elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201410
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MEM.Airport, TN
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B MEM
ATC / advisory: TRACON M03
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I had base and downwind traffic for Runway 36R on both the left and right side. I turned Aircraft X behind a heavy at the same altitude and went below the required 3.5 mile RECAT separation. I did not use a memory jogger or scratch pad entry to notate the altitudes and did not recognize this until I had already turned Aircraft X to join the final approach course.I should have used my scratch pad entries to notate the altitudes assigned since I had traffic from both sides to minimize any confusion.




Synopsis: M03 Approach Controller reports of turning aircraft to final and losing the required separation with another aircraft on the opposite base leg.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Procedure; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I had just gotten the position from the previous controller and was training. Aircraft X; was IFR doing practice approaches at ZZZ1. His climbout was Heading 120; Altitude 2;000 feet and I turned them northbound through a 2;500 foot Minimum Vectoring Altitude. My technique is to give them 3;000 feet to avoid the issue and I did not catch the inappropriate altitude which was assigned by the previous Controller.




Synopsis: TRACON Controller in training reported they vectored a departing aircraft while the aircraft was still below the Minimum Vectoring Altitude.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZAU.ARTCC, IL
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZAU
ATC / advisory: Center ZAU
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion; Workload; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X populated our (I was providing OJT) ACL display list on the scope direct RANDL.MIZAR3 and we were 20 miles in trail to DTW. I quick looked the DTW arrivals and brought up Aircraft X's data block. The aircraft was in sector 84's airspace (McCook) with .79+ in the 4th line. Direct RANDL from that location would transit LOGAN (34) and FWA (36) before entering OLK; where we would hand off to ZOB.  This course enters ZOB basically eastbound; 25 miles north of FWA and almost perpendicular to our normal DTW arrivals onthe MIZAR arrival.  There was another DTW arrival; another air carrier; immediately below Aircraft X. The other air carrier remained on the proper route to DTW; via LFD. MIZAR3.  Direct RANDL did not allow for the proper spacing behind (or infront for that matter; but that comes later) our other DTW arrivals; so LOGAN and FWA were required to vector Aircraft X into the face of the WATSN.WATSN2.ORD arrivals. And since TMU hadn't planned Aircraft X to be blended with the FWA.MIZAR stream; there was no hole for Aircraft X; which resulted in excessive vectoring to subsequent DTW arrivals.I have no idea 'Why' it happened. I have no idea what made a controller in our Southwest area think direct RANDL was a good idea.  I have no idea why the controller at McCook didn't put this aircraft over LFD or work with Joliet sector (JOT had the other carrier which was direct LFD.MIZAR3) to sequence 2 aircraft as opposed to taking Aircraft X out of the stream he was designed to fit in; and transitioning him to a stream he didn't.  I have no idea why two previous areas shirked their responsibility and shat on another area.  I'd prefer they didn't.I think Traffic Management Unit (TMU) should have been more aggressive in instructing previous controllers to route Aircraft X back over LFD.  Guidance that when we have significant mile-in-trail requirements; rerouting aircraft to avoid that requirement; only to meet another requirement should be a) APREQed and b) discouraged.




Synopsis: ZAU Controller reports of another sector taking an aircraft off a specific route and questions why the Controller would do that. The aircraft has to be sequenced in a flow to handoff to another center with certain miles in trail.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Other Gate Pushback
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Time Pressure; Workload; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Gate Pushback
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During pushback; I received a call from the Flight Attendant concerning a loud noise coming from the aircraft forward right side. At the same time; I began smelling fumes on the flight deck; so I told the Flight Attendant 'I will get back with you'.I commanded oxygen masks on and established communication. I asked the First Officer to request a return to the gate; as I performed the Flight Crew Operations Manual isolation guide checklist.Upon return to the gate; we deplaned the aircraft promptly; and the appropriate logbook entries were made.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported a fume event on the flight deck during gate pusback. Flight crew executed a gate return where passengers and flight crew deplaned promptly.
Date: 202106
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Cessna Aircraft Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
Second aircraft: UAV: Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Unauthorized Flight Operations (UAS); Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Shortly after reaching cruising altitude of 5000 ft. MSL I was just about to cancel my IFR clearance and proceed to ZZZ1 with VFR advisories with a decent to 3500 ft MSL. After leaving the ZZZ Class B. I received a Traffic Alert on the Garmin 430 showing a target less then 1 mile and at 12 o'clock but with no altitude beside it. This prompted me to immediately look up and scan for traffic; I noticed a light almost immediately and directly ahead of me; seconds later; I passed beneath the drone by approximately 25 feet. In that moment I was able to determine it was a white; 4 bladed drone; approximately the size of a microwave. The light I had seen appeared to be just that; or a possible camera that the sun was reflecting off of. There was not enough time to react; due to this; I continued on my IFR clearance for a few more miles; while I reported the incident to ATC. After the report to ATC; I notified [company] of the event and asked them to issue a PIREP for those heading into ZZZ. There was one passenger onboard; however; they were unaware of this incident. The flight concluded safely with no aircraft damage. Cause: Unauthorized drone activity.




Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew was on an IFR flight; cruising at 5;000 feet. The pilot received a Traffic Alert and noticed an object directly ahead of them. Without time to react and after passing the object the pilot noticed they had a near miss with a multi-rotor UAS.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were at TPA (Traffic Pattern Altitude) (1000 ft.) and had entered a direct downwind Runway XXL as instructed by ZZZ Tower. Aircraft departing XXL; Aircraft X; did not comply with their departure instructions and began a crosswind departure in our direction. Tower called 'Aircraft X; fly runway heading; you were instructed to turn left at the river. Traffic 12 o clock; one thousand.' The aircraft responded 'We were cleared for a left standard departure' and Aircraft Y continued their climbing turn straight at us approaching our same altitude. TCAS alerted traffic. I had to take controls and immediately descended to the right away from the aircraft down to 700 ft. as they climbed above us. As Aircraft Y passed over they called Tower 'Below traffic in sight'.




Synopsis: Cessna 172 Pilot reported taking evasive action to avoid an aircraft that disregarded the Tower's instructions.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Second aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Trainee
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Staffing
Primary problem: Staffing

Narrative: The traffic volume was very high for one Controller.  I cleared Aircraft X for the visual approach and he didn't start the descent as fast as I thought he would.  Aircraft Y was headed north and I noticed it when they were too close; but know that they were not going to come together.  I told them about each other and they were not concerned.The traffic volume was extreme; but this is due to COVID.




Synopsis: TRACON Controller reported an airborne conflict and cited traffic volume being very high for one Controller.
Date: 201812
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MMMZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: Center MMFR
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Arrival in Mazatlan in VMC conditions. ASOS was reporting VOR DME 1 RWY 26 in use; MZT Approach assigned VOR DME 2 RWY 26. Non-flying pilot entered ILS LOC DME 2 RWY 26 into the FMS. The FMS was improperly sequenced [and] I flew through the DME ARC intercept and aircraft continued directly to MZT. I realized I missed the intercept so I [disconnected] the autopilot and started a turn to the left. [We were in] VMC conditions; I called the field in sight and ATC issued a clearance to land. After turning left to fly towards the RWY 26 centerline; [we] received a GPWS terrain alert for a hill that was left or our course to the RWY 26 final. Being cautious of the terrain alert and maintain visual reference to the hill; I overshot final slightly; re-established and landed normally on RWY 26. I believe a contributing factor was a late clearance to descend from cruise altitude. When the autopilot did not turn onto the DME ARC; I should have called missed approach.


Second narrative: On [our flight to] to Mazatlan; we were cleared for the VOR DME 2 for Runway 26. My First Officer (FO) built in the approach on the FMS and we forgot to sequence the approach from the initial approach fix. On commencing the approach I noticed that we were still flying to the airport instead of the arc on the approach for the VOR DME 2 for Runway 26. We disengaged the autopilot immediately and hand flew the approach. I should have checked to make sure the approach was correctly sequenced and also paid close attention to make sure the approach was flown properly.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported a track deviation and GPWS terrain warning occurred on the approach to MMMZ Runway 26.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke; Rain; 3
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 36
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: None
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Runway; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Weather was above minimums; and I had the airport in sight through rain on the windscreen. Comparing my ground speed and airspeed I decided a straight-in on 22 was preferable to circling over the runway. Due to the rain on the windscreen I flew a higher approach to avoid the embankment on the approach end. I touched down around; maybe a bit after; the first third of the runway; and initiated maximum braking procedures. I failed to initiate a go-around when I noticed the tailwind component on the ground was more than it had been on final. I ended up going over the runway end at 5-15 knots.




Synopsis: Pilot flying BE36 aircraft ran off end of runway on landing.
Date: 202008
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi; Takeoff / Launch
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Aircraft
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: This is just a safety concern I wanted to highlight. It has to do with maintaining visual contact behind our Airbus aircraft at night; usually during landing but it also happens during takeoff. Their strobe lights are only activated when the aircraft is airborne; which results in the aircraft appearing completely dark on the runway. This is due [to] the strobe light switch having both an Auto and ON position. Our SOPs are to always leave the switch in Auto. Therefore; when behind an Airbus on landing; especially at night; once the aircraft touches down it completely blends in with the runway centerline lights as the strobes turn off - it basically disappears. Thus; the spacing is tight; we can never be quite sure if/when the aircraft clears the runway; which causes a safety concern. This also happens when behind an Airbus on takeoff. It can really degrade situational awareness to others and in my case has caused more than a bit of concern when following at night. My suggestion would be for the Airbus fleet to flip the strobe switch to On when cleared for takeoff; (Instead of leaving it in Auto) and to turn it back to Off/Auto when clearing the runway.  This would ensure the aircraft remains visible to other aircraft especially at night. This would also align [Company] with industry standard SOPs (just about all other Airbus operators use the manual on/off strobe operation.)  Losing sight of aircraft when behind at night due to insufficient aircraft illumination. Suggestion for the Airbus SOPs to revert to manual strobe light operation to enhance situational awareness and aircraft visibility especially at night during runway operations.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported Airbus aircraft are difficult to see on the ground due to strobe lights only turning on after becoming airborne.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: D01.TRACON, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B DEN; Class E ZDV
ATC / advisory: TRACON D01
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: While descending into DEN on the CLASH4 STAR near JAAAM intersection at 13;000 ft.; we received a GPS-L Invalid message followed by a GPS-R Invalid message. We noted the FMC was not receiving a GPS signal. We reported the anomaly to Dispatch and ATC who advised us that many other aircraft were encountering similar GPS issues. We continued VMC to landing. After landing I noted my iPad was not receiving a GPS position as well. While taxiing to the gate; both my iPad and the aircraft reacquired a GPS signal.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported loss of GPS signal on arrival to Denver.