elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202003
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airport; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During night visual conditions crew accepted vectoring for visual approach with ILS BACKUP which is second option to straight in ILS to Runway XX in ZZZ. Instead of long downwind vectoring ATC queried crew if Runway was in sight; then cleared for approach. Crew turned base; but dim runway lights initially contributed to crew not descending in a timely matter. After lights were turned up crew determined stabilized approach could not be achieved and performed a go-around. Tower cleared crew to enter downwind and crew kept runway in sight while climbing to 3;000 feet AGL. On descending base turn crew got momentary EGPWS terrain warning and started nighttime terrain procedure. Warning silenced within 2-3 seconds. Normal landing was made. Crew debriefed extraordinary threats to mental distraction due to Coronavirus events. Captain had flown 5 straight days and was further distracted by family situation involving extraordinary airline operations.


Second narrative: During night VMC the crew accepted controlled vectors to visual backed up by ILS which is second option to Runway XX in ZZZ.  ATC asked if runway in sight and cleared us for the approach.  The lights were very dim and we also had a momentary false capture of the GS.  Immediately requested lights turned up by Tower; but crew determined we were unable to achieve a stable approach.  Upon go-around Tower cleared us to the downwind and we climbed to 6;000 MSL.  Upon initial descending turn to base we got momentary EGPWS terrain warning an immediately executed terrain procedure. Warning went away immediately.  Normal landing achieved.  Captain and I debriefed all threats and distractions especially due to Coronavirus and impact on our company; careers and families.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew received a momentary EGPWS terrain warning while turning base on a nighttime visual approach. The flight continued to a safe landing. The crew noted that distraction due to the COVID-19 pandemic; its impact on the company; and family concerns contributed to the event.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: NQI.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 4
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Military Trainer
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D NQI
ATC / advisory: Tower NQI
Reporter organization: Military
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Upon departure from runway 13R at NQI; ATC issued Aircraft X an intermediate level off altitude of 5;000 feet MSL at a climb altitude of 2;000 feet MSL and advised of south bound Gulfstream traffic to the east of Aircraft X's position at 6;000 feet MSL. The intermediate altitude was 2;000 feet less than initial clearance of 7;000 feet MSL. While in the non-standard left hand turn to MOA entry point and scanning for the traffic Aircraft X missed level off altitude of 5;000 feet MSL by 400 ft. Aircraft X pilot made an immediate correction back to 5;000 feet MSL. Kingsville departure queried Aircraft X pilot to confirm updated level off altitude of 5;000 feet MSL. Aircraft X was visual of Gulfstream traffic during climb and left turn.




Synopsis: Military trainer pilot reported overshooting a 5;000 foot altitude constraint with traffic at 6;000 feet.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E D01
ATC / advisory: TRACON D01
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Descending VIA FRNCH arrival STAR; ATC leveled us at FL190 then was stepping us down a few thousand feet at a time.  In the vicinity of TOMSN intersection at or near our assigned altitude of 15;000 feet we encountered a light aircraft between 300-500 feet above us traveling in the opposite direction.  I was making a radio call to Approach when I saw the aircraft and said 'AIRCRAFT' before releasing the microphone.  Time from visually acquiring the aircraft to determining it wasn't going to impact us to having it pass was approximately 3-5 seconds.  I then reported 'near midair collision' to ATC.  ATC informed us of traffic at 13;000 feet which I saw below us.  ATC then reported a VFR target squawking 1200 shortly after.  The aircraft may have turned on their transponder after seeing an Airbus nearly hit them.A few miles earlier I had noticed an unfilled white diamond symbol on my TCAS; however it was not in our flight path.  We received no TCAS RA; Traffic Alert or any other guidance or warning.


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


Synopsis: A320 flight crew reported an NMAC with a single engine light aircraft in the vicinity of DEN.
Date: 201702
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Light: Night
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure; Company Policy
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: At many of our airports; the parking lead-in lines are very difficult to identify at night and/or when the pavement is wet. This problem is exacerbated when the lead-in line is not perpendicular to the terminal building. The marshalling signal depicted in the FOM is inadequate to identify the angle of the line in the conditions mentioned above. Consider this signal from the pilot's perspective out on the taxiway as we attempt to locate the line at night and/or in the rain. With this inadequate signal; the marshaller's body could be rotated 30 degrees to either side and it would look exactly the same to us. We know where the end of the line is because the Marshaller is standing on it; but we can't determine the angle of the line because we can't tell if the marshaller's body is slightly rotated. A much better signal here would be to alternate between arms straight above head and arms pointing forward and down in the direction of the line. This exaggerated arm movement that actually points in the direction of the line would easily allow us to determine where the line is and whether or not it is angled with respect to the terminal building. This is the way we used to do it and it worked well. A few of the old-time rampers still do this; and it is a welcome relief to park at one of their gates. Said another way; the current method identifies the end of the line but not the angle of the line. The proposed method identifies both the end and the angle. It would make parking much safer and less confusing when operating in less than perfect visual conditions.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported that the company's prescribed hand signals for marshaling aircraft into parking is inadequate for purposes of identifying the ramp lead-in line at night with a wet ramp. Captain suggested returning to a marshaling signal that had previously been used.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Flight Engineer / Second Officer; Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Enroute IFR to ZZZ1 from ZZZ2 we were advised by ZZZ Center that there was control issue at ZZZ TRACON and that we would either have to divert to alternate airport or fly VFR to destination. The weather at ZZZ1 was good so we said we could plan to go VFR into ZZZ1 and we were cleared direct destination. At approximately 35 SE of ZZZ1 at 10;000 feet ZZZ Center asked if we were VMC and we advised we would be upon reaching 9;000 feet. At 9;000 feet we advised Center we were VMC and could proceed visually to ZZZ1. At that point we were on the boundary of ZZZ Class B. I specifically asked if Center would provide flight following through Class B enroute to ZZZ1.  Center responded by saying something to the effect 'Class B airspace is down.' I assumed that ATC was saying that Class B airspace was not in effect due to ZZZ TRACON problem.We proceeded to ZZZ1 and landed without issue. I was then advised by ground control to call ZZZ Center. I called and explained what happened to man on duty. I later that day again spoke with the same individual and he advised me there was a COVID cleaning event that created the problem at TRACON. He advised me that the Controller who handled my flight was in error and did not handle the situation properly.In the event this situation ever happens again I need to make sure I work with ATC to obtain a clearance either out of or through Class B airspace. This was an unusual set of circumstances and that's when everyone involved should have a keener awareness of following proper protocol.




Synopsis: Air taxi Captain reported an airspace violation after having to divert from original route due to a TRACON facility going ATC Zero.
Date: 202012
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Hydraulic Main System
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Time Pressure; Training / Qualification; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance
Detector: Person Maintenance
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Chart Or Publication; Company Policy; Manuals; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I am filing this for the technician that was tasked with this job. Aircraft X had a log to flush blue system hydraulics due to contaminated hydraulic fluid. The procedure in the AMM called out for a tool to purify the hydraulic fluid which [our] company didn't have. The mechanics were then told to follow the AMM until they came to a 'roadblock' and then figure it out from there. Eventually they used the Hydraulic Mule; which got contaminated; and figured out a way to flush it through the RAT (Ram Air Turbine) system. Capturing the contaminated fluid became another issue as no one could determine at what pressure this fluid would exit the line. Furthermore; because there was no procedure in place for this task no one could give guidance on what pressure to dial into the Mule in order to get the fluid pushed out (they eventually started at 50 psi and worked their way up to approx 2000 psi which was adequate to complete the task. Whoever wrote the task card should have ensured there was a viable AMM or procedure to accomplish this task and that the correct tooling was in place. We are now aware of several other Airbus aircraft around the system going through the exact same hydraulic contamination issue. In the case of [another] aircraft; it is the Green and Yellow systems that are affected which would necessitate a gear swing if i understand correctly. Could the ERC (event review committee) pleased use all resources to ensure proper procedures and tooling are in place prior to tasks like this one being assigned. Also; is it possible to find out the source of this hydraulic contamination?




Synopsis: Technician reported inadequate Task Card and Aircraft Maintenance Manual references; exacerbated by wrong tooling caused difficulties in purging as contaminated aircraft hydraulic system.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: PA-32 Cherokee Six/Lance/Saratoga/6X
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Power
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After an uneventful flight from to ZZZ immediately beforehand; I picked up passengers at ZZZ.On initial climb out; I lost alternator power. Digital display on panel indicated the problem; but I did not immediately recognize it for what it was. I knew something wasn't right with the electrical system; and suspected that I had lost the alternator but was unsure. Kept an eye on instrument and saw continued negative draw on battery; and voltage dropping; and determined I had a problem.I reported the problem to ATC; canceled my flight plan; and stated my intent to return immediately to ZZZ. I believe I was on with approach at the time. They asked if I wanted flight following; I said yes; and said I would likely lose my radios soon. By that time the panel was dimming significantly. ATC asked if I needed anything else; and I asked them to get the lights on at ZZZ; and they confirmed my request.As I was on with ATC; I was executing a 180 turn. Shortly after ATC confirmed my request for lights; I lost all power. I was able to use my phone; which has Foreflight + GPS; to navigate to ZZZ; which was a much easier option than a dark compass. The runway lights were on (I would learn later they were activated by a nearby aircraft at the request of ATC) and I was able to manually extend the gear per memorized procedure; and successfully landed at ZZZ.ATC had the local fire and police department waiting for me at ZZZ; for which I'm grateful; despite not needing them in the end.Things I did well:- Noticed the problem- Stayed calm- Took action and told ATC what I needed- Prepared plan B and C in my mind if plan A didn't work out (Plan B - Call police to get runway lights turned on; Plan C - Fly to towered airport nearby)- Had a backup nav system ready to go; and used itThings that I did not do well / will do differently:- Understand my digital display and electric system completely so that I recognize problems instantly- In the event of an alternator problem; immediately slow to gear extension speed and extend gear; and turn off all unnecessary electrical items- Practice with and carry a portable radio on all flights




Synopsis: Piper 32R pilot reported that during climb all electrical power was lost.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LGB.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E SCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Aircraft component: Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS)
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We encountered 2 RA events on a Part 91 reposition/ferry leg to LGB. The pilot flying was receiving type specific instruction.IFR route clearance was: Fly runway heading; radar vectors; maintain 3000 feet. After level off on assigned altitude of 3000 feet ATC advised us of VFR traffic at 3500 feet at our 11 o'clock. We saw the traffic and I reported the traffic in sight. As we crossed under the single-engine piston airplane we received an RA: 'Do not climb.' We complied.Shortly thereafter ATC instructed us to descend to 1600 feet. As we approached 2000 feet ATC instructed us to level off at 2000 feet and advised us of another traffic at 1500 feet at our 10 to 11 o'clock. As we leveled off I sighted a helicopter at our 11 o'clock position moving from left to right in level flight 500 feet below us. I reported the traffic in sight and told ATC it's a helicopter. We then received an RA to 'climb; climb.' My copilot maintained level flight. By this time we were crossing above the helicopter and I had the traffic in sight. I determined there was no traffic conflict so did not take over the controls and allowed my co-pilot to continue flying. The flight concluded with an ILS runway 30 approach to LGB in visual conditions. During the post flight debrief I clarified to the co-pilot the importance of complying with an RA. He did not know that a TA/RA event takes precedence over ATC instructions. He was also unaware to the requirement to comply with an RA. I will bring this matter to the attention of the training department so these misunderstandings are corrected as soon as possible.




Synopsis: An Air Taxi Captain reported encountering two conflicting aircraft. The first TCAS warning indicated 'DO NOT CLIMB' and a second aircraft warning 'CLIMB'; which the First Officer did not follow.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: During takeoff roll Runway 01 (while setting takeoff N1); Tower Controller cleared an aircraft for takeoff on an intersecting runway. Tower stated to that aircraft; 'From intersection D; Runway 10; cleared for takeoff.' This was very alarming; as we had to determine where intersection 'D' was in relation to our takeoff roll. So while thrust was advanced on our rolling takeoff past 90 knots; I had to swipe back from my SID page to the 10-9 page and 'pinch out' to highlight where intersection D was. Quickly determining its location was one taxiway east of our position where the two runways intersected; about 2;500 feet had gone by approaching abeam Taxiway Romeo; and that's where we saw we were clear of the conflict. We continued the takeoff.It would have been useful to get a heads up from Tower that the departing aircraft was down line from the intersecting runway with a diverging heading. I feel a Tower clearance of this sort constitutes an unsafe practice; without receiving this mitigating information.




Synopsis: B737-700 Captain taking off on Runway 01; heard Tower Controller clear another aircraft for an intersection takeoff on intersecting Runway 10. Captain had to ascertain from the 10-9 page that the given intersection was past Runway 01 and would not be a conflict.