elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: D10.TRACON, TX
Aircraft: King Air C90 E90
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: Low ceilings vectoring aircraft for ILS approaches (getting visuals sometimes). I was vectoring a King Air IFR inbound to ADS Airport. I was also working aircraft inbound to DAL. I observed an aircraft pop up approximately 3 miles SW of ADS heading NE bound. It showed a computer assigned beacon code; not local but I do not remember the code; but no altitude and only showed something like 90 or 100 KTS. This target moved directly across ADS Airport and I had thought it was being worked by ADS and probably landing there. I cleared the King Air for a visual and the target continued across the airport NNE bound toward the King Air. I called ADS and asked them if they were working the aircraft and they said no and that they could not see any traffic out the window. I told them I would hold on to the King Air (he was approaching 5 NM from the airport) so that I could continue to call traffic. The King Air never saw any traffic and then after they crossed paths; in about a mile or two the other target just disappeared. This took a lot of my attention away from all of the other aircraft to call traffic for a 'Ghost Target.' I originally had all of the beacon codes and call signs; but lost my notes. We did full route the Ghost Target beacon code and the computer showed not stored. The target looked real and it was observed on ADS RADAR; also (they get their feed off of ours.) All of the data was reported to D10 Management through our STARS reporting sheets. Shut down this system until they can figure out what is causing these false targets.




Synopsis: D10 Controller described a 'Ghost Target' event while vectoring an aircraft to the ADS Airport. The reporter noted the STARS equipment should be shut down until the cause of these false targets can be fixed.
Date: 201407
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ROC.Airport, NY
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp ROC
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airport
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: At night; the north ramp at ROC is somewhat dimly lit.  There is no centerline taxi line in the alley [between Concourse A and B].   As a result; crews have to be especially vigilant because there are airplanes parked on both sides; and the ramp narrows considerably as you approach the terminal.   As we entered the ramp; one of the wing walkers was standing out in the ramp and motioning us toward him.  I realized he brought us extremely close to the tail of another parked B737.  We need a centerline taxi line to follow.




Synopsis: B737-700 Captain laments the lack of a taxi line between Concourse A and B at ROC.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CKB.Airport, WV
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E CKB
ATC / advisory: TRACON CKB
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Second reporter function: Supervisor / CIC; Approach
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working Approach East when an aircraft checked in descending out of 16;000 feet for 11;000 feet. I told him to expect the visual approach runway and to continue decent to 6;000 feet. He read back that he would expect the visual to 21 and descend and maintain 6;000. About 5 minutes later the low altitude alert went off and I noticed him descending through 4;000 feet. I immediately told him to climb to 4;500 and turned on the emergency map to make sure there were no obstructions in his path. With no obstructions in his path; he safely climbed.Keeping up your scan to make sure the pilots are following your instructions.


Second narrative: On initial contact; the aircraft was given a control instruction by the Approach Controller to descend and maintain 6;000 feet. He read back the instruction correctly. He was observed descending through 4;000 feet in a 4;500 foot Minimum Vectoring Area (MVA). He was immediately given a climb to the MVA of 4;500 feet. During this time I was working the Controller in Charge position as well as Radar Assistant. Both are non-control positions. I immediately pulled up the Emergency Obstruction Video Map to check for unsafe proximity to obstructions. He was not near any obstructions.


Synopsis: Two TRACON Controllers reported that an aircraft was assigned a descent to 6;000 feet; and read back the clearance correctly. The aircraft descended to 4;000 feet and below the minimum vectoring altitude for its area; before the controller noticed and climbed it back to 4;500 feet.
Date: 202004
Location: VCV.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 30
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZLA
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Time Pressure
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was flying my airplane Aircraft X from ZZZ to ZZZ1 at 9500'. My husband was flying Aircraft Y about 5 miles in trail. I was approaching VCV and my husband let me know over air to air I had a converging ADS-B target. I verified the target on my ADS-B and started visually scanning the area. The target was approaching from my 10 o'clock at the same altitude. When it was about 1 mile from me I visually saw a predator drone being followed by a chase plane; a low wing Cherokee; at about a 1/2 mile in trail. The drone and my airplane were on a collision course so I pulled power and stated a descent. I noticed both the drone and Cherokee had also started a descent. I added full power and started a climb and the drone passed about 200' beneath my plane and the chase plane passed just behind me. I flipped over to Joshua Approach on 124.55 and heard the chase pilot and approach discussing that Joshua had issued a descent at the same time I had started to descend to avoid.




Synopsis: Small aircraft pilot reported a NMAC with a UAV. The reporter described a chase plane following the UAV.
Date: 202002
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Monitored closely aircrafts with recurrent fume events to investigate the root cause of the problem until a permanent solution that yields the desired results is achieved. Including but not limited to replacement of currently used engine life-limited parts; and the check intervals of such parts that could be potentially leading to these fume events. During the takeoff and initial climbout phase at about 500 feet AGL the Captain and I smelled a strong dirty-socks odor. The Captain checked with the flight attendants to confirm there was no odor in the cabin. Shortly after; during the climb phase we ran the supplementary procedure for elimination of odor/fumes in the cockpit/cabin. After turning Pack 1 off; the smell started to dissipate and a few minutes later there was no odor. We notified Dispatch; applied MEL operational procedures associated with one pack off. The rest of the flight was uneventful.




Synopsis: A320 First Officer reported smelling a strong dirty socks odor during initial climb.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Other / Unknown
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance
Detector: Person Dispatch; Person Other Person
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was contacted by company in regards to flight from ZZZ-ZZZ1. The ground crew did not provide me with the proper documentation regarding the 6 kg of dry ice that was loaded onto the aircraft. Also; the weight and balance app/closeout did not show that there was an dry ice on the aircraft. It was then confirmed today that the dry ice was indeed on the aircraft for that flight and I was never made aware of it or provided with any documents that would have told me the material was loaded. Company made me aware days after the fact due to their own investigating. Lack of documentation [provided to flight crew.]In the future hopefully there is better attention to detail and double checking that the proper procedures are followed.


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


Synopsis: EMB-145 flight crew reported company notification of undocumented Hazmat cargo transported on previously completed flight.
Date: 202011
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Icing
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pneumatic Control Valves
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During climb after departing ZZZ; we experienced light clear icing; which began around 12;000 ft and ended around 20;000 ft. During this time; we noted STALL PROT ICE SPEED status message displayed; as well as the WING and both ENG BLEED VALVE OPEN advisory messages displayed. Roughly around 24;000 feet and still climbing; we experienced a master warning EICAS message (A-I WING 1 LEAK). The FO was flying; so I asked him to maintain control of the airplane; and to handle the radios while I ran the QRH checklist. The checklist drove us to press the wing ice protection button out; which we did. Almost immediately the EICAS message disappeared from view. I brought up the ice protection schematic on my MFD; and verified the wing valves were closed. We continued and completed the checklist.We exited icing conditions around 20;000 feet; and it appeared that clear skies were ahead and above us. We decided to continue the flight and landed safely at ZZZ1.We decided that icing conditions were not forecast or reported on our WSI app along our route of flight. We also could not see any apparent icing conditions ahead. With this in mind; ultimately I decided that we could continue the flight safely to ZZZ1. I also did not feel that this warranted an in-flight call to Dispatch and Maintenance; however; I did call maintenance control after we reached the gate at ZZZ1. I informed the controller what we experienced; and we both agreed that a discrepancy no longer existed and therefore did not make an AML entry. At the end of our day; I made the next Captain aware of our event verbally when we got to ZZZ2.I wish that I had taken a picture after the wing valves were closed on the ice protection schematic on my MFD. I think we handled the situation well as a crew; and we both agreed that we could continue the flight safely.




Synopsis: EMB-175 Captain reported that the wing bleed air system malfunctioned while the aircraft was experiencing icing during climbout.
Date: 201401
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MMH.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: CTAF MMH
Aircraft component: Speedbrake/Spoiler
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Departing Runway 9 at MMH; with a very light passenger load; we performed a static thrust takeoff; thrust levers were set to T/O prior to brake release. At approximately 60-70 KTS we hit a bump in the runway and received a 'GLD [Ground Lift Dumpers] UNSAFE' caution message. The Captain started to retard the thrust levers at which point the message disappeared and the Captain advanced the thrust levers back into the T/O position citing a concern about the stopping ability of the aircraft. We continued the takeoff uneventfully and continued the flight to our destination with no further issues. We did not receive the 'GLD UNSAFE' on landing.The bump in the runway may have caused a fluctuation in the radar altimeter causing the message to be displayed. Since there was a concern that the aircraft's stopping ability may have been affected continuing the takeoff was a prudent decision; however after the initial reaction of bringing the thrust levers out of the T/O detent an abort would have also been warranted. There was very little time for me to react or speak up but I also should have been more assertive in stopping the aircraft after the thrust levers were retarded.Best way to avoid the situation would be by making a plan of action and adhering to it. If there may be messages that we are to disregard then they should be briefed ahead of time. However; once any action to abort the takeoff is made it should be carried out.




Synopsis: A Medium Transport flight crew departing MMH got a momentary GLD UNSAFE warning as they approached 80 KTS. The Captain initially began to reduce thrust to reject the takeoff; but reconsidered; re-established takeoff thrust and continued the takeoff successfully.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Fuel Booster Pump
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: The aircraft right center fuel pump low pressure light would not go out with the switch on.  The flight would not be legal to operate in ETOPS airspace (ZZZZ-ZZZ).  Due to the COVID pandemic; deplaning passengers/crew at any of the stations was unavailable.  Decision was made to operate the aircraft back to ZZZ1.  For FDPs originating in ZZZ1: 'The second sequence will begin in either ZZZZ1 or ZZZZ and have no more than one segment; ending in ZZZ.'  Due to the inability to continue the flight to ZZZ and the inability to deplane the aircraft; the decision was made to have 'Crew B' operate the aircraft from ZZZZ2 back to ZZZ1.


Second narrative: We had a center tank (right) inop fuel pump on deck in ZZZZ2. We were thus unable to complete the future ETOPS portion of our assigned trip to ZZZZ1; ZZZZ and ZZZ. My copilot and I reached our time limit during the ensuing company machinations to determine the fate and future of our trip. When we timed out we were on the ramp in ZZZZ2. There are dramatic virus pandemic restrictions of personnel in ALL of the X locations encompassed by company. These were supposedly excepted/exempted for crews that got 'stuck' in the various X locations due to maintenance issues; etc.; but apparently were not; at least not in ZZZZ2.  The company was aware of our plight; and the restrictions; and determined the best course of action was for the relief pilots to assume flight duties and fly the aircraft back to ZZZ1. The relief crew planned and flew the flight back to ZZZ1 without any known incident.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported equipment problems and having to change destinations due to COVID-19 restrictions.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: NCT.TRACON, CA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: Tower OAK
Aircraft component: VHF
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Workload; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We experienced a temporary lost communications situation on departure from Oakland on [date] at approximately [time] Z. We were cleared the COAST 9 Departure and heading to ZZZ. There were no radio issues prior Oakland Tower's hand off to Departure. When attempting to acknowledge the hand off; it became clear that there was a problem. The Captain assumed control of the aircraft and leveled at 2;000 ft. per the initial hold-down. I assumed Pilot Monitoring duties and attempted to make contact with Oakland Tower; Departure; and any station on Guard on both VHF 1 and 2. We were apparently receiving intermittently and not transmitting at all. It sounded like a stuck MIC whenever we tried to transmit. The Captain directed squawking 7600 and initiated the published lost communication procedure. Shortly after turning to the south; I tried Tower one more time; this time with the audio panel hot MIC switches in the center; off position. Whether this last action resolved the problem directly is uncertain; but communication was restored. Upon establishing contact with Oakland Departure I inquired about returning to our originally issued squawk code. Communications for the rest of the flight were normal. Upon landing at ZZZ we called the Oakland Tower to ensure there were no open issues to discuss. Maintenance conducted numerous tests but was unable to duplicate the problem. After being cleared; we flew the aircraft two more legs that day without further communication difficulty.




Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported that a radio malfunction resulted in a temporary loss of communications with ATC on departure.
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BFL.TRACON, CA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E BFL
ATC / advisory: TRACON BFL
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Distraction; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: The BFL radar equipment could not pick up the aircraft's transponder. I told the pilot he would need to be routed via non radar route (which would have added time to his flight) or he could cancel IFR. The pilot canceled IFR and I tried to provide flight following using a primary target. Please note that both Fresno Approach and Los Angeles Center could see the aircraft's transponder.I recommend replacing the radar and equipment with 'NextGen' technology. This has been a constant problem and even more dangerous since we are limited to one beacon channel. When BFL equipment cannot pick up an aircraft's transponder; it causes 'tunnel vision' and makes it more likely a controller will miss providing safety advisories and services to other aircraft.




Synopsis: BFL Approach Controller reported of not being able to see an aircraft's transponder. The Controller gave the pilot the option of being routed non-radar or cancelling IFR. Pilot cancelled IFR and Controller tried to provide flight following. Controller reported that ZLA and FAT Approach could see the aircrafts transponder. Controller requested the radar be updated during NextGen technology.