elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: IAH.Airport, TX
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B IAH
ATC / advisory: TRACON I90
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While on a visual approach to runway 27 in IAH my First Officer informed me he had a drone in sight off the right side of the aircraft. He stated the drone looked to be yellow in color and about 2;500 feet. Our current altitude during the sighting was 3;000 feet. Our location was about 15 DME of the ILS and we were on the localizer to runway 27. We landed normally. We were advised by dispatch to contact IAH TRACON to give more specifics of the sighting. Drones are a hot topic issue. They are increasing in numbers in the US. Extra vigilance going forward to see and avoid drones is paramount.




Synopsis: EMB145 Captain reports sighting a drone at 2;500 FT on the ILS 27 at IAH. No evasive action is required.
Date: 201402
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: MBO.Airport, MS
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E ZME; Class G MBO
ATC / advisory: CTAF MBO
Second aircraft: S-70/UH-60 Blackhawk/Seahawk/Pavehawk/Knighthawk
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: My student and I were in the pattern at our airport doing takeoff and landings. 20 minutes after sunset we were climbing off of Runway 17 after doing a stop and go. At 1;000 MSL feet on left crosswind; rolling out on heading 080 a Blackhawk UH60 with minimal lighting (Nav and red beacon; no strobes or landing lights) crossed from right to left at our altitude. We had to roll right to pass behind him; estimated closure to 300 FT or less (saw lights on panel in UH60). UH60 continued northwest and appeared to pass over the airport's south end at 1;000 MSL FT. No communications were ever received from the UH60. After landing; I called Approach and talked to the Supervisor. He advised that the UH60 was on an 'orientation' flight from the airport 8 [miles] southwest of our field and the Approach Controller was busy and did not provide a traffic alert to the UH60 as it approached our airport. We were 7 north of the primary airport; right at the transition altitude between our airport's G airspace (700 AGL) and the overlying E airspace. The Class C airspace begins at 1;700 MSL at that location. Normally aircraft 'Flying Around' would be well above the pattern altitude of 1;300 MSL or would be on advisories to let airport traffic know intentions. Our aircraft is equipped with Mode S TIS and alerted us to the traffic when less than 1/2 mile apart. The TIS normally only begins to work as we climb out of 700-800 FT and acquires the Mode S radar signal from the main airport. We are glad approach was running the Mode S instead of ATCRBS transmitter. We do not understand why a military aircraft would purposely fly through a VFR pattern; opposite direction to pattern traffic; without making radio calls on position and intentions; without every available light activated. Nor why an Approach Controller; no matter how busy; could miss the potential collision and not provide a Traffic Alert (Priority duty?) to the military aircraft.




Synopsis: A pilot reported taking evasive action during a near miss with a UH60 in the MBO CTAF traffic pattern with no communications.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon arriving at the airplane in the morning; the Flight Attendant reported that the vents were blowing hot air. Unable to control the temperature in automatic or manual mode; we consulted with Maintenance; who deferred the right pack and cabin temperature controller. For our departure; we followed the procedure outlined in the MEL book for operations with the left pack only. During climb; while passing through FL240; the Captain and I noticed the cabin altitude suddenly rising rapidly and the delta P dropping; and we felt a severe pressure change in our ears. Our left pack had tripped offline. We immediately completed the Emergency Descent Immediate Action items and I began following the QRH procedures. We also declared an emergency and began a rapid descent to 10;000 FT. Upon reaching a safe altitude; I briefed the Flight Attendant and the Captain explained the situation very briefly to the passengers. Very shortly into the event; we received an amber L PACK HI TEMP CAS message. We completed the QRH for the emergency descent and then began working the L PACK HI TEMP QRH. During this QRH procedure upon recycling the pack; we noticed a burning smell; we immediately switched off the pack and picked up the speed to the airport. From this point on; a normal Descent Checklist; briefing; and normal landing occurred; and the fire trucks accompanied us to a normal deplane at the gate.




Synopsis: After being dispatched with one air conditioning pack deferred a CRJ-200 flight crew suffered the loss of the remaining pack as they climbed through FL240.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: FEW 250; 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: Learjet 75
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: A rapid decompression was experienced in between FL180 to FL200 approximately; the RED CAS message 'CABIN ALTITUDE' was displayed and no previous alert or any other signal that would alert the crew of this situation was shown by the systems. Crew performed an [expedited descent] as indicated by memory items and then double check the procedures with the QRH. [Priority handling was requested] with Center and the flight return safely to the departure airport ZZZ.No written report or any other information where required by ZZZ Tower; the PIC called the Tower via phone and talked with the Supervisor on duty at that time. Nor any other authority requested further information to the flight crew regarding this incident.




Synopsis: Lear 75 Captain reported a loss of pressurization during climb that resulted in a return to the departure airport.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: C90.TRACON, IL
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 ORD
ATC / advisory: TRACON C90
Aircraft component: Indicating and Warning - Landing Gear
Component problem: Malfunctioning
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: Distraction; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: At 6;300 ft. MSL on the BENKY STAR; Runway 28C Transition; the landing gear warning horn; unsafe landing gear lights; and First Officer's RADALT gave intermittent false warnings. Two separate series of flashes separated approximately 20 seconds apart approaching the TONIE intersection. Uneventful landing. Wrote up discrepancy. Maintenance performed FMC Built in Test equipment check; DFCS (Digital Flight Control System) Built in Test equipment check; and CDS (Cockpit Display System) Built in Test equipment check. All checked good.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported during arrival landing gear warnings and intermittent radar altimeter false warnings were received. Post flight maintenance checks did not find any system malfunctions.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 135 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B LAX
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Human-Machine Interface; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Automation Aircraft TA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Company Policy; Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was the On Job Training Instructor. The Embraer 135 (E135) was on a heading of 340 level at 6000 feet. A PA-28 was enroute westbound at 6500 feet. My trainee issued traffic to both aircraft. The PA-28 reported the E135 in sight; when the E135 was approximately 1 mile south of the PA-28 we observed E135's mode C was reading 200 feet high. The trainee asked the E135 to verify level at 6000 feet. During this transmission; the E135 indicated climbing through 6300 feet. The E135 advised they were responding to an RA and they climbed through 6500 feet. After the aircraft had passed; I asked the E135 to verify they received a climb RA for the PA-28 above them. The E135 responded affirmative. There was no observed traffic below the E135 in their vicinity.I advised the trainee that in this situation an immediate traffic alert would have been more appropriate than questioning the pilot. In this case; the TCAS did the opposite of what it should have done. This information should be forwarded to whomever is responsible for looking into TCAS errors.




Synopsis: SCT TRACON Controller reported an aircraft restricted to 6;000 feet received a TCAS/RA and climbed for a VFR aircraft above it at 6;500 feet.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: RBW.Airport, SC
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class G RBW
ATC / advisory: CTAF RBW
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: I was on an ILS approach to Runway 23 at RBW. I had announced that I would be flying the approach at the initial fix on the UNICOM frequency and gave position reports inbound right up to the short final point. I never saw the other aircraft nor did any of the two crew members nor did we hear any position reports from the other aircraft. After landing; the other pilot advised me when we met in the FBO that we had come within 200 FT; he estimated; on final approach. I believe he went around after that. Following the ILS approach; I remained in the pattern and did several landings before going into the FBO.




Synopsis: A pilot reported a near miss on short final to RBW after making the recommended traffic reports which were not acknowledged by the other pilot.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Icing; Snow; Rain
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airport; Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We taxied into gate during cold weather ops. All airport surfaces were covered in snow with braking action good to fair. After receiving the chock signal from the guide man; I released the parking brake due to hot brakes and a quick turn. I went heads down to complete the parking checklist and noticed the aircraft had started moving backwards. I reset the brakes and looked for the guide man who was looking at the nose wheel but gave me no signal to reset the brakes. Another ramp person emerged from under the nose and gave me the set parking brake signal. I spoke with a ramp supervisor. He stated that the chocks were not strong enough to hold the aircraft due to ice under the snow. From the tire and shock drag marks in the snow I estimated about two feet of rearward movement from the original stop mark. I'm not sure how much movement occurred after I reset the parking brake. Luckily the belt loaders had not yet pulled up to the aircraft. This was a new and unexpected experience for me and I could not find any reference or warnings for this type of occurrence in the cold weather ops section of the flight manual.




Synopsis: A320 Captain experiences aircraft movement at the gate after being choked and releasing the brakes on an icy ramp.
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Second aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Air Carrier X was on a high base on the west side of ZZZ centerline to Runway 16R; Air Carrier Y was on an east side downwind for Runway 16R at 5;000 feet and Air Carrier Z was on the Runway 16L localizer at 5;000 feet. I had not noticed the similar sounding call signs yet so I was grouping my numbers. I told Air Carrier X to fly heading 130 and join the localizer to 16R and I heard the read back (not noticing that it was Air Carrier Y responding); then I told Air Carrier Z to descend to 4;000 feet. Since I had not heard that Air Carrier Y took Air Carrier X's heading; I didn't correct the read back. I then noticed Air Carrier Y's data tag begin to move west. I told Air Carrier Y to fly heading 340 and called traffic because now Air Carrier Y was in conflict with Air Carrier Z.  Air Carrier Y said he had Air Carrier Z in [sight]; I told Air Carrier Y to maintain visual separation; caution wake turbulence and fly heading 340. Air Carrier Y told me he was responding to a TCAS. Air Carrier Z was descending; as instructed; when I called traffic. From what I can remember; Air Carrier Z was descending out of 4;500 feet when traffic was called. During the relief briefing; when I was taking the position; I was informed that the fused radar had 2 very bad stitching jumps; upwards of 1/2 mile each. During my session; I noticed 1 very bad stitching problem and I can confirm it appeared the Air Carrier jumped about 1/2 mile to the west then corrected. When Air Carrier Y's tag went west; my first thought was that it was a stitching problem but when it didn't correct is when I took action. The airlines need to ensure similar sounding call signs don't arrive into the same sector at the same time and the stitching problem with fusion needs to be investigated. Fused radar has had stitching problems all along but tonight; a 1/2 mile jump is just unsafe.




Synopsis: Approach Controller reports of similar sounding call signs problem along with a stitching issue related to fusion radar.
Date: 201409
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: MEM.Airport, TN
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B MEM
ATC / advisory: Tower MEM
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)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: [We were a] sequenced departure from Runway 18R in trail of previous departing aircraft. Cleared for OLMES2 RNAV to EMIIT; FMS loaded; LNAV armed. Normal rotation; liftoff and climb; at 1;000 FT VNAV engaged and autopilot on; tracking normally toward EMIIT. Passing 1;500 FT the aircraft rolls left; about 15 degrees of bank; with a slight yaw. Not normal; so I disconnect the autopilot and try to correct right with normal aileron. No response. Applied almost full right aileron to break out of what I believe to be a wake turbulence encounter from the previously departed aircraft. Corrected back on course with no further turbulence encountered. Wind 180/4 at takeoff. [We] notified Tower and Departure Control of event; Tower as it was occurring and Departure a few moments later. Suspect light tailwind may have created the environment for this to occur. Providing this information as data to evaluate RECAT under these conditions. I have never experienced this type of situation before and consider myself a fan of RECAT.


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


Synopsis: B757-200 flight crew reported encountering wake turbulence shortly after takeoff in trail of another aircraft.
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Aircraft: B737-800
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Aeroplane Flight Control
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At cruise altitude of FL370 Mach .76 in smooth air. Captain attempted to write on his fuel log which was attached to the yoke clip and the yoke moved forward with no resistance. We then found out we could move the yoke forward and aft 6 or 7 inches in each direction without it disengaging the autopilot or changing our flight path.  We were also able to turn the yoke left and right 3 units of travel in either direction without disconnecting the autopilot or changing the flight path of the aircraft. The yoke just moved freely in pitch and roll with no resistance.  We were flying over high terrain in Utah and Colorado. After talking with Dispatch; Maintenance Control; fleet captains; and Boeing Maintenance representatives; we determine the best thing to do was leave the autopilot engaged and autoland the aircraft. We looked at possible landing airports along our route and determined our best option. We declared an emergency and requested vectors and set up for ILS and executed an autoland. After the successful autoland and communicating with ARFF; the Captain taxied the aircraft to the gate.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information]

Second callback: The Captain clarified that that both yokes and control columns moved in unison and did not cause autopilot disconnect. This reinforced his opinion that the autopilot should not be disengaged and led to the autoland decision. After landing and clearing the runway flight control movement felt normal. Flight data recorder examination showed the flight deck controls being moved in cruise without a corresponding control surface movement. Maintenance attributed the anomaly to cable stretch or slack in the flight control cables.

Synopsis: B737-800 flight crew discovers during cruise at FL370 that the Captain's yoke can be moved several inches in both pitch and roll without disconnecting the autopilot and without affecting the flight path of the aircraft. After discussions the crew elects to autoland on a long runway; and does so without difficulty.