elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: JAX.TRACON, FL
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C JAX; Class E ZJX
ATC / advisory: TRACON JAX
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Departure; Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; No Specific Anomaly Occurred Unwanted Situation
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure; Human Factors; Airport; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: I was working arrival and departure for the JAX north area. We were on Runway 26. FHB airport is about 15-mile final for JAX [Runway] 26. We are constantly having to vector air carriers and business jets around 1200 codes traffic over and around that airport. Their altitudes and courses are erratic. The air carriers are audibly uncomfortable with it. Just today I had three 1200 codes from 1;500 feet to 3;500 feet MSL orbiting around my final while I'm trying to get jets into JAX. That sector also has multiple Victor routes that are busy with low level GA overflights. So; we have to get these jets as low as we can to miss the overflight traffic but the 1200 codes are blocking our low altitudes. It takes all our focus because we have to watch the tracks and altitudes of these VFR airplanes and constantly update the jet traffic of where they are. We don't like it. The pilots don't like it. It is a wildly unsafe situation there.Our Class C needs to be extended for the final for [Runway] 26. That is the only solution. No one should be flying around our final at crossing altitudes without talking to us. They just opened a flight school at FHB recently so the problem is only going to get worse. It's almost a daily problem now. One air carrier pilot said this is the only airport he flies into where he is dodging Skyhawks on the final. It is the most unsafe operation I have seen in my career.




Synopsis: JAX TRACON Controller reported airspace issues related to GA traffic crossing air carrier final approach paths without communication. Controller suggested the JAX Class C needs to be extended to avoid these issues.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: S46.TRACON, WA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 25
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citationjet (C525/C526) - CJ I / II / III / IV
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E S46
ATC / advisory: TRACON S46
Second aircraft: B737-900
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Undershoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Failed to meet crossing restriction at WOODI intersection due to wake encounter and evasive action.Inbound to SEA on GLASR1 STAR; cleared to 'descend VIA GLASR1'. We were flying a Citation CJ4; ten miles in trail of a 737-900. Shortly after passing JAKSN intersection; we began to encounter wake turbulence as buffeting and uncontrollable left/right rolling. I reduced our descent rate to remain above the path of the preceding 737-900. The buffeting and rolling stopped and we continued our descent; but were unable to make the 'at or below 14000 feet' crossing restriction over the WOODI intersection. I believe we crossed WOODI about 1000' high. We reported the wake encounter to the controller and mentioned our lack of meeting the crossing restriction. The controller said nothing to us regarding the altitude deviation. The remainder of the STAR and approach continued behind the 737-900 with occasional wake buffeting. We are experiencing wake turbulence more frequently; especially on STARs and approaches. My guess would be due to the accuracy of the GPS/RNAV equipment.




Synopsis: C525 Captain reported failing to meet a crossing restriction during avoidance maneuvers related to a wake turbulence encounter in trail of a B737-900 on arrival into SEA.
Date: 201504
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: IAD.Airport, DC
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZDC
ATC / advisory: Center ZDC
Aircraft component: Altimeter
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On descending via to IAD; ATC advised us not to use the altimeter setting sent on the ATIS; as it was incorrect.  Upon resetting the altimeter; we observed we were about 200 feet off altitude crossing a fix.  ATC advised it was not our fault; and that it was a Nationwide problem.  He advised us not to worry about any repercussions. Cross Verification or Monitoring; Aircraft Settings; Did Not Cross-Verify Altimeter Settings.




Synopsis: A B737 First Officer is advised by ATC during descent into IAD; that the altimeter setting obtained via digital ATIS is not correct and that it is a nationwide problem.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class C SNA
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: As we were cleared for takeoff we were also given a revised level off altitude of 3000 ft. After being handed off to SoCal Departure; we were made aware of VFR traffic at 3500 ft. We did see him and I tried to shallow out my climb; however we still received a TCAS RA commanding us to descend. The RA was not preventable with our takeoff clearance and us simply flying the CHANNEL 2 Departure. The VFR traffic was close enough to trigger the RA. Flying the noise abatement departure takes some attention and it is not ideal having to descend out of 2700 ft to avoid traffic flying it. I don't feel that we made a mistake in this case; but want to raise attention to this issue.




Synopsis: B737-700 Captain reported that while departing SNA on the CHANNEL 2 Departure he received an RA that commanded a descent at 2700 ft MSL.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SNA.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class C SNA
ATC / advisory: Tower SNA
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Local; Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Tower refused to give ATC Frequency. ATC failed to warn of another aircraft that was same make and model with similar tail number.




Synopsis: Small aircraft pilot reported a near midair collision with another same type aircraft and similar call sign.
Date: 201211
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: PAO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 25
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E NCT
Second aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airspace Structure; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was being checked out on the Piper Warrior II. We had just departed PAO. The Controller was extremely busy giving traffic advisories to several planes and handling traffic at the same time. We were given a traffic advisory but couldn't see the airplane. There was a lot of glare from the sun (we were flying towards it). We turned left to avoid the hills and to direct us to the practice area. A few seconds later we saw a C172 flying towards us. My instructor saw the airplane first and turned right to avoid a mid air collision. This happened on a clear day after a week of relatively poor weather.




Synopsis: PA28 pilot reports an NMAC departing PAO with flight following by NCT. The Controller pointed out the traffic but it was not detected by the reporter until the very last second.
Date: 201207
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Tablet
Component problem: Malfunctioning; Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: My iPad frequently closes out of the application I am using with no action from me. I have noticed at least three occurrences in the past week at home while studying for simulator training that while scrolling through pages the application closed and required me to re-login. While traveling to the training center for the simulator; I was using my iPad to review some FOM material when it closed again. This time I could not log back in due to a lack of wireless connection for authentication of my password. I was locked out of all content material for the remainder of the flight. What happens when this occurs to two pilots simultaneously after all ship sets have been removed from the aircraft? The iPad needs to have improved reliability before it is a suitably safe alternative to printed charts.

Callback: The reporter believes that the spontaneous closing of the application is a glitch or bug in the program that will need to be corrected; but does not understand why a wireless connection is necessary to log in.



Synopsis: Air carrier pilot laments the lack of reliability of the EFB application provided by his company and suggests that paper charts cannot be replaced by the iPad until this situation is fixed.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Powerplant Fire Extinguishing
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On short final I went to cancel the glideslope warning about 100-200 ft above touchdown and accidently pushed the left engine fire button. The guard on the button was stuck in the up position and the engine was shutting down as we were touching down. It was night time operations with low lighting and I did not see the guard was broken and stuck in the up position. A slight yawing [occurred] as the engine was spooling down. The broken switch guard which was not written up by previous crews or caught by maintenance. Proceeded to a normal landing. Wrote up the problem in maintenance log and discussed the issue with the maintenance personnel who picked up the plane at the gate. All guarded switches need to be checked during maintenance rotations for broken or weak springs and ensure they close properly.


Second narrative: After arriving at the gate; we turned the lights on; and [the] Captain pointed out that the guard for the LH Fire Push Light was not all the way down. It was stuck up at a 45 degree angle. This would make it possible to accidentally push the button in the dark flight deck. [The] Captain wrote up the guard in the maintenance logbook.


Synopsis: CRJ-700 flight crew reported the Captain accidentally pushed the left engine fire button instead of the glideslope warning cancel button on short final resulting in an unintended engine shutdown.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Flight Dynamics Navigation and Safety
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Rejected takeoff 18R by 85 knots due to disagreement between First Officer (FO) and Captain Flight Mode Annunciator (FMA). FO called out 'no SRS (Speed Reference System).' Exited runway; accomplished checklists and waited for brakes to cool before uneventful 2nd takeoff attempt. ATC gave us a transponder code as we forgot we didn't get a PDC. I asked FO to confirm clearance to Destination. We were rushed and didn't notice the FO flight director was in flight path vector. Rejected takeoff; got our SA (Situational Awareness) back.Should have asked the tower for more time i.e.: hold on taxiway to get both pilots back in the loop.




Synopsis: Flight was advised that they had failed to obtain a PDC; which resulted in a rushed pre-departure cockpit environment at the runway. The aircraft was not properly configured resulting in a low speed rejected takeoff.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ORD
ATC / advisory: TRACON C90
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were given an intercept heading of 310 to join final for a visual approach to runway 27L. We had been experiencing some wake turbulence; and at the same time my FO said localizer alive; we got more wake turbulence. I was distracted by trying to see what type of aircraft we were following when I realized I was about to go through final; so I turned on final immediately and I overshot a little; just a few degrees. After the turn and centered on localizer; I recall a traffic alert; but wasn't sure if it was on other final. The controller did not indicate an issue and we landed safely. Concentrate on joining localizer regardless of visual or not.


Second narrative: The captain was distracted by the wake turbulence event and was not paying close enough attention as to how fast the localizer was coming into center. While looking for traffic in busy airspace that we are following I should do a better job of scanning outside visually and inside to verify we are staying on course while still remaining on the lookout for other traffic.


Synopsis: EMB-145 flight crew reported flying through the localizer on approach to ORD when he was distracted by wake turbulence.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Undershoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Between ZZZZZ and ZZZZZ1 on the arrival at approximately FL 200; we were vectored off the arrival to the left/north and given a descent to 17;000 ft. We were told this was for traffic. The frequency was very busy. After several other calls; we were given; 'Descent to 10;000 ft.; no delay through 14;000 ft.' The Controller the made multiple calls to another aircraft. One of the calls was partially blocked with the end being 'direct ZZZZZ1' and another aircraft responding to the call. As we continued our rapid descent between 16;000 ft. and 15;000 ft.; TCAS gave a TA (Traffic Advisory) for a converging aircraft below us. We immediately switched from LVL CHG to VERT SPD and slowed our descent to 500 fpm. Shortly thereafter ATC queried as to why we had slowed the descent and if we were direct ZZZZZ1. We responded with the traffic alert and 'negative.' He issued direct and we responded. Once clear we continued the descent 10;000 ft. At no point prior to that did we respond to a clearance to ZZZZZ1. TCAS did not issue an RA (Resolution Advisory) during the advisory process.[Some] preventative measures [could be] keeping us on profile; making at least one aircraft predictable. Multiple vectors; multiple COMMS; multiple aircraft in dynamic flight; and one partially blocked call made for a difficult situation.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information].


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported an uneventful resolution to an airborne conflict due to a communications breakdown between flight crew and ATC during approach.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Cockpit Window
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We were at cruise and large single crack or melting was noted on the windshield.   Then got an Ecam for an overheat.  Completed ECAM actions.  About 30 seconds later we heard a load pop; looked up and the fo windshield had cracked.  Followed  non-ECAM abnormal procedure (windshield crack)  The decision was made to divert. Descended to lower altitude to reduce landing weight but encountered turbulence.  Completed windshield crack procedure  prior to landing and followed overweight landing procedures as a precaution (FMGS  predicted the landing weight within limits but may have been inaccurate due to  SID).  Maintenance did an overweight landing inspection.




Synopsis: A320 pilot experiences a cracked front window in cruise and elects to divert after completing QRH procedures.