elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DAL.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B DFW
ATC / advisory: Tower DAL
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Undershoot; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Go-around aircraft on 13L turned in front of us just after we lifted off from Runway 13R. I was situationally aware of the go-around aircraft; but didn't expect him to turn in front of us while we were still in a critical phase of flight. When I saw his course was going to cross ours; I immediately initiated a level off at approximately 1;200 feet - 1;500 feet AGL and continued to clean up my aircraft. The First Officer (FO) pointed to the buildings in front of us and I made a turn heading 070; remembering the single engine procedure. I may have descended slightly as I was looking outside the aircraft only. My concentration was to maintain vertical separation from the other aircraft and downtown. I deviated from the LNAV departure momentarily but quickly rejoined and was able to meet all altitude restrictions. We never got a TCAS TA or RA. My FO said he never saw anything less than 1;200 feet vertical separation on the TCAS. Tower and Departure need to coordinate. Also; it would have been nice to have a heads up that the aircraft was going to cross in front of us.




Synopsis: A pilot departed DAL Runway 13R and took evasive action from an aircraft which had executed a go-around from Runway 13L and turned to cross the 13R departure path.
Date: 202101
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Amateur/Home Built/Experimental
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On raising the nose in this tail wheel the left turning force would not be abated with right rudder and a little right brake a takeoff abort should have been attempted. Ran off the runway into tall grass. A ground loop occurred. The plane was dragged to a tie down at airport.




Synopsis: Pilot reported losing control of aircraft; having a runway excursion; and ground looping the aircraft.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying; Relief Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: I was in the crew rest at the time ATC notified the operating pilots about a violation of a NOTAM.  This NOTAM applied to the way we were filed through to Russian airspace. The operating pilots then pulled out the NOTAM paperwork and shifted through the 33 pages of NOTAM to find the appropriate one.  When I came up to the flight deck to relieve one of the pilots; I was made aware of the violation.  I looked through the NOTAM packet and found the NOTAM that was violated.  During the preflight; we all looked through the flight packet to try and find all appropriate information for our route of flight.  The way this NOTAM was written would make it very difficult to apply to our route of flight without several hours available before the flight to plot the positions that it was talking about since we did not have the fixes written in the NOTAM as filed points.  After this incident; I will be looking more closely at all available paperwork. This NOTAM was able to be missed by at least the Dispatcher; Clearance Delivery; four pilots; and Center.  A more clearly structured way to deliver NOTAM would be helpful in avoiding this in the future.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer stated that NOTAM was poorly worded and required several hours of plotting to comply with; causing NOTAM to be violated.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: On final approach for XXR into ZZZ; Tower advised of traffic off our left. The traffic could not be visually identified. The traffic appeared to be operating in Class B airspace but was not on frequency with Tower. As we descended on short final we received two traffic advisories. At approximately 800 feet AGL we received a resolution advisory instructing us to climb. The Captain was PF and I was PM. The Captain initiated a climb to resolve the conflict. After the climb was initiated a stabilized approach to a landing in the touchdown zone was no longer assured. At that point the safest course of action was to execute a missed approach and the Captain proceeded to do so. We executed the missed in compliance with ATC instruction and landed uneventfully on the next attempt.Lately I have noticed an increase in small single engine GA aircraft doing landings and pattern work at ZZZ and transiting the Class B airspace. With the drastic decrease in fuel prices and lower 121 traffic volume in and around ZZZ it seems there has been a corresponding increase in small aircraft.


Second narrative: I was the Captain on Aircraft X from ZZZ1 to ZZZ. We were on a visual approach to runway XXL. Descending through about 2;000 feet Tower gave us a traffic alert regarding Aircraft Y that was over the shoreline heading towards us but was not talking to Tower. Immediately following that statement from tower we got the 'TRAFFIC; TRAFFIC' alert from the TCAS. We made the final step in configuring for landing; descended below 1;000 feet; got the 1;000 foot chime and almost immediately got another 'TRAFFIC' alert from the TCAS. Shortly after; we received a Climb RA at about 800 feet; but neither me or my First Officer had had the traffic in sight so I elected to execute a missed approach instead of trying to salvage the visual following an RA. We got vectored around and landed safely with no further incident.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported being on final to a Class Bravo airport and having to go-around due to a small aircraft that was not talking to Tower; which caused the airborne conflict.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Challenger 350
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Time Pressure; Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Weather in the morning was clear blue skies and a temperature in the low 50's. After a long taxi out from the hangar to the runway we were cleared for takeoff on a runway heading to 4;000 feet. Once in the air; the appropriate checklists were completed and we were handed off to Center fairly early as we were the only airplane in the area. In the climb crossing approximately 8;000 feet we encountered a vibration which to felt and sounded like the landing gear panel had dropped back down. After a quick scan of the instruments we realized that our left engine had indications of a much higher temperature and erratic N1 and N2 indications. At this point; we were both convinced that a return was our best course of action. After a quick level off and a call to Center to let them know we needed to return; the engine started to show signs of further failure.Once power was reduced to start the descent; the vibration and the noise level were both increasing. After the handoff to Center we were offered one runway for landing; however; we both agreed that we were too high and would have to move too aggressively to make that runway safely. We opted for a different runway to allow a safe descent and a little more time to run the appropriate checklists. On our base leg as the aircraft was being configured for landing and power was further reduced the left engine was now shaking violently and the only option for us was to shut it down. A smooth landing was made and a taxi back to the hangar was without further incident. After the mechanic did his inspection of the engine;it was determined that the number 4 bearing had failed which is a somewhat common occurrence for this particular Honeywell engine.




Synopsis: CL350 pilot reported engine failure after takeoff. Return to departure airport was made with the engine shut down resulting in a smooth landing and no further incident.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citationjet (C525/C526) - CJ I / II / III / IV
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ZZZ; Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Cargo Compartment Fire/Overheat Warning
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
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: While descending into ZZZ out of approximately 10;000 feet MSL; we received a BAGGAGE SMOKE annunciator and master warning alarm. I directed Pilot Not Flying to retrieve the QRH while I took the radios. QRH procedures direct to land as soon as possible. I [requested priority handling] with Approach and advised that we had a cargo smoke indication and would require CFR (Crash Fire Rescue) response. We were given an immediate vector for a visual approach to Runway 13R. I disconnected the autopilot and initiated a descent for the airport. We were able to descend using normal procedures and maneuvers (idle thrust; speed brakes; flaps) and position ourselves for a normal visual approach to Runway XXR backed up to ILS. We were cleared to land on Tower frequency and requested a visual check and advisory for trailing smoke. We reviewed emergency evacuation procedures and duties; but agreed that we would exit the runway and proceed to the FBO under escort providing we did not receive any secondary indications of smoke or fire (sight; smell; ATC/CFR advisory). After a normal landing and no secondary smoke/fire indications we exited the runway and were met by CFR vehicles for a safety inspection. During this time; Pilot Not Flying briefed passengers. We were cleared by CFR to proceed to FBO under escort. Upon arrival and shutdown; Pilot Not Flying exited the aircraft first to open and inspect forward and aft cargo compartments along with CFR personnel. I remained on board with the passengers and explained again what had occurred. We were given a final all-clear and proceeded to deplane passengers and cargo as normal. The BAGGAGE SMOKE annunciator remained illuminated constantly until shutdown. We observed an unusual amount of condensation in the forward cargo compartment; but no other evidence of smoke or fire was observed.




Synopsis: C25B Captain reported observing a 'Baggage Smoke' annunciator light; which resulted in a request for an expedited approach and landing.
Date: 202003
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: SR20
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: FBO Personnel
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Other Person
When detected: Taxi
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While on duty as the Flight Supervisor; an individual who works for Airport Operations came in and asked to speak with the pilot of Aircraft X. The PIC was already at the counter so I stated that he was the PIC of Aircraft X. The Airport Operations Official said there was a report of him taxiing under the wing [of Aircraft Y] who was pushing back on [the] taxiway. The PIC said after landing; Tower told him to taxi X and Y to the ramp and stay on frequency. He said he thought it was weird and abnormal to taxi under the wing but felt there was enough clearance so he continued. He also stated that he maintained the right side and would have gone into the grass if he went any further right and would have hit the aircraft's engine if he went any further left. He wrote his statement and gave it to the Airport Operations Official and then called Tower to discuss the event. A video was taken clearly showing [the] PIC taxiing under the wing of Aircraft Y which I sent to the management and safety department.




Synopsis: FBO Flight Supervisor for flight school reported Airport Operations Official notified the Duty Officer of a Critical Ground encounter of an FBO SR-20 with air carrier during taxi.
Date: 201807
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: PBI.TRACON, FL
Aircraft: Regional Jet CL65; Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E PBI
ATC / advisory: TRACON PBI
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion; Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Manuals; Procedure
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: I had just taken the position. I was briefed on a departure which I climbed and switched to ZMA. I was only on position a few minutes when I was relieved from the position to move over and split off the position. This was done by a supervisor and a trainee as the trainee was certified on the departure sector but not the arrival one. After opening the Arrival position and working for a few minutes I overheard the Departure Controller asking the position of an aircraft. This aircraft ended up being a regional jet that had departed and tagged up approximately 40-50 miles north of the airport. The Departure Controller asked if I talked to the aircraft before the sector split. I stated that I had not talked to the aircraft and had no idea they took off. I did not observe a data tag or an untagged secondary target at any time. I do not recall ever hearing the aircraft check-in and as a result never radar identified it. I did have other aircraft on my frequency that required my attention away from the departure side of the airport as well as weather beginning to build in the airspace. I never received a 'no tag' call from the Tower on departure.[I recommend] a reminder to the workforce that the PBI Standard Operating Procedure requires the Tower to notify the TRACON within 3 miles of any departures that have not tagged. Do not switch aircraft to departure control from local control until an acquired tag is observed. Do not continue to have a departure SID level off at an altitude that is in direct conflict with an arrival descent procedure.In light of this; I do accept responsibility in that I should have observed the primary target in my airspace and questioned it. Also; the tower did scan the departure strip but I did not check the printer for it. While not required; this is a practice I normally do workload permitting and will make sure my focus always stays sharp in the future with regard to this.




Synopsis: TRACON Controller reported a departure did not tag up on the radar display and was not detected until flying 40 to 50 miles.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: A80.TRACON, GA
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ATL
ATC / advisory: TRACON A80
Second aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was conducting OJT on departure RADAR South. Air Carrier X departed Runway 27L; Runway 27R; the normal departure runway had a disabled aircraft on it; on the NOV RNAV SID. It was apparent Air Carrier X was south of the RNAV tracked. A few miles behind him Air Carrier Y departed on the DAW RNAV SID on track. Air Carrier X checked on stating he was having issues with his compass and would be deviating from the RNAV departure. Air Carrier X had already compromised separation between himself and Air Carrier Y. Unfortunately the Developmental's reply was 'roger'. I immediately told him to turn Air Carrier X and he assigned a 270 heading. Air Carrier Y was still on the Tower frequency. I promptly called Local Control 3 and told him Air Carrier X had compass issues; was assigned a 270 and to assign Air Carrier Y a 255 heading to ensure separation. A80 has a waiver for reduced departure separation. Thankfully; DR-N had no departures on the westbound RNAV heading because assigning. Air Carrier X a 270 vector would have compromised separation between those 2 tracks. ATL Tower needs to ensure aircraft are on the correct track; hold onto the aircraft until this occurs. In this case if Tower had both aircraft on frequency visual separation could have been applied. Air Carrier X should have advised the Tower of his situation. NOT check on departure already deviating into the path of Air Carrier Y.




Synopsis: A80 Controller providing OJT described a loss of separation event when traffic departing on an RNAV SID experienced equipment difficulties straying from the published route and conflicted with parallel runway departure traffic.
Date: 202109
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: DFW.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Workload; Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airport; Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: We had an early departure with a myriad of operational issues with the right pack inoperative; the checklist was outdated and required canceling our prior clearance to push.  We normally taxi out to Spot XX and await DFW Ground to call us. There was a broken aircraft that was being towed from the runway and we were assigned spot XY. We taxied around Terminal E; it was dark; the lighting was inadequate; the terminal goes around and the spots are very difficult to see.  We also had to be vigilant of parked aircraft at Spot XZ. There was confusion between Spot XY and XA and by the time we saw the spots; they were the spot markings on Taxiway Kilo.  We contacted Ground at spot XY and Ground Control advised us we were on Taxiway Kilo. We acknowledged our mistake and received taxi instructions to taxi to 17R.Taxi Error: Did Not Hold Short of Assigned Location.




Synopsis: Air Carrier First Officer reported poor lighting in the area surrounding Terminal E at DFW contributed to a taxiway incursion.