elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZMA.ARTCC, FL
Aircraft: PA-32 Cherokee Six/Lance/Saratoga/6X
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Airspace: Class E ZMA
ATC / advisory: Center ZMA
Second aircraft: King Air C90 E90
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A King Air 90 was IFR on his route to MLB at 10;000 FT. A Piper Saratoga called to pick up his IFR. I gave the Saratoga his squawk code and started a track north of Freeport since this is where they normally call to pick up their IFR. I continued to take care of other aircraft in my sector. My D-Side mentioned the altitude as the 'conflict alert' went off and asked if I issued the Saratoga 10;000 FT. I said no; just a squawk code. I then proceeded to give the King Air the traffic call in case that was indeed where the Saratoga was; but I had yet to RADAR identify the aircraft. The King Air said that they had no contact and that they were IMC. When I issued the traffic; there was only 3 miles separation with a large overtake; and at the same altitude. I then asked the Saratoga if he was level at 10;000 and that; if he was that it was not an approved VFR altitude; then I issued him the overtaking traffic. He said that he was trying to get to 10;500 but encountered a layer and decided to descend. However; while I was issuing all the traffic to both aircraft; his altitude never changed from the 10;000 FT. After there was finally altitude separation; and I felt like the danger was no longer imminent; I was able RADAR identify the Saratoga. Even if pilots are anticipating on being issued their IFR; they should still remain in VFR conditions and at VFR altitudes.




Synopsis: Enroute Controller described a near loss of separation when a VFR aircraft awaiting an IFR clearance entered IMC conditions close to an aircraft on an IFR clearance.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: GNV.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation V/Ultra/Encore (C560)
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower GNV
Second aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: In the [Aircraft X]; I was taxiing daytime; VMC. The First Officer and I had completed running the taxiing checklist; and were approaching the approach hold short area. I observed that there was [Aircraft Y] in the run up area. As we approached the run up area; we talked about switching controls and the takeoff safety brief; when the First Officer exclaimed 'whoa' and I noticed that [Aircraft Y] was now hanging out of the run up area. I swung the plane further left of the centerline; but in the process the tip of our wing rubbed over the tip of [Aircraft Y's] wing. Impact was not felt or heard; but we taxied back into the ramp and observed slight scuffs on the bottom of our wing tip. I believe the piston had begun to taxi forward out of the run up as we began to pass him; as our wing doesn't hang over into the run up area.


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


Synopsis: Citation flight crew reported distraction and loss of situational awareness during taxi; resulting in a ground collision with another aircraft.
Date: 201709
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZID.ARTCC, IN
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 2 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZID
ATC / advisory: Center ZID
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Staffing
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: When Aircraft X was approximately 2 minutes out from HTS approach; I called with an approval request. HTS Approach did not answer the line. I had something else to do so I hung up; did some work; then called again for a handoff. HTS was still not answering the line. An aircraft was checking in so I hung up and checked him on and then called again for a handoff but there was no answer. At this time a Handoff position was just sitting down but had not been told about the situation. I hung up the line and issued a turn to 180 degrees because I was within 1 minute of the boundary. During this time; my Handoff called again and HTS answered while I was in the process of calling another sector which had already gotten a pointout but on the airway where I now needed to point the aircraft out southbound.When I came back; my Handoff position said to keep him coming. I called HTS approach again and they did not answer. So I called them again and no answer. So I called them again and a man answered who was out of breath. I asked if he could hear the line and he said to keep the aircraft coming but that the radar controller was busy and could not answer the line. Also; of all the traffic I could see; there was one airplane in the entirety of HTS airspace. So I got a 'keep 'em comin' approval from a man who ran across the room and answered a radar line. I've got no idea if this is legal or not. A minute later I called and talked to a female controller and told her the position of the aircraft and that he's already on non-radar routing so I was terminating his radar and they can work him. It is a continuous battle to get HTS Approach to take radar handoffs on any aircraft at most any altitude. From a service perspective for the aircraft; the best thing to do would be to take away all of HTS airspace and let all the surrounding sectors absorb their airspace. Until then; I would propose that all aircraft be non-radar to HTS and on non-radar routing with coordination done at least 5 minutes in advance due to the high volume of their traffic and inability to answer land line coordination.




Synopsis: ZID Center controller reported HTS Approach routinely does not accept handoffs or answer the landline.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: TBM 700/TBM 850
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
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: The engine failed during flight and I diverted to the nearest suitable airport and landed. It happened quickly and there was nothing to be done differently.




Synopsis: When his single turbine engine quit at FL190 the pilot of a TBM-700 dropped into a conveniently located airport.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Helicopter
Operator: Other Power company
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Other Power line work
Flight phase: Other hoovering
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
Aircraft component: Helicopter Cargo Winch
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: My main rotor blades made contact with the power line tower we were working on. I was hovering next to the structure while a worker was on the skid of the helicopter working on the line. A hoist he was using to hold the line failed. The line came at the helicopter and down; landing on my skid pulling me down. As a result; my blades made contact with a bond wire above the structure.




Synopsis: Helicopter pilot reports hovering next to a power line tower while a worker was on the skid working on the line. A hoist used to hold the line failed and the line came down on the skid; causing the main rotor to contact a bond wire on the Tower.
Date: 202012
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb; Initial Climb
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Horizontal Stabilizer Trim
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: B757 Captain reported a runaway stabilizer trim issue after maintenance.Runaway / Uncommanded Stab trim. Could override with trim switch.[There was a] fault in the auto trim transducer.Ground check and test fly all aircraft coming out of heavy maintenance.




Synopsis: B757 Captain reported a runaway stabilizer trim issue after maintenance.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: Marginal
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: RV-12
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Sport / Recreational; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Landing Without Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Airport; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: I was flying on VFR only aircraft; light sport; with the pilot as a light sport pilot. The intention was to proceed to ZZZ. As I passed ZZZ1 the route began to look doubtful so I returned to ZZZ1 and landed. The weather caused a two day delay. On the day of this event my intention was to fly to ZZZ2. The clouds were broken and there was light turbulence. [While enroute] the weather was not improving so I decided to land and evaluate things on the ground.My intention was to land at ZZZ3. I'm not familiar with the area and thought that ZZZ4 was ZZZ3. I was broadcasting on Unicom; hearing other aircraft but not seeing any. After touchdown and a long taxi I was met by an automobile and stopped. After giving my information I was instructed to contact Tower. The Tower gave me instructions for departure and a heading to ZZZ3. There was no traffic at ZZZ4 during the time I was in the pattern or on the ground.The pilot has had limited flight experience in the last three years. Landing was the correct decision; but I got confused by similar looking airports near each other.




Synopsis: Pilot reported landing at the wrong airport.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MDW.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Cloudy
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C MDW
ATC / advisory: Tower MDW
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Observer
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: The ceilings were low and weather was IFR. I was working Local. I was scanning the runway when someone over the frequency said 'Watch your runway'. I looked towards the approach end of RWY 22L; within a second of doing so; Aircraft X broke through the clouds and was left of course. I stated 'Aircraft X; you're off course go around.' Aircraft X responded 'We're going around; Aircraft X'. Recently the terminal lights were replaced. They are much brighter than they used to be. Perhaps Aircraft X got disoriented with the terminal lights and mistook them for the runway lights. The terminal and RWY 22L are not too far from each other.




Synopsis: MDW Controller reported aircraft misaligned with runway; possibly aligned with new bright terminal lighting.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ISP.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ISP
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After receiving my clearance at Islip; ISP; I contacted ground. Ground asked if I could accept an intersection takeoff. I confirmed that I could. I was cleared to runway 33L via C to B3. The active runway was runway 24 but the winds were very light so I thought runway 33L was also an option. Upon reaching intersection B3 at Runway 33L; and completing my runup; I contacted the tower and informed them that I was ready for takeoff at intersection B3 at Runway 33L. The tower advised me to line up and wait. I lined up on runway 33L and was cleared for takeoff. I was about ready to rotate when the tower told me to abort my takeoff; taxi down to the end of the runway; do a 180 degree turn and taxi back and hold short of runway 24 and call on my cell phone (note: rwy 33L intersects runway 24). I called and spoke with the tower. They advised me there was 'a misunderstanding' and they needed to explain. I advised the tower that ground had cleared me to runway 33L via C to intersection B3 for an intersection takeoff. I asked if I committed a violation the tower personnel informed me that I did not. Their explanation as to what happened was a bit confusing to me and they also told me that perhaps I should file a NASA report. After hanging up I called the tower was cleared to runway 24 for immediate takeoff. Later in the day; I called the Tower. I wanted a better understanding of what happened. Here is how I understand it now. Yes; I was cleared to runway 33L via C to intersection B3 at runway 33L and yes I was instructed to line up and wait for an intersection takeoff; to me that meant an intersection takeoff on runway 33L at B3. However to the tower I think they assumed I would taxi on runway 33L to Runway 24; line up and wait on rwy 24 and wait for clearance to take off on Runway 24. Those instructions were never given to me at the time and I was told in my second phone call that they often do intersection takeoffs on runway 24 at the intersections of runway 33/24. I didn't know. There were no incidents or close calls.




Synopsis: Air taxi pilot reported confusion with his clearance while attempting an intersection takeoff at ISP airport.
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZID.ARTCC, IN
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; 1
Light: Night
Aircraft: Gulfstream IV / G350 / G450
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZID
ATC / advisory: Center ZID
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: While descending through FL280 for FL260 the aircraft encountered severe turbulence. We were unable to maintain altitude and during an uncontrolled descent we were instructed by Center to maintain FL240. The aircraft was finally recovered from the descent at FL200. We notified ATC of our altitude and were instructed to maintain FL220. We were able to climb and maintain FL220. At this point the deviation was complete. I don't believe at any point did we have a conflict with other traffic.


Second narrative: While descending for Nashville; TN thru FL280 FT near the Louisville VOR (IIU) we were notified of moderate to severe turbulence by an aircraft in our area between FL280 and FL220. We immediately instructed the flight attendant and two passengers to be seated with their seatbelts firmly fastened. We also slowed the aircraft to turbulence penetration speed of 270 KTS or .75 Mach. We began to experience severe turbulence and immediately asked to a lower flight level to try and descend out of it. We were told to stand by and shortly after began to experience severe down drafts followed by an immediate increase in airspeed well over 50 KTS indicated. Throttles were pulled back to the stops but the airspeed increased as well as the descent was uncontrollable. Speed brakes were extended and it was almost 20;400 FT before the aircraft was brought under control once again. We informed Indianapolis Center of what we had just experienced and asked for a level off at FL220 which we were granted. The rest of the trip continued on without incident. I would classify the clear air turbulence we experienced far greater than anything I have ever experienced in 26 years of flying. We reported this to Indy Center and suggested they divert aircraft away from the area we went through.


Synopsis: A G-IV flight crew reported a severe turbulence encounter descending through FL280 that resulted in loss of vertical path control and an involuntary descent to FL200.
Date: 201412
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: TRM.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-46 Malibu/Malibu Mirage/Malibu Matrix
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E TRM
ATC / advisory: CTAF TRM
Second aircraft: Beechcraft Single Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I spotted the airport from 20 miles away. I had been cleared for a visual approach and cancelled IFR when I began making radio calls to the local traffic. The wind was reported as 4 kts from the north so I announced landing runway 35. One aircraft was using runway 30/left traffic; away from my approach from the east. My fourth radio call was made while turning final approach to runway 35 at 500 FT AGL. Shortly after; the pilot of a Bonanza announced that he was taking off runway 17. I asked him; 'Did you just say 17?' He responded affirmatively and that he was going. I told him I was on final but he continued straight towards me. I did not have him in sight nor was I aware of his departure intentions. I immediately made a right turn (away from all runways; to the east) and waited for the Bonanza pilot to make another call. The pilot using 30 made a call that he was on left downwind. The Bonanza pilot called he was turning right downwind for 17 and departing to the north. He did not indicate that he had either me or the other aircaft in sight. No one at the FBO I went to knew the pilot or the tail number of the Bonanza. He could have killed me or the other pilot in the area and will likely retain his hazardous attitudes and actions until someone gets hurt. He clearly had a working radio and could hear us just fine. The only way to prevent this from happening again is for him to receive instruction from a CFI or government official. Unfortunately this airport is uncontrolled so there is likely no record of the radio transmission. Therefore there will be no recourse for this blatant disregard for safety as well as right-of-way laws.




Synopsis: The pilot of a Piper PA-46 announced his progress into the area on the CTAF frequency. While on final; he was surprised to hear of another pilot announcing his takeoff roll from the opposite direction runway. He took evasive action and heard the other pilot depart the area with no acknowledgment of the other aircraft in the pattern.