elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SLC.Airport, UT
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E SLC
ATC / advisory: TRACON S56
Second aircraft: Bonanza 35
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Departure; Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Weather; Human Factors; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working the Final position and we were in simultaneous ILS approach airspace. A CRJ2 was level in the downwind at 090 per our SOP and needed to fly another 5 miles or so before I could base the aircraft. SLC was reporting marginal VFR conditions but we had been on ILS approaches all day. I had noted low level VFR traffic earlier (at 5;800 FT) and thought that maybe conditions were improving somewhat; as bases had previously been reported just below 6;000 FT. I had two other aircraft that I needed to get turned in and cleared for the ILS approach; which I was just finishing up when the CA went off for the CRJ2 and a then VFR aircraft squawking 1200 that I was not talking to. The VFR aircraft had climbed into Bravo airspace without establishing radio communications and receiving a clearance and was showing level at 8;500 FT; about a mile and a half to the southeast of the RJ; level at 9;000 FT. I issued a traffic alert to the CRJ2 and the pilot advised 'we are looking; we are descending now for an RA; and we got him in sight.'  I asked the RJ if 8;500 FT was a good altitude on the aircraft because I thought it was a little strange that the TCAS issued a descent. The pilot said it was and descended to 8;100 FT in an 8;500 FT MVA. When I observed the RJ passing 8;300 FT I issued a Low Altitude Alert to the aircraft. The pilot replied; 'Roger; we are climbing; we have the terrain in sight.' I advised the pilot to maintain their own terrain/obstruction clearance; and when able maintain 9;000. Shortly after passing the RJ; the pilot of the VFR aircraft (a BE35) called up for services. I told him that he needed a Bravo clearance before entering the airspace to which he replied that he was sorry and was trying to remain clear of clouds. I issued a brasher warning to the pilot of the BE35. This pilot; and more broadly; general aviation pilots; need to understand the different rules for different classes of airspace.




Synopsis: S56 Controller reported a TCAS RA event by an IFR CRJ arrival into SLC when a VFR aircraft entered Class B without clearance; reportedly because of cloud avoidance maneuvering.
Date: 201401
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: APF.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Fog
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D APF
ATC / advisory: Tower APF
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Confusion; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On final approach to APF RNAV (GPS) 5: I accidentally stepped down to 295 FT; which was the LPV DA. The MDA or DA for LNAV/VNAV WAS 446 FT. I could not see the ground; and at the same time APF reported a low altitude alert. I reported 300 FT. Simultaneously I realized I had busted minimums and declared a go-around. This was executed normally. I don't recall visibility.




Synopsis: A single engine aircraft pilot in an advanced avionics flight deck descended below the APF RNAV GPS 5 LPV DA and executed a go-around after ATC issued a low altitude alert.
Date: 201410
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Amateur/Home Built/Experimental
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Second aircraft: Amateur/Home Built/Experimental
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other After The Fact
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airspace Structure; Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was participating in a flight of Vans RV series experimental aircraft for the purpose of conducting a pre-game flyover for [a] Major League Baseball game. The flight obtained a TFR waiver and received radar services from [the associated] Approach Control. The flight was conducted as briefed.The day after the flyover the team received information from [our association's] Vice President of Government Relations; that he had been informed by the FAA Department 800; Washington DC; that the team would be violated for Title 14 CFR section 91.319 (c) for any future flyovers over the Stadium. Unfortunately; this information was received the day after the flyover.Although I believe the FAA interpretation of Title 14 CFR section 91.319(c) is incorrect and should be challenged through proper channels; I would not have participated in the flyover if I had been provided the FAA's current interpretation of the CFR prior to the flyover.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information]


Synopsis: A day after having performed a previously approved stadium overflight demonstration with nine homebuilt aircraft the pilots received notice through a third party (an association officer) dated prior to the event advising any such flights would be in violation of CFR 91.319c.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-900
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure; Airport
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We were pulling up to [Gate] XX when ground cleared us to 'follow company just out of [Gate] XX to [Runway] XXR.' As there was a company jet that just left [Gate] XX right ahead of us; I proceeded onto the taxiway. As I turned the corner; another company jet crossed in front of us fast from right to left; and turned north on Taxiway XX. I had to hit my brakes to avoid them. Upon questioning Ground; we were told that that was the company we were supposed to follow.They were behind us! We could not have seen them at any point before they cut us off. We were never told they were there. I believe Ground got confused as to who was number one at [Gate] XX. This kind of thing happens all the time. Most pilots would have prudently stayed behind and followed us and informed Ground that they were number two at [Gate] XX. The Captain of Aircraft Y decided to treat it like a competition to the runway and sped up and cut the corner to get in front of us. He created an unsafe situation out of a non-event. See narrative above.Ground should not use vague descriptions of traffic if they indeed wanted us to follow someone we couldn't see. The Captain on Aircraft Y should have used better judgment and caution.




Synopsis: B737-900 Captain reported having to suddenly brake to avoid collision with an aircraft overtaking them from behind and turning in front of them.
Date: 201211
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ATL.Airport, GA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ATL
ATC / advisory: Tower ATL
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Captain executed go-around upon receiving TCAS RA on short final to Runway 27L. ATL Tower was crossing a MED flight helicopter from south to north beneath the final approach courses for west arrivals into ATL. Tower had warned of traffic and stated the helicopter had arriving traffic in sight. However; visual contact; clearance to land; and TCAS RA all occurred simultaneously at about 1;000 FT AGL. Captain immediately complied with the TCAS RA. First Officer told Tower of go-around due to TCAS RA and Controller acted surprised that we had to go-around; but then issued go-around instructions. Flight returned and landed on Runway 28. Cause: Tower crossing traffic too close to arriving aircraft on short final which caused the TCAS RA. The traffic crossing underneath could also be affected by wake turbulence.




Synopsis: Air Carrier arrival into ATL to Runway 27L executed a go around due to a TCAS RA caused by an ATC reported helicopter crossing the final approach course.
Date: 201312
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: EWR.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke
Aircraft: Dash 8-400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B EWR
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Second aircraft: Airbus Industrie Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: This was my leg to fly. We were being vectored for the approach. Over the radio it sounded like there were three other aircraft in front and we were behind a heavy Airbus. Then ATC gave altitude; speed and heading to fly. In a very short time be were in moderate to severe turbulence. The aircraft rolled left and right and  [changed] pitch. The autopilot disconnected automatically so the Captain and I grabbed the controls. Then the Captain said 'I have the controls'. He then returned the aircraft [to] the assigned altitude; heading; and speed and re-engaged the autopilot. Captain then advised ATC of what just happened.


Second narrative: When I took the controls we were supposed to be at 3;000 FT. I noticed that we had descended to 2;730 FT. I immediately corrected the altitude deviation and notified ATC of the abrupt wake turbulence. ATC made no comment as to our deviation. The flight/approach continued with no other issues.It would have been nice if ATC had provided adequate traffic separation and/or provided direction as to where the heavy Airbus was.


Synopsis: A Dash 8-400 encountered wake vortices from a heavy Airbus on approach to EWR.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MNN.Airport, OH
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thermal Activity; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 150
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Other Glider Tow
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G MNN
Aircraft component: Cargohook/Strop
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Other Person
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: I was on short final for a grass runway; when crossing a road the yellow tow rope alarmed a car driving on the road. The auto driver said that the rope came too close to the car and they needed to apply the brakes. The driver called the Airport Manager who contacted me. The Manager came out and observed the glider tow operation and witnessed a landing and indicated that that landing was fine and I had adequate clearance with the tow rope. I had been taught to keep 150 feet over the airport fence to allow the tow rope to 'clear' any obstacles. There were active thermals and the weather conditions were clear with light and variable winds. The Airport Manager was aware of automobile traffic issues as the runway is a short distance from the road.  Plans are in place to extend the runway and to change the landing zone 700 feet east to avoid low aircraft crossing the road. In the future I will raise my approach to 200 feet over the 'fence' and allow more room for traffic and the tow rope.  (The tow rope has a yellow wiffle ball (softball size) at the 'ring' end to protect the ring from wear and is very visible.)




Synopsis: The pilot of a glider tow aircraft was informed that while he was landing an automobile was forced to apply the brakes while traveling along the road adjacent to the grass landing strip. His standard approach was observed by the Airport Manager and it was determined to be safe.
Date: 201211
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: R90.TRACON, NE
Aircraft: Super King Air 350
Flight phase: Initial Climb
ATC / advisory: TRACON R90
Reporter organization: Government
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 Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Airspace Structure; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: B350 departed CBF airport which is under Omaha's Charlie airspace. B350 climbed through the Charlie airspace without establishing radio contact at all. He did call to pick up his IFR clearance after violating the Charlie airspace. At that point a Brasher warning was issued. We need a RTR/RCO at CBF. Known issue for a decade. I had 6 departures off CBF in the 15 minutes prior to this airspace violation. It's a very busy uncontrolled airport under the shelf of a Charlie airspace. If you depart South; you're in the departures Southbound off Omaha Eppley and/or heading into the OFFUTT AFB Charlie airspace (2 of the 6 did that). They established two-way radio communications as required. If you depart East or North; you're in the arrival STARS landing Southbound at Omaha Eppley. The other 4 departures did that. Three of them established communications as required. BE350 did not. I know that a remote RTR/RCO is not budgeted.




Synopsis: R90 Controller expressed concern regarding the limited frequency coverage with aircraft operations at CBF; the reporter recommending the installation of a RTR/RCO at CBF.
Date: 201903
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Cooling Fan; any cooling fan
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Flight Attendants (FAs) smelled pungent electrical odor near door 3L after level off. I directed them to turn off everything including lights; coffee makers; chillers; etc. The smell lingered. Called Dispatch and [Maintenance]; and checked LAVS; overhead bins; and outlets; along with the passenger luggage in bins. No problem was discovered. Turned off right recirculation fan for 5-7 minutes. The smell did not dissipate. Created a diversion plan with crew; Dispatch; and [Maintenance] (based on lingering smell). No smoke was ever seen. After waiting five additional minutes; FAs moved out of the area; sniffed lemons and returned to galley area. Smell had dissipated. Additional FAs went back to check; and everything was normal. With concurrence of crew; Dispatch; and [Maintenance]; flight continued to original destination. Along the route of flight; we identified several diversion bases if needed. Flight landed uneventfully.


Second narrative: During our flight at cruise enroute to ZZZ. Our FA (flight Attendant) called and reported a smell of electrical fumes from near the 3L door (rear galley). I was flying and took over radio functions as the Captain worked with the Flight Attendants to find a source. I started looking for good diversion airports; there were plenty all around us. I was kept in the loop during the event and agreed with the Captain's decision as he worked with Dispatch and [Maintenance Control]. Our Flight Attendant eventually said the smell went away. Maintenance Control; Dispatch; the Captain; our Flight Attendants; and I agreed to monitor and continue to ZZZ. We entered an ELB (Electronic Logbook) into ACARS about the issues. No further issues were notice the remaining time during the flight and I landed uneventfully.


Synopsis: B757 flight crew reported being informed by a Flight Attendant of electrical odor in the rear galley area. Smell dissipated several minutes after deactivating right recirculation fan.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SQL.Airport, CA
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D SQL
ATC / advisory: Tower SQL
Second aircraft: Helicopter
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A helicopter contacted San Carlos tower requesting to do photo work over the Oracle campus at 1;000 feet. The Oracle campus is NW of the SQL airport and is right under the standard traffic pattern. It is roughly positioned at the crosswind leg of the traffic pattern. Traffic pattern altitude at SQL is 805 MSL. The helicopter was in this area for approximately 15-20 minutes. I was with a student in the traffic pattern at SQL. We were cleared for takeoff with no restrictions on altitude or traffic pattern turns. As we were in the takeoff climb we had visual contact of the helicopter directly ahead. Due to noise abatement procedures; the upwind/departure leg is flown nearly to the Oracle campus.  As we were approaching the location where we could turn crosswind; we still had visual contact with the helicopter. The distance between our airplane and the helicopter at that time is estimated to be about 200 feet vertically and approximately 400 feet horizontally. As we turned crosswind we lost sight of the helicopter but could catch glimpses of it at our 6 o'clock. At that time the student climbed slightly above pattern altitude to around 900 feet and we were probably within 100 feet of the helicopter. The onboard traffic display showed the traffic at 100 feet above us. It was only at this point that the Tower Controller direct us to extend the crosswind leg; which we did. It appeared that this caused our airplane and the helicopter to be on the same course and separated by only 100 feet.In hindsight it would have been safer to have taken different actions. For example; we could have ignored the noise abatement procedure and turned crosswind earlier to avoid the path of the helicopter or the Tower could have told the helicopter to climb to a higher altitude or move out of the traffic pattern area.We were depending on that helicopter to not descend below 1;000 feet and maintain visual separation from us all while it was performing a photo mission. In hindsight; that was likely not the safest thing to do.




Synopsis: C172 flight instructor reported an NMAC with a helicopter in the pattern at SQL.
Date: 201903
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Airbus Industrie Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Fan Blade
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter FOD
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Other Non-Routine Inspection
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Manuals; Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Event for damaged fan blades documented. FOD (Foreign Object Damage) inspection doesn't appear to have been complied with by AMM (Aircraft Maintenance Manual) Procedure 72-00-00-200-006-A or [Job card Number]. Documented History Report states fan blade inspection found tears. Fan blades not serviceable IAW (In Accordance With) AMM 72-21-00-210-009-A. FOD fan blades with missing material also requires an Engine Boroscope not complied with as well IAW AMM 72-00-00-200-006-A or [Job Card Number].




Synopsis: Technician reported proper engine inspections were not accomplished following FOD (Foreign Object Damage) event.