elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZFW.ARTCC, TX
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZFW
ATC / advisory: Center ZFW
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Possible altitude deviation/controller communication error 40 miles west of TXK VOR; we were climbing through approximately 33;300 FT enroute to our assigned altitude of FL350. Controller transmitted '[Our call sign] stop the climb at 340' As I was about to key the mike to acknowledge; another aircraft with a very similar call sign acknowledged. The Captain and I assumed that the call was for this other aircraft; but just to be sure I queried the Controller and asked; 'Who was that for?' The Controller responded hastily and with a rather annoyed tone; 'He got it!' So; assuming that the call was for the other aircraft; we continued the climb and leveled at FL350. Less that a minute later; the Controller transmitted '[Our call sign]; turn 35 degrees left immediately!' I acknowledged the directive and we did so. The Controller then asked; 'Did you hear the clearance to level off at 340?' I told him; 'Someone else answered for us; I asked you to repeat the call sign; and you told me 'he got it'' The Controller then said; 'Okay; no problem.' Nothing more was said of the incident by the Controller.


Second narrative: On climbout west of TXK were given a clearance to climb to FL350. At approximately FL330 the Controller gave a clearance to climb to FL340 which we believed was intended for our aircraft; however another aircraft took the clearance. We asked the Controller who that last clearance was for and was told the correct aircraft got it. We continued the climb to FL350. At FL350 we were asked by the Controller if we had gotten the revised clearance to FL340. We responded that we had asked but were told the correct aircraft had gotten the clearance.The frequency was busy; however I believe that if we had used our call sign in our query instead of 'Who was that for' and if the Controller had used our call sign in his response instead of 'The right aircraft got it' we would have avoided the problem.


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reports another aircraft accepting a clearance to level off at FL340 that was meant for them. When ATC is queried about whom the clearance was for ATC responds that the correct aircraft got the clearance. No call signs were used in the exchange and the crew did not level off as the Controller wished.
Date: 202109
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZJX.ARTCC, FL
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZJX
ATC / advisory: Center ZJX
Aircraft component: Engine Temperature Indication
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion
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 New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: After arriving at the aircraft; we completed our normal pre-flight duties. The only irregularity was a temp controller MEL which we reviewed.During climb talking to the 2nd or 3rd center controller; he asked if we were on a heading. I referenced the FMC and told him we were direct DEFUN. He didn't respond for a few seconds; then cleared us direct MVC flight plan route. We thought this question was unusual and spooled back to the beginning.Reviewing our clearance/CPDLC during cruise; we realized our mistake. During pre-flight we were discussing the new EPCOT1 departure and the need to load a runway for departure to load properly. After the recent FL airspace update the departure runway is now included in the clearance; and I brought that up to my partner. The CPDLC came back and we verified clearance and jumped to page2/3 to check for runway. Runway 36R was listed and we proceeded to to load the runway and verified the legs/restrictions on the EPCOT1. Fixating on the runway and departure with the usual just before closing door activities caused us to miss the page 3/3 load prompt for a route change after MUGLS to DEFUN. The controller sorted it out without any issues; but in the future I will make sure the entire clearance/route gets reviewed again after loading the runway and departure.Being able to print entire clearance without scrolling 3 pages might have helped us catch this error promptly.




Synopsis: Pilot reported issues with the clearance; and not loading correct information; resulting in a course direction question from ATC.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: 1W1.Airport, WA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class G ZSE
ATC / advisory: CTAF 1W1
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Student and instructor were on a night cross-country. Traffic pattern was entered and to verify wind direction we did not descend on downwind but continued on an upwind leg to ensure we would be ready for the landing. We turned crosswind and downwind and did our before landing procedure. Student was slow to configure the aircraft which extended the downwind leg further than desired and upon turning base we noted we were low on the VASI. The student made a correction to get back on/above the glide path which was too little. I as the instructor was too late and too slow to inspire a more aggressive correction until the top of the tree came into view. I took control of the airplane and landed uneventfully and taxied to parking. There was no indication of flight control malfunction nor any indication of a loss of engine RPM. Subsequent inspection revealed slight damage to the right main landing gear fairing and damage to the left horizontal stabilizer fairing. I suspect that the propeller may have been impacted but there was no sudden stoppage of the prop. Of note; when the runway lights were activated by the CTAF; the lights on the north side of the runway from midfield to the departure end did not illuminate. What did come on was all of the lights on the south side of the runway and half the lights on the north side from the approach end to midfield. Also; I'm aware that the VASI glide slope angle is set higher than a three degree glide slope because of obstructions (trees) and the angle used to be published in the Chart Supplement; but that information is no longer available.




Synopsis: Instructor reported possibly clipping a tree on approach due to being lower then normal.
Date: 202110
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Check Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Departing ZZZ this morning Tower issued our takeoff clearance [Runway] XXR/X2 as an Airbus in front of us was on its takeoff roll. I taxied the Aircraft into position on the runway centerline held the brakes and waited until the [departing] jet had cleared the runway; before starting our takeoff. Normal takeoff roll through 80 kts.; v1; rotate for us. Climbing through 600 ft. I looked down our aircraft nose and to the right of us and saw [an aircraft] crossing the runway below. I immediately asked Tower if an Aircraft was crossing the runway in front of us? He replied with 'yes; sorry about that; contact departure; have a great day'. We continued to ZZZ1 uneventfully. I believe [critical ground conflict] was due to the fact the Controller had Ground and Tower frequencies combined and completely saturated with taxiing; departing; landing; and repositioning Aircraft.That much traffic in the morning demands multiple controllers on multiple frequencies monitoring and directing traffic safely.




Synopsis: EMB-175 Check Airman reported a critical ground conflict during takeoff initial climb with a taxing aircraft crossing departure runway.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 3 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Nacelle/Pylon
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Lead Technician; Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Postflight walkaround found #1 engine pylon access panel had departed aircraft.




Synopsis: During a postflight walkaround; Aircraft Maintenance Technician discovered the #1 engine pylon access panel was missing.
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: PCT.TRACON, VA
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; 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 Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Approaching the BEWEE intersection on the CONLE1 RNAV Departure; Potomac Departure asked if we had been assigned a vector. We stated that we had not and that we were approaching the BEWEE intersection of the departure procedure. They informed us that we appeared to be 5 or 6 miles off course. Both the first officer and myself were puzzled since the proper runway and procedure were entered into the FMS. Additionally; both of our flight instruments were indicating that we were on course with the autopilot engaged. Upon further review when workload permitted; we reviewed our flight plan and did not notice any discrepancies. All standard operating procedures were complied with for an RNAV departure procedure to include briefings and autopilot engagement.


Second narrative: According to our flight plan and the visual indication we had in the plane (FMS and MFDs) we were on the CONLE1 DEP and on track. ATC called us later and asked according to our flight path where did we show ourselves? I responded with 'when you called us to inform us we were off course we were crossing BEWEE and initiating our turn towards OHSSS.' He responded with 'OK thanks'


Synopsis: EMB-145 flight crew reported ATC advised them they were off course while flying the CONLE1 RNAV departure out of BWI. Flight crew stated they showed right on course.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Aircraft: Cessna Citation Mustang (C510)
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ambulance
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local; Ground; Trainee
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was training Local and Ground combined. Airport was IFR with snow removal in progress. OS [Operational Supervisor] handed me an updated list of NOTAMS for field conditions. An opposite direction arrival to Runway 21 was coordinated and approved by me. Aircraft X was approximately 20 miles north of the field. I concentrated on updating the IDS-4 [Information Display System] and did not check the radar scope as I should have. I am still learning to adapt to IDS-4 requirements of my new facility. No one in the tower pointed out to me the position of the inbound aircraft. Aircraft X checked in on a 6 mile final. I had to scramble to get vehicles off of the runway. Aircraft X really should have been sent around. Personnel in the tower at the time. OS on CIC. Training on TRCAB. Controller monitoring between me and TRCAB. OJTI plugged in with me. Total persons including myself 6. This situation was allowed to develop to prove a point to me. While I do allow conditions to develop so trainees can learn; with the weather and vehicles on the runway; this was too dangerous of a situation to allow this to happen. I do take responsibility for not checking the radar; but at the minimum the supervisor should have said something to keep the operation safe. Stress the importance of tower team concept. Describe when it is appropriate to allow situations to develop and when it is not. This should be included in some type of training such as recurrent training.




Synopsis: Tower Controller reported rushing to clear the runway of vehicles for landing traffic while training.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: J3 Cub
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Unable to maintain altitude. Landed in wheat field.




Synopsis: Piper J3 Cub pilot reported landing in a field because of inability to maintain altitude.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: APU
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Fume/odor event at gate as indicated by oil fume odor probably related to APU bleed air. Pilots removed themselves from flying status. Aircraft removed from service. No passengers involved as problem was detected prior to boarding.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain reported refusing aircraft due to fumes on board during preflight at gate.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 210 Centurion / Turbo Centurion 210C; 210D
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Exited Penetrated Airspace
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While departing WHP turned northbound from left downwind runway 12. intent was to remain below 3000 feet MSL and proceed to Mendenhall Pass to exit the area. This would keep me out of Class C airspace overlying the area around WHP. As I approached the pass I realized I had inadvertently climbed to 3;200 ft penetrating the Class C airspace. I immediately descended to below 3;000 ft MSL. I continued below the Class C. Once clear I began my climb while entering the pass. The primary cause of this incident was my inattention to situational awareness and allowing the aircraft to climb while engaged with a passenger in the aircraft who was having difficulty dealing with the light turbulence. Contributing factors included the aircraft not being trimmed for level flight; the Class C air space ending very near the mountains and requiring entry into the pass at an altitude 1;500 ft. below the mountain ridge height; which causes a desire to climb as you approach the mountains. This pass is narrow and rugged. As a pilot we desire to have as much altitude and horizontal space as possible to turn back toward lower terrain. The mountains rise rapidly from the valley floor; approximately 3;500 ft. in one mile. The ground in the pass is rugged and unsuitable for a forced landing. The Class C airspace in this area is not generally used for traffic at BUR except when wind conditions are out of the North. This occurs about 15 percent of the time and the pass experiences severe turbulence so using it is undesirable when that area is used for approaches to BUR.




Synopsis: Cessna T210 pilot reported an airspace violation departing WHP; citing terrain concerns as contributing.
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LAS.Airport, NV
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B LAS
ATC / advisory: TRACON LAS
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During descent into LAS on Tyssn2 arrival; ATC kept us up high for traffic and after clearing this traffic; I started a descent after we were cleared direct to SHAND intersection for a visual approach to LAS. We received a 'Caution Terrain and a Pull Up' audible while having all terrain and runway in sight. I observed the 'Pull Up' by applying power and climbing. We both felt like we were well clear of terrain and the cautions were a predictive vector message from GPWS. We continued with a stable approach and landed uneventfully.At night in mountainous terrain; it would be safest to fly the arrival in its entirety and adhere to the published altitudes.




Synopsis: A B757 Captain reported receiving a GPWS terrain alert on a night visual approach to LAS even though he felt he was clear of terrain.
Date: 202202
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: JFK.Airport, NY
Aircraft: Medium Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B N90
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Aircraft component: GPWS
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Upon departure on 4L in JFK; we were in a turn at 1.5 DME off the JFK VOR to 100. We were established on the 100 heading for less than one minute and were given direct WAVEY. We were climbing at 250 kt. at approximately 2500 ft. per minute and turning direct WAVEY. We received a 'wup wup pull up terrain terrain' passing through 3200 ft. We only received this aural warning one time. Our MSA was 2000 ft. in that quadrant. Since we were climbing and the warning went away; no evasive action was taken. The MFD remained normal with no terrain overlay for escape guidance. After the event we believed it was a possible 5G event.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported a single terrain warning during initial climb despite being well clear of terrain. Captain cited 5G interference as possibly contributing.