elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201808
Location: FCH.Airport, CA
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Other Person
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Airport
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: This report is submitted to address an unsafe airport condition at the Fresno Chandler Airport (FCH) Fresno; California. Chandler consist of one runway; 30/12 with multiple housing and large trees on the approach end of runway 30. A PAPI system has been installed for runway 30 to insure obstacle clearance from residential trees on the approach end of runway 30. Recently the FAA Flight Inspection shut down the PAPI system at Chandler due to one tree protruding into the approach path of the PAPI light system area. The City of Fresno Airport Division had the tree in question removed along with two other trees that could be within the approach path area in the near future. However; Flight Inspection; operating out of Sacramento Metro Airport; Sacramento; Ca; have failed at this time to return to Fresno Chandler Airport to re-evaluate the system and place it back into operations.Now to the safety aspect of this shutdown. Without the PAPI system in operation; it places pilots; local residences on the approach end of runway 30; the City of Fresno and the Federal Aviation Administration at risk for injury and liability in the event of a landing accident due to an aircraft approaching too low to runway 30. In particular this becomes an even higher risk at night due to the inability for pilots to see and properly avoid trees on the end of the runway without the PAPI system in operation. This has been an ongoing concern for all pilots familiar with the area; however; it places non-local pilots in a higher risk hazardous position; not knowing the area and not having the aid of the PAPI system available. City of Fresno requested the re-evaluation with the FAA without expedition action to place the system back into service which places the FAA in liability.Resolution to the problem is very simple at this time. Flight Inspection need to inspect and evaluate system for proper operation and clearance and place it back in service immediately in order to mitigate the risk and liability presently imposed due to the shutdown of the system.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported the approach for Runway 30 at FCH is unsafe because the PAPI lights are non-operational.
Date: 202106
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing; Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: UAV: Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Unauthorized Flight Operations (UAS); Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was the pilot monitoring and my captain was the pilot flying. The aircraft in front of us reported a drone at about 4;200 ft on final landing on into ZZZ. ATC told us about the possible drone on final. At about 3;500 ft at almost the final approach fix we see a drone pass off the right side maybe within 50 ft of us. The drone was silver in color and looked to be heading back to the coast. Upon landing; ATC gave us the number for the tower to call and give details on the drone.




Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew was given a traffic alert from air traffic control about a UAS near the final approach path. At 3;500 feet and near the final approach fix the flight crew saw a UAS pass 50 feet away. Aircraft landed without incident.
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: EWN.Airport, NC
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: Dash 8-300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D EWN
ATC / advisory: Tower EWN
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: About 10 minutes before arriving to our destination the ASOS said the visibility was 10 SM and ceiling 3;000 feet broken. We were being vectored to the airport to pick up a visual approach. We were 1;500 AGL and 160 KTS and 4.5 miles to the field when we picked it up visually. We configured the aircraft and finished the landing checks. Turning base to final we realized we were much higher than the glideslope and pitched down to capture the glideslope. We received an EGPWS warning and realized there was no way to maintain a stabilized approach to landing. We executed a go around and got vectored back around to do an ILS approach and landed normally.At 500 feet AGL we would have to descend more than 1;000 feet per minute to make a landing in the first 1/3 of the runway making it an unstable approach. The same time I figured that out we received an EGPWS warning.At the airport visibility may have been 10 miles and the ceiling may have been 3;000 feet but 4 miles from the field it was not. The runway lights were on step 2 making it hard to see the lights until we were very close to the field. The dim lights also made it hard to judge distance. We were actually closer to the field than we appeared to be causing us to start the descent too late to land at a normal rate of descent.Went around and did the ILS and landed normally. On the ILS we were about 500 feet to minimums and I asked the tower what the runway lights were set to and this is when he told me step 2. I was about to ask for them to be turned up when we saw the field and landed.Ask for the lights to be turned up to the brightest level before looking for the airport. Start descent a little earlier to land with a normal rate of descent. Ask for the ILS approach when able.


Second narrative: [Report Narrative Contained No Additional Information]


Synopsis: Dash 8 flight crew reported executing a go-around during a visual to EWN because the approach was unstable.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: 7
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Trailing Edge Flap
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During approach; at Glide Slope intercept altitude; First Officer called for Flaps 22. After positioning flap handle; we received 'Flap Fail' message on EICAS. Flaps were still at 9 degrees. We told Tower we were going missed. Tower assigned an altitude and issued vectors to allow us to sort things out. We ran the QRC and discussed who should fly the approach. First Officer said he had never actually flown a no-flap landing; so in the interest of safety the Captain took over as FP. We declared an emergency with Tower and landed normally.


Second narrative: The additional landing distance required was not an issue because the runway was 11;000+ feet long. Even though the ATIS reported BKN007; we saw the airport clearly and unobstructed from a 4 mile final.


Synopsis: EMB-145LR flight crew reported trailing edge flaps failed when commanded to Flaps 22. They executed a go-around; ran the procedure; declared an emergency; and executed a safe landing.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Bombardier Learjet Undifferentiated or Other Model
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Second aircraft: Bombardier Learjet Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Departure; Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was training a Developmental on the G scope. The Developmental told a Lear on the downwind to the airport that their sequence was another Lear at 11 o'clock and 6 miles; 2 miles west of ZZZZZ. The Lear on the down wind reported the other Lear in sight. The Developmental instructed the Lear to follow the traffic; cleared Visual Approach to Runway XX. After acknowledging the clearance; the Lear pilot requested to be switched to the Tower. The Developmental switched the Lear to the Tower frequency. I then immediately told the Developmental to call the Tower and coordinate the Visual Approach because we could not ensure that the Lear on the Visual Approach would be established on a 7 mile final per LOA. The Tower said unable and that the 2nd Lear was turning base early and following the wrong aircraft. Had the Lear followed the correct traffic; coordination would most likely not be needed and separation would have been ensured.




Synopsis: TRACON Controller providing OJT described a confused sequence event and potential conflict when a Lear was cleared for a Visual Approach to follow another Lear on final; but cut in front of the straight in traffic.
Date: 202010
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: The aircraft was not cleaned per COVID guidelines. Absolutely nothing was wiped down with the hospital grade cleaning solution that was in plain sight. This has been observed multiple times on all recent departures out of ZZZ. Even though there was no time constraint; this cabin crew refused to wipe down the cabin. After being asked multiple times if they would comply with this cleaning requirement; I was told; 'we don't do that anymore; we don't get paid enough for that.' You are telling passengers that their aircraft; seat; and tray table is being sprayed down with a hospital grade disinfectant; and this is a gross misrepresentation of what is actually happening. This flight was not properly cleaned despite there being plenty of time to do so and despite cabin service workers having the cleaning solution in their bags. This has also been observed on the last 5 departures I have worked out of ZZZ. This is absolutely disgusting; jeopardizes the well-being of crew and passengers; and deserves immediate attention. Cabin service workers are deliberately ignoring this cleaning procedure.  Address this issue with ZZZ cabin service immediately. They should be wiping down cabin seats; tray tables; bins; and more with the hospital grade cleaning solution as you have advertised to customers as a means to gaining their confidence in flying with the airline. This is a complete false truth. These airplanes are not being cleaned per procedure and customers and crew need to be told the truth.




Synopsis: Air carrier Flight Attendant reported unacceptable cleaning and sanitizing procedures by the cabin cleaning crew.
Date: 201807
Location: ZBW.ARTCC, NH
Aircraft: Learjet 45
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZBW
ATC / advisory: Center ZBW
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft checked on descending to FL240; and I issued the descent via into BED; which is the ZELKA STAR. The aircraft descended below FL240 before crossing EEGUL RNAV waypoint; thus violating ALB sector 22. This is the third or fourth time I am reporting this exact same event. The fix that aircraft cross at or above FL 240 is right inside our airspace boundary so when aircraft descent before the fix accidentally (or on purpose) or an FMS programming issue as the pilots keep claiming; then that busts adjacent airspace; which is right on top of a heavy departure corridor climbing to FL230. This fix needs to be moved further into our airspace or another procedure be created because this happens daily; luckily this one time I didn't have an aircraft climbing out underneath to FL230.




Synopsis: ZBW Controller reported aircraft frequently descend early on the ZELKA STAR resulting in airspace violations.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Clear; 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Seaplane or Amphibian
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: After completing some touch and go water landings; I began my climb out and contacted Tower for clearance into their Class D airspace and a full stop landing at my home base. I established radio contact and was given a squawk code and positively ID'd by Tower. Upon reaching clearance into Class D and leveling off I spotted another aircraft converging toward me. I called out the traffic and Tower responded; I maintained visual separation and did not have to make any evasive corrections to my flight. The rest of the flight was uneventful. After landing; I called the Tower Control Manager on duty and we debriefed the event. We learned a few things as we talked about the event. They did not show me on their radar until the traffic alert was imminent. The other aircraft was on an instrument approach into ZZZ and never saw me at all. We talked about establishing some protocols for a positive contact with both controlling agencies in the area and will continue to communicate these ideas with them as there are other floatplanes based in this area; and we have continuous VFR and IFR flights around the area.




Synopsis: After lift-off; float plane pilot reported encountering converging traffic that was on an instrument approach to a nearby airport. Pilot met with his home airport manager in order to develop procedures for ensuring future separation of traffic in similar situations.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: Icing; Rain; Turbulence
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Tobago TB-200
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Carburetor
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Engine began to surge and have intermittent low power. Although the aircraft did not exhibit any signs of icing I suspected potential ice or water ingestion into engine air intake. I immediately [notified] ATC and asked for radar vectors to ZZZ. As the engine surged low; the vacuum system shuddered and caused the directional gyro to work sporadically. After two unsuccessful attempts to track inbound on most direct approach into ZZZ; I was able to conduct a successful landing at minimums into the airfield. This event would not have reached a successful conclusion if not for the incredible and efficient support by ZZZ Approach. Upon post flight inspection; aircraft engine air intake rubber gasket protrusion caused a small edge that caused water and eventual ice accumulation.  I will reach out to the filter kit manufacturer and send the pictures of the issue to ensure other pilots/maintainers are aware.




Synopsis: Pilot reported engine power loss and surging at cruise and diverted to make a precautionary landing.
Date: 202107
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: FLL.Tower, FL
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class C FLL
ATC / advisory: Tower FLL
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle; Ground Event / Encounter Aircraft; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: East operation; landing Runway 10L. Aircraft X was cleared to land Runway 10L as the aircraft began to flare over the runway the ground controller asked if I had someone on the runway. I quickly observed an unauthorized vehicle on the runway. I then Immediately initiated a go around to Aircraft X. Pilot was able to execute the go around just a few feet above the runway and before touching down.  Better training for drivers operating vehicles that have to drive on or anywhere near active taxiway and runways.  It was reported by the county that it was the drivers first day operating on a service road that runs parallel to an active taxiway.




Synopsis: FLL Tower Controller reported a runway incursion caused by a vehicle entering the runway while an air carrier was flaring to land.
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MTJ.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-46 Malibu Meridian
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZDV
ATC / advisory: Center ZDV
Aircraft component: Autopilot
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Glider
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; 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 Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Performing a course reversal at BRUUK for the ILS 17 MTJ I received an altitude alert. Correction was initiated. It became apparent that the autopilot had disconnected. An unusual attitude recovery was made from a nose low right turn and altitude recovered. Approach was continued until VMC was entered and IFR canceled. Lesson learned: be continuously aware of autopilot status and for inadvertent disconnects especially when the disconnect alarm can be obscured by other distractions.




Synopsis: PA46 Captain experienced an autopilot disconnect during a procedure turn that initially goes undetected resulting in descent below the segment altitude and an unusual attitude. The unusual attitude was corrected and altitude recovered. The approach was continued to VMC and a normal landing.