elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BNA.Airport, TN
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Baron 58/58TC
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZME
ATC / advisory: TRACON BNA
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Workload; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: [I] was working Nashville Approach on an IFR flight plan that routed us to the east of Nashville; on a northwest track. Approach gives us an 80 degree heading change for vectors around a military operating area. We found that strange; as there were no NOTAMs; TFRs or MOAs depicting this activity. When asked what the deal was; Approach said that was a jet practice session for an up and coming air show. We strongly feel that if a group of military jets are practicing for an air show; at LEAST a NOTAM would be appropriate. We would have normally flown this route VFR and would have never known.




Synopsis: A BE58 pilot filed IFR on a route he normally flew VFR and on this particular day was vectored around a non NOTAMed military airshow training session which he would not have known about if VFR.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MEM.Airport, TN
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B MEM
ATC / advisory: TRACON M03
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Local
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A CRJ2 departed Runway 36C on the CRSON1 RNAV departure; which should be approximately a 010 heading for about 12 miles then a northeast turn. I observed the aircraft make a turn to the northwest approximately 1 mile off the departure end. I made sure Tower didn't have any conflicting departures and then coordinated with West Departure. I asked the aircraft which fix he was heading to. The pilot responded 'RNAV to CASLN' which is a northwest departure only used on the midnight shift. I told the CRJ2 that their flight plan was for CRSON and spelled it for him. The pilot stated that CRSON was not in their data base. I then gave the pilot a radial to join off of the Memphis VOR and coordinated with ZME. I believe that this would be easily avoidable by re-naming one of the two RNAV departures. They are very similar sounding and in spelling.


Second narrative: I cleared a CRJ2 for takeoff with the following phraseology: 'CRJ2 Runway 36C; RNAV to SLONN; cleared for takeoff.' The aircraft read back correctly. I observed the aircraft airborne off the departure end and switched him to Departure. I gave control instructions to other aircraft. When I scanned the departure corridor I noticed that the CRJ2 had turned to the northwest when he should have turned to the northeast. I alerted the Local Control 1 Controller that the aircraft had encroached into his airspace. At that time the Departure Controller called and queried the situation. I told him Local Control 1 had no conflicting traffic. The Departure Controller advised me that the aircraft stated he was RNAV to CASLN and did not have the transition fix CRSON (which was part of his filed flight plan) in his database. Tower needs to issue vectors to departures instead of allowing RNAV aircraft to fly up to two miles off the departure end while 'hunting for their next fix' on RNAV departures. If this aircraft was issued a vector; this potentially catastrophic situation never would have happened. We were fortunate that Local Control 1 did not have a simultaneous departure which is a frequent occurrence at this airport.


Synopsis: M03 Controller described a developing conflict invoving IFR departures assigned RNAV SIDS. The reporters indicated that both similar sounding fix names CRSON and CASLN as well as Controller awareness issues were causal factors.
Date: 201807
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZJX.ARTCC, FL
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Procedure; Staffing
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: I was assigned a detail; with overtime scheduled to cover for my absence. I signed in for my scheduled detail and was told by the Supervisor in charge (who is actually a Supervisor from another area assigned to cover our area) that I was needed to split a sector. I noticed two sectors were showing 'red' and I asked which of the two I should split. I split my sector and watched the other red sector become extremely busy. There was nobody available to split the sector or work the D side. Luckily; the Supervisor from another area who was watching our area used to work our area as a Controller years ago; so he was able to assist the Controller a little. I doubt this was a legal thing to do; but it was practical and he really needed the help. This is not the first time something like this has happened. Our staffing has become so low that any tiny thing causes a situation where people cannot get help. If we take a sick call in the morning; or there is weather early or late there simply are not enough people to safely conduct the operation. In fact; today our schedule was dropped under the 'normal' staffing numbers and we did not take a sick call. Supposedly our Traffic Management Unit helps with slowing the traffic; but it always seems too little too late to actually help. We need to get more controllers in the area. Short term; we need more controllers here on overtime or we need traffic slowed on a regular basis.




Synopsis: Jacksonville Center Controller reported staffing problems associated with no one available to assist another Controller whose sector was in the red.
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: JNX.Airport, NC
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E JNX
ATC / advisory: CTAF JNX
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was providing instrument instruction to a CFII candidate. The student was wearing a view limiting device. We were conducting practice instrument approaches to JNX runways 3 and 21. We were currently on the practice ILS approach to runway 3 at JNX at the time of the intentions.I made an announcement on the CTAF frequency that we were 7 miles out on the practice ILS runway 3 circle to land on 21. We heard another aircraft make an announcement that they were 3 miles away and entering the downwind for runway 21 on a 45 degree entry. The tone of the pilot's voice made me suspect it was a student pilot on a solo flight. The next announcement I made was a 5 mile final for the ILS runway 3 circle to land on 21. The other airplane in the pattern then made an announcement that they were going to join the crosswind for runway 3. I queried the airplane and asked if the pilot was by themselves and got no response. At this time I made the decision to continue the approach to a full stop instead of executing a circling approach. I made an announcement that we were on a 1.5 mile final and that we would be a full stop; at this time I observed the previous mentioned aircraft turn the base leg in front of us. My student was still wearing his view limiting device; I took control of the airplane and executed a missed approach sidestepping to the right of the runway and announcing my intentions on the CTAF too. We rejoined the traffic pattern on the upwind and made a normal approach to landing.




Synopsis: GA flight instructor reported a NMAC while on a practice instrument approach to Runway 3 at JNX when another GA aircraft turned base in front of them.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZLA
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On departure out of BUR we were initially flying the VNY 1 departure from RWY 15 via FMS NAV. We began the climbing right turn HDG 210 when I checked in with SoCal departure and I thought I advised the controller that we were flying the VNY 1 climbing to 4;000 ft. Then ATC advised fly heading 310 so I thought. My FO went to heading mode and dialed in what we thought was our new heading of 310. So while we continued our right turn ATC asked why we are heading north when we should be on a heading vector of 210. I was confused by his query because I thought I was doing as instructed. I had mistaken his initial instruction to fly heading 210 instead my FO flew HDG 310. My FO and [I] thought we were doing what was instructed. Then we were given another HDG which I honestly don't remember which I believe was further north. Then finally a HDG of 360 was given and we complied and then notified of a possible pilot deviation.Discuss more thoroughly the departure with the PF and possible scenarios that could be expected. Then if anything is outside of what is expected then query ATC for clarification and confirm with the PF that the instruction that was heard was the same. Then if still understood incorrectly query ATC again.


Second narrative: Pay closer attention to instructions and be more assertive.


Synopsis: An air carrier crew departed BUR on the VNY 1 but were given a vector by SCT which they misunderstood; were given a second misunderstood vector; and finally got the correct heading.
Date: 202001
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 6
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 36
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ZZZ; Class G ZZZ1
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Time Pressure
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Taxied the aircraft from the FBO to Runway XXL; run-up was fine; magneto checks were fine; takeoff roll was fine. Upon rotation although engine indicating proper takeoff manifold pressure; it was barely producing power and the aircraft was barely climbing. Engine began to sputter. ZZZ Tower noticed we were not climbing; and I advised them of engine issue. Tower asked to take a heading of 060 to make a downwind back to the runway. We were very low; very slow and the stall warning was sounding. The engine was running but barely producing power. We managed to climb to approximately 350 feet; maintained a southeast heading. GPS showed ZZZ1 was ahead; I advised ZZZ we were headed there. Water on the way seemed a lot softer than the crowded city. Once Runway X at ZZZ1 was assured; I selected gear down; full flaps and landed without incident.




Synopsis: BE36 pilot reported a partial power loss after takeoff that resulted in diversion and an uneventful landing.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At FL390; the 'B' Flight Attendant called the cockpit and spoke with the First Officer reporting an acrid electrical smell at mid-cabin. The 'A' Flight Attendant also smelled it; while the 'C' Flight Attendant did not. At that time; the Captain spoke with the flight attendants via the inter-phone to get more information; and he determined that a diversion was necessary and we agreed on an alternate airport. We coordinated with ATC informing them of our intentions and the emergency was declared. We complied with the Smoke/Fire/Fumes QRH Checklist. The Captain was the pilot flying and I communicated with ATC during the descent; spoke with the flight attendants per the abnormal checklist; and retrieved the airport charts from the alternate binder. I completed all of the abnormal and normal checklists as we were on final approach; and we landed overweight at 129.4 LBS and stopped on the runway. The Tower asked if we could clear the runway; and we did so. At this time; the fire crews pulled up next to the aircraft and asked what our area of concern was: we reported over-wing/ mid-cabin. Fire crews completed a visual exterior and thermal imaging inspection with no defects noted; and we then taxied to the gate. After coordinating with Maintenance; Dispatch; and local Customer Service; the customers were deplaned.


Second narrative: [The Flight Attendant] described that the fumes could be from a possible electrical fire in the cabin overhead. He indicated that the fumes were not dissipating.


Synopsis: B737-800 flight crew had a Flight Attendant notify them of an acrid electric smell at mid-cabin. Flight crew declared an emergency and diverted.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
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: Galley Furnishing
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness; Physiological - Other; Distraction; Time Pressure
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Leveling at FL340 we smelled a burning odor coming from first class. In the next few seconds the odor intensified and smoke filled the cockpit. All three crewmembers donned our oxygen masks and initiated our emergency procedures. I was the Pilot Monitoring and was notified by the First Class Flight Attendant that there was a large amount of smoke from the oven. I told her to pull the circuit breakers and to let me know if the smoke subsided. I told my First Officer to immediately return back to the departure airport and to let ATC know what our situation was. I ran the QRH for smoke in the cockpit and smoke removal. During that time the smoke subsided; but there was still a pungent odor coming from first class. We were given emergency priority into the airport. We landed without further incident. The fire department rescue inspected our oven and found hot spots; but no further immediate fire. We taxied to the gate without further incident.


Second narrative: I was directed to fly the airplane and handle ATC while the Captain ran checklists and coordinated with the flight attendants. I communicated with ATC that there was smoke in the cockpit and we were returning to the departure airport. After running the emergency checklist and descending; the smoke abated. We continued and landed overweight.


Synopsis: B737NG flight crew reported diverting after a fire started in the forward galley oven.
Date: 202012
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: Small Transport
Operator: Government
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Other FAA Certification
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class D PSC
ATC / advisory: TRACON PSC
Second aircraft: Small Transport
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working the R1 position. Aircraft X was inbound from the south requested RNAV [Runway] XX approach to get below the deck and requested to proceed via own navigation to ZZZZZ. I cleared Aircraft X to maintain and cross ZZZZZ at or above 5;700 ft.; RNAV [Runway] XX ZZZ Approach. Aircraft Y was inbound from the east; and instructed to hold east of ZZZ at 6;000 ft. for sequence behind Aircraft X. Aircraft X was radar service terminated and switched to ZZZ Tower. ZZZ Tower had not been advised of Aircraft Y in holding. At approximately 5.5 mile; ZZZ Tower called and advised Aircraft X was requesting a 360. I approved Aircraft X request. When I observed Aircraft X continuing to travel eastbound; I called ZZZ Tower to verify Aircraft X had canceled IFR. ZZZ Tower advised they had not canceled IFR. When I observed Aircraft X began to climb higher than 4;600 ft. eventually up to 5;200 ft.; I issued Aircraft Y to continue in holding except to climb to 7;000 ft. CA went into alarm; I issued a traffic alert to Aircraft Y and advised a right turn heading 360 and to climb and maintain 7;000 ft. I called ZZZ Tower and asked them to switch Aircraft X back to me. Aircraft X was still on Tower's frequency and they rejoined the RNAV [Runway] XX at 10.5 miles and continued inbound.On initial call from ZZZ Tower; I should have verified that Aircraft X had canceled IFR with Tower. I could have instructed Aircraft Y to hold at 7;000 ft. from the initial call.




Synopsis: Controller reported previous IFR released to Tower made unexpected climb towards holding traffic resulted in an airborne conflict.