elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CLT.Airport, NC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class B CLT
Second aircraft: Helicopter
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We where on a visual approach to runway 23; and coupled to the ILS. About 700 feet AGL; we got a TA. I looked at the PFD; and saw a traffic advisory with it showing the aircraft +100 feet just off to our right. I look out to the right and see a helicopter just above us flying across our path. I'm on the glide path; I continue down and at the same rate as I see the helicopter is maintaining his altitude. Being so low to the ground I didn't want to increase my descent rate; especially knowing we would pass under the helicopter. As we pass under the TCAS was showing him at + 200 feet. We land; and the tower didn't say anything about it. The tower never even called the traffic out in the first place. After we got to the gate the Captain called the tower. The tower told him the helicopter was supposed to pass behind us. The captain informed them he passed in front and above us; and that the tower never informed us of the helicopter in the first place.




Synopsis: Air Carrier First Officer experiences a NMAC with a helicopter at 700 feet AGL on final approach. The traffic was not called out by the Tower; but the helicopter had been instructed to pass behind the reporters' aircraft.
Date: 202103
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: We were cruising at FL320 around late afternoon when transmission with ZZZ Center became difficult as we were handed off to the next frequency. ZZZ Center's transmissions were muffled and unreadable at times. Multiple aircraft; including my own; had to ask Center to repeat instruction due to the muffled voice and weak transmission. My belief is that the Center Controller was wearing a mask and that mask was causing the majority of communication difficulty.If true; the use of masks by Center controllers is creating a serious communication and safety issue between pilots and Air Traffic Control. Everything about the national air space system is designed so pilot to ATC communication is to be understood without interference or confusion. The use of masks by ZZZ ATC has the potential to create confusion and ultimately a sacrifice of safety.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported difficulty understanding Center controllers and believes the problem maybe the controllers are wearing face masks.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local; Traffic Management
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Landing Without Clearance
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: My last session working before end of shift. Started working all LC [Local Control] combined; was moved to TMU [Traffic Management Unit] for re-certification mid-session and then put back into LC combined for end of session. There was a consistent mix of arrivals and departures. Nothing complex or high workload but consistently keeping you engaged. Throughout my session there were moments when departure strips were being passed late from GC [Ground Control] and I had to retrieve or wait for them to be passed; that occurred around the time Aircraft X should've been checking in. I believe social distancing was a partial factor in the movement of strips. I remember observing Aircraft X on the STARS [Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System] display and continuing my scan of arrivals/departures and out the window. I was missing a strip or two compared to the aircraft nearing the end of Runway XXR and it did not register with me that Aircraft X did not check on with me. The Aircraft X was part of my scan and I did plan for their arrival and time on runway reference departures and other aircraft. I do not recall if I had turned the data block blue on the STARS display to show the aircraft had been cleared to land.Suggestion: Digital strips/flight boards to assist in social distancing and decrease workload/heads downtime. Would also include inbound aircraft and not just departing aircraft.




Synopsis: Tower Controller reported not being sure if a landing clearance was given to an arrival aircraft.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: PSC.Airport, WA
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Snow
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground PSC
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Weather at PSC was reporting light snow at the time. When the passengers were boarded we were informed by a ramper that they were running low on Type IIV anti-ice fluid. He also mentioned he wanted to conserve the fluid. The captain and myself told him to be generous and he agreed. I noticed while they were applying the anti- ice fluid that there was very little pressure in the hose. They were also spraying into the wind; which didn't help. I mentioned I was concerned about the coverage of the fluid. Before we took off; I took another look at the wing and noticed snow was building on the outer edge of the wing. I ended up going back and looking at the wing in the cabin and noticed the fluid had failed. We decided to go back to the gate in the interest of safety. When we arrived back at the gate I got out of the plane to take a closer look. The agent had completely missed sections of the wing and they were snow covered; in other areas there was very little fluid and it had already failed. Cause was the agent's attempt to conserve fluid so that they could get all flights out of the airport in the morning. They needed to take their time and apply the fluid evenly. The poor equipment also does not help when it is windy.The biggest suggestion I have is that the importance of coverage needs to be emphasized to the agents responsible for spraying the airplane. There is a constant push to get planes out; and to conserve de/anti icing fluid. Also the equipment should be better maintained and all of these causes have a direct impact on safety. This event was completely avoidable.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported returning to the gate in PSC due to improper application of deicing fluid.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: Marginal
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Indicating and Warning - Landing Gear
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon take off we received a red warning gear disagree message. We ran the QRH and diverted into ZZZ1 due to being several thousand pounds overweight to land back at ZZZZ. We landed at ZZZ1 without incident. There were no injuries and calls were made to Operations Shift Manager and Maintenance to inform of the situation. Cause: defective nose gear indication sensor.




Synopsis: CRJ-200 Pilot reported an unsafe gear indication after takeoff.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MRI.Airport, AK
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 180 Skywagon
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower MRI
Second aircraft: Helicopter
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Both aircraft were inbound over Knik arm. The Cessna 180J (wheel penetration wheel ski equipped) was 1 mile ahead and was instructed by ATC to 'keep their speed up.' Cessna 180 was cleared to land runway 25 and helicopter was cleared to land north of taxiway alpha (alpha is north of runway 25). Helicopter was warned that landing was at their own risk. The wind was steady from the north at approximately 3-4 knots. Cessna 180 had landed and about 3 seconds into rollout when a loss of control was experienced. Aircraft violently swerved right and rocked up on left landing gear. The aircraft continued to slide sideways for 2-3 seconds apparently sliding on wear strip on ski until control was regained. The loss of control was immediately as Cessna passed helicopter leading to the conclusion that the north wind had blown the helicopter's wake turbulence into Cessna's landing area.Neither the flying pilot nor the passenger in the Cessna (also a pilot) were aware of the risk of the helicopter wake turbulence. No warning was issued by ATC to the Cessna about wake turbulence. If this hazard was recognized; there were many ways to mitigate it. The Cessna could have been allowed to land first; the Cessna could have landed on another runway (runway 34 was available); the Cessna could have circled until the helicopter landed and spooled down; etc. In the interest of safety; it is highly recommended that ATC warn and or avoid situations were helicopter wake turbulence can lead to a loss of control of a fixed wing aircraft.




Synopsis: C180 pilot reported loss of directional control on landing rollout when he encountered wake turbulence and rotor blast from a helicopter landing nearby.
Date: 202010
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: HWV.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E ZNY
ATC / advisory: CTAF HWV
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Traffic Pattern
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Arrived in area at CCC under IFR. Cancelled IFR and proceeded to HWV under VFR from the northeast. Upon switching to CTAF (Common Traffic Advisory Frequency) learned aircraft were landing Runway 33. Announced position and intent for midfield transition to enter downwind Runway 33 several times starting at 4 miles. Noted significant traffic entering downwind from the southwest and parachute activity on southwest corner of airport. While tracking several aircraft entering the pattern and landing/taking off noted tow plane and sailplane being released at pattern altitude turning right crosswind Runway 33 at 0.25 miles from airport. They were approximately 300 ft. away at same altitude as me. Took evasive action and banked right towards 270 heading and pitched down resulting in descent to 800 ft. Other aircraft continued on approximate crosswind course where I lost sight of them. Continued to enter downwind Runway 33 and uneventful landing Runway 33. Looking back; I did not expect right hand traffic when all other aircraft were left traffic for Runway 33. I didn't hear announcement of that traffic on CTAF although frequency was very busy and I was focused on left hand traffic entering from southwest.




Synopsis: Pilot reported Near Mid Air Collision in traffic pattern.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZMA.ARTCC, FL
Aircraft: Citation X (C750)
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: Center ZMA
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working RADAR and had Citation X descending into the SEF airport. The pilot was approximately 10-12 miles away from the airport and reported that he had the field in sight. I cleared the aircraft for a visual approach. Just after I issued the clearance; I terminated RADAR service and cleared him to the airport advisory frequency. I thought the aircraft was close enough to the field to proceed straight in and land. Instead the aircraft took a hard left turn which I was not expecting; presumably to set up for landing on whichever runway he was using. This hard left turn put the aircraft into the proximity of R2901A which was active surface to 070. I'm not sure how close he got to it; or even if there was an official violation of the airspace; but it was nonetheless unsafe in my opinion. I tried several times to raise the aircraft on my frequency; but was unsuccessful due to either the aircraft's low altitude or just being on the UNICOM frequency and not monitoring mine. There are several things that I would recommend to help avoid this situation. First the pilot should have been advised the status of the airspace; and could have taken measures to avoid it. Usually I do advise aircraft going into this airport when the airspace is hot; but I didn't in this situation because I didn't feel the pilot would maneuver the way that he did. It is uncommon for pilots to take such a radical turn on approach; but if he had been so advised it may not have happened. Second I could have waited a few more miles to let the pilot change frequencies. This could have led me to be in communications with the pilot when I noticed the abrupt vector. However this second option is not guaranteed; as the pilot's low altitude severely limits the range of my radios and we tend to like to let them do the approach early; so we know they can hear the approach clearance. The third and final thing I can think of is to use the only approach we have that will clear R2901; but this is also not always practical because it requires the planes to come to the South and set up a GPS.




Synopsis: ZMA Controller described a Restricted Airspace incursion when an aircraft cleared for a visual approach to SEF varied from the expected flight path to the airport.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Windshear; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 340/340A
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Main Gear
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: 1000 to 1500 ft after touchdown; the left wheel locked up and the aircraft made a sharp 180-degree left turn on the runway. I reported what felt like a tire blow out to the tower; who called for assistance. Upon inspection the LEFT scissor link bolt had failed causing the wheel to caster sideways.The winds on the ground were reported 270/6; and I recall on short final at about 500 ft the winds were 20+ kts so there was some degree of wind shear. Also in windy conditions it is common to get what local pilots refer to as the hangar effect as wind blowing in north of the runway centerline interact with the hangars to the north and cause additional turbulence at the touchdown point. As I flared the aircraft ballooned up instead of settling. I continued and flared a second time the aircraft ballooned again. At this point the airspeed had slowed to the point flight was no longer possible and the aircraft settled firmly on the runway. The aircraft did not skid or exhibit any undue side load following touchdown. I have had harder landings in the past; and both tires and both struts remained inflated; so in my opinion the landing was not hard; but slightly more firm than a well-timed flare/stall touchdown.I do not believe the firm landing caused the bolt failure; but the firmness of the landing may have been the catalyst for the failed part to finally give way. Upon inspection the bolt showed no sign of sudden stress; but more of an extended wear pattern; which allowed the nut to separate. My takeaway is that flying a 35+ year-old airplane requires partnership with a mechanic and extra consideration to be taken looking at critical parts that may not have been changed since the aircraft was new. I believe shared experience with other operators is also useful.




Synopsis: The pilot of a Cessna 340 reported a landing gear issue that resulted in a ground loop during landing.
Date: 202202
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Icing
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb; Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pneumatic Control Valves
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Weather
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Bleed 1 & 2 Fault on upwind departing ZZZ. Leveled at 6000 ft. Completed Electronic Cockpit Aircraft Monitor procedure. Requested a return to [departure airport]. Accomplished follow up procedures. Regained bleeds and then lost again. Landed without incident. [We were in] Icing conditions.




Synopsis: A319 pilot reported returning to departure airport after experiencing faults in bleeds 1 and 2 in icing conditions.
Date: 202011
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Other Preflight planning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Covid test site
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Arrived at appropriate report time. Flight planned and then proceeded to COVID test site. Test extremely unpleasant. Results took XX minutes. Had to call Operations and delay the flight; fortunately a cargo flight today; so no passenger connection issues. Departure was XY minutes late. This could result in crews rushing in the future. Please have someone review testing procedures and timeliness of receiving results. Forward as you see fit.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported the time required for the COVID-19 test delayed the departure of their flight.