elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MIA.TRACON, FL
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B MIA
ATC / advisory: TRACON MIA
Second aircraft: Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: Aircraft X was inbound to OPF from the northwest; they requested Runway 12. I got them down to 020 to get under MIA approach traffic and put them on a vector southwest-bound for sequence. I then turned [them on a] 100 heading to intercept the localizer because there was a VFR at 019 a mile west of the localizer heading northwest-bound. The area where this happened is usually a hotspot for VFR traffic in the way of descending IFR traffic. Right as Aircraft X was about to intercept the localizer; the VFR turned north right into his path. Aircraft X was about to turn southeast on the intercept and the VFR was 100 ft. under him - if Mode C was correct - so; my immediate thought was to climb Aircraft X to 025. There was traffic; Aircraft Y; westbound in the downwind about 6 miles away at 030. I tried to climb him to 035; but was stepped on by Aircraft X saying he had the VFR in sight and no factor. I told Aircraft X to descend back down to 020 for the approach and called the IFR traffic. I then climbed Aircraft Y to 035 and called the traffic. Due to clouds; visual separation could not be achieved. As lateral separation was lost; altitude started to correct. The area this occurred is a hotspot for VFR traffic. There aren't many ways to safely descend IFR traffic down to 020 when getting them into OPF; but it has to be accomplished to get under inbounds to MIA descending to 030. The pilots who are VFR in the area need to be more alert and aware that there is usually jet or turboprop traffic.




Synopsis: MIA TRACON Controller reported a potential loss of separation between two aircraft at a hotspot for VFR traffic near the OPF airport.
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was performing landing training with a student. On the upwind leg of the landing pattern there was a garbled call on the radio which sounded like somebody asking about traffic at ZZZ. I asked calling aircraft to repeat. The aircraft came back and asked if there was any traffic at ZZZ. I responded 'one aircraft in the traffic pattern currently on upwind'. My student and I saw the traffic at our 2 o'clock traveling in the opposite direction to us; parallel to Runway XX which we had just taken off from. We continued to fly our pattern; left downwind followed by a left base. We made our traffic calls on downwind and base. When we were on base we heard a call saying Aircraft Y base to final. We looked around and could not see another aircraft; so proceeded with caution. We turned final and called the final; still looking for the traffic but did not see anything. We landed and at the end of our landing roll we saw a Cessna exiting the runway. The Cessna did not have a functioning rotating bacon or white tail navigation light. The green navigation light was functioning. The pilot of the other aircraft got on the radio and said 'so you landed while we were still on the runway'. I responded with 'Do you know that your beacon and your white light are out; we could not see you'. The other pilot again said 'you landed while we were no the runway. I asked 'did you hear that your lights are not working; we did not see you and you were not making radio calls?' The other pilot follow-ed up with a rude response so I did not engage him any further. I wanted to tell him that ZZZ has a left pattern to Runway XX and he had flow what seemed to be a right pattern; without a functioning beacon or white light and not making radio calls.




Synopsis: Flight Instructor reported another aircraft entered the traffic pattern against traffic flow. The other aircraft did not have all required external lights working and landed while the instructor was still exiting the same runway.
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MDPC.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On taxi out; we couldn't get ACARS so we were holding short of runway 8 while we did a radio close out. After we got our numbers; we informed tower we were ready for takeoff. An A310 was on short final. After he landed; the Tower Controller asked if we had the other airplane on final in sight; a 737. We said yes; and she said 'Line up and wait; be ready'. We started to line up and wait; and she then said; 'Hold short of runway!'. We told her it was too late; and she made [the 737] go around. We were cleared for takeoff; everything else was uneventful.After we got in the air and started talking about it; the first officer mentioned he heard her say 'after landing traffic; line up and wait'. I didn't hear the 'after landing traffic' part; but he assumed she was talking about the A310 that was just rolling out. I did mention it was kind of tight; and I was surprised they were doing it; but I've seen much tighter spacing in [another airport]. We could have gotten airborne before [the 737] landed; but that's not what happened. I don't know why other countries allow verbiage like 'after landing traffic; line up and wait'; it does nothing but create confusion; and in my opinion; should be stopped immediately.


Second narrative: NEVER NEVER accept that type of clearance that tells you to line up and wait BEFORE the traffic has crossed the threshold. The U.S. does not use this type of clearance for good reason. Why this is allowed is foolish. Especially with the circumstances we were in where a plane had JUST landed and we thought that that was the plane to line up and wait after. [I] might want to send email to the pilot group on this one.


Synopsis: A319 flight crew taxied onto the runway in MDPC; resulting in a conflict with a landing aircraft because they misunderstood the clearance.
Date: 202112
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Cruising at FL250 we received a CAB PR EXCESS CABIN ALT ECAM. We donned our oxygen mask; initiated a priority descent and advised with ZZZ Center. We leveled off at 10;000 feet. I called the Purser to assess the situation in the cabin. The passenger oxygen masks did not deploy. We made the decision to divert to ZZZ and I completed the brief with the Purser and made PAs to the passengers. We landed uneventfully and taxied to the gate.




Synopsis: A319 flight crew reported a pressurization malfunction during cruise. The flight diverted and landed uneventfully.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Challenger 650
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Indicating and Warning - Fuel System
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Manuals
Primary problem: Manuals

Narrative: On the CL650 there is a 35% sensor which is accessed from the tail of the aircraft thru the hell hole - no tail tanks are opened and no wet bladder panels are opened or removed.Per our GMM (General Maintenance Manual) the only thing which is RII (Required Inspection Item) under the Fuel Chapter is access panels.  The sensor is not an access panel; 6 bolts and an O ring are only things which are removable.  The MM just calls out for an ops check and a leak check. Would this sensor be consider an access panel? Would this be a RII item?




Synopsis: A Bombardier Challenger 650 Maintenance Technician reported that there is some confusion identifying a required inspection item for the fuel system.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Light: Daylight
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: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Workload; Time Pressure; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: At XA:44; the Company asked the Dispatcher to divert an airborne flight to another location for operational necessity. The Dispatcher ran an inflight scenario and sent the appropriate ARTR for new burn; new destination; new alternate and route. The Dispatcher followed up asking the crew to 'send the diversion message and new ETA when able'. At XB:05; the crew sent back the diversion message which cancels the original flight and creates a new flight with the new city pair. (The new flight usually shows up in XXXX in the 'XXXX1' desk and then has to be moved to the dispatcher's desk.) At XB:12; the Dispatcher notified the shift supervisor that the flight had 'self-diverted' and the new flight needed to be moved to the Dispatcher's desk. At XB:35; the flight arrived at the Dispatcher's desk--approximately 23 minutes after the Supervisor had been notified--during which time; operational control was lost. The Dispatcher was able to maintain visual flight following via the software and communicate with the flight via communication software; but was unable to make further changes to the route during this time. (The crew subsequently took a direct routing.) There were numerous computer outages / updates taking place through out the day; making operational control via secondary means; difficult at best.  Supervisor had just come on duty and had not logged into the computer before relieving the previous supervisor. He then got into a backlog of issues including this one. Supervisor should log in and familiarize himself with today's operations and issues before relieving the previous supervisor. Review with the Supervisor the importance of moving a diverted flight in a timely manner so that operational control can be maintained by the dispatcher. Schedule important computer outages / updates for a day that is less busy (IE a weekend).




Synopsis: Dispatcher reported operational control of a flight was lost and explains how it occurred.
Date: 201904
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 210 Centurion / Turbo Centurion 210C; 210D
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was cleared for takeoff and for a left downwind departure by Tower. After initial climb and after crosswind/downwind departure I was going to meet up with another aircraft southwest of the airport. Tower asked if I had the other aircraft in sight; and I responded 'affirmative.' Tower told us to contact ZZZ Tower; as that was our destination. I changed the frequency in my radio but had not contacted ZZZ Tower yet. Shortly after that I thought to myself 'If I'm going to catch the other aircraft; I better speed up.' However my hand was still on the throttle; and the throttle was pushed all the way in. I looked at my manifold pressure gauge and was only indicating 20 inches of manifold pressure. I jockeyed the throttle a few times with no change in engine power output or manifold pressure. At this time I was about at a 45 for left base for a landing at ZZZ. I flipped the frequency back to ZZZ Tower and requested a 'Priority Landing; please!' That was obviously granted. I made a turn for the numbers and had enough speed to lower the landing gear and two notches of flaps. On final approach I glanced at manifold pressure gauge and saw 15 in Hg. I landed in the middle of the touchdown zone and on centerline. As I cleared the reverse high speed runway exit my prop came to a stop.An hour later my mechanic arrived and removed the cowling and confirmed a throttle cable breakage.




Synopsis: C210 pilot reported a return to departure airport after noticing loss of power due to broken throttle cable.
Date: 201406
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: VNY.Airport, CA
Light: Night
Aircraft: Gulfstream IV / G350 / G450
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class C BUR
ATC / advisory: Tower VNY
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Time Pressure; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Aircraft X was inbound on an ILS approach to [Runway] 16R; on short final he unexpectedly went around. Our procedure with a go around on an ILS approach is to do the published missed approach. I called the Valley Sector at SoCal Approach and they concurred. The Local Controller told him to execute the published missed approach and the plane appeared to be doing so. He turned southeast bound and was given the Departure frequency; and the frequency change. Shortly after the Valley Sector yelled on the line that they need to talk to Aircraft X so I said we'll try again and the Controller switched him again. At this point we observed the plane flying through Burbank's Class C at 2;500 MSL; flying northbound towards Whiteman airport and elevated terrain. Valley calls over again and we switch him again; this time the pilot responds to the change but then calls back a second later asking again for the frequency. At this point I tell the Controller to give him 120.4 the Filmore frequency which is the tag he was listed under on the radar scope. I called Filmore to ask if they had him as he was flying at 2;500 FT seemingly into a mountain; they said no; I asked Valley and they did have him. I told them they need to climb him; they did and re-sequenced Aircraft X with traffic. On his next approach he transmitted that he had issues with his flaps; that's why he went around.The published missed approach isn't really helpful; in most cases it makes the situation worse. He flew right into Burbank's airspace and then into Whiteman's airspace barely missing traffic. In most cases aircraft are visual approaches and thus we don't have this problem but there has to be a better missed approach procedure then to turn them into another Tower's airspace.




Synopsis: VNY Tower Controller reports of a missed approach that doesn't get on the correct frequency quickly; which causes the aircraft to violate a Class Charlie and fly towards mountainous terrain.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: BUR.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 0.5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C BUR
ATC / advisory: Tower BUR
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: On approach to BUR Runway 8 with weather at mins; the azimuth swung full deflection in both directions at mins. I have noticed this during VMC ops and it seems to be a common (as it happens every time) issue. ATC was involved. I have since flown into BUR and again witnessed the issue. If this is not addressed at the source; suggest [company pilots be advised] and suggest we hand fly the approach when weather is critical.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported the BUR Runway 8 ILS LOC signal was unreliable and stated he has seen this anomaly several times.
Date: 202001
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ORF.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: PA-28R Cherokee Arrow All Series
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ORL
ATC / advisory: TRACON F11
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Confusion; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Departed with Flight Following. Tower cleared me to contact Approach with suggested heading of 270. I turned to 270 but saw that would take me into Class B; so I turned slightly to the right while awaiting contact with Approach. Shortly thereafter; I was advised to turn to heading 320 which I think I acknowledged and complied with. I was further advised to 'turn to heading 320 now' because of an incoming Citation. I rechecked my heading as 320; but I do not remember how or if I verbally responded. When ATC said something to the effect of turn now or I'll send you back I realized something was off. I checked my magnetic compass and realized then that I had not set my heading indicator properly during my preflight. Once corrected I was able to properly follow ATC instructions. Basic training has always been to set heading indicator prior to taxi and then double check once on runway prior to takeoff. Corrective action on my part is obviously to do a better preflight. That said; once ATC realized I wasn't responding properly; instructions to 'turn 30 degrees right' would have resolved the issue as well.




Synopsis: PA-28 pilot reported they were not complying with ATC assigned headings because they had not set their heading indicator properly before takeoff.
Date: 201808
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B787-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Powerplant Lubrication System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While on first break crew got low oil pressure EICAS message while at FL360 during cruise phase. They followed ECL (Electronic Checklist) shutting down affected engine and notified ATC. ZZZZ was on nose with long runways; VFR weather so it was our nearest suitable airport. Accomplished overweight landing checklist; calculated non-normal landing distance in addition to all checklist previously done. Landing was uneventful. Oil system failure on right engine.




Synopsis: B787 pilot reported an oil system anomaly which resulted in an engine shutdown and landing at alternate airport.