elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: PHL.Airport, PA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface; Distraction
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A ramp person had come up and asked that we use hand signals for pushback as the comm'(communication headset) were not working. Once we were ready to push there was another ramper on the tug. The Captain gave the signal that the brake was released and we were cleared to push. She didn't see the hand signals the first time so the Captain gave the signal again. The tug driver; then in a rush began pushing. About 20 feet into the push the aircraft jolted and the push came to a stop. At this point there was no communication from the ground crew to cockpit until the supervisors came out and were able to connect the ground comm's. After watching the wing walker walk to the right (he was on the left wing) wing and appear upset; I assumed we had been pushed into something on the right wing; but we could not see anything. At this point I contacted ops and told them we suspected we just got pushed into something and we needed a manager. At the same time the Captain called the flight attendant to see if he could see anything. The flight attendant asked passengers if they saw anything. Which they said they saw a tug drive away; but not actually make contact with us. A manager eventually came out and connected out ground comm's and had informed us that we had been pushed into a tug and that the right wingtip and aileron had been damaged and that we needed to call maintenance to come out and pull us back into the gate. Maintenance showed up and took pictures along with ground ops the document the event. Eventually maintenance backed us into the gate and we deboarded. All passengers were fine besides the delay that was incurred.The aircraft jolted and came to stop. We assumed we either hit something or the tow bar broke loose.Lack of communication between the wing walker and tug driver. From my understanding the wing walker had signaled the tug driver not to push.We came to a immediate stop and contacted operations for further help.Proper communication between tug driver and wing walker. Radio comm's with tug driver could had also helped the situation.




Synopsis: EMB-145 flight crew reported pushback crew pushed aircraft off the gate into a tug damaging right wing area.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: MDW.Airport, IL
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C MDW
ATC / advisory: Tower MDW
Second aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Departure; Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: MDW was using a combination of RNP/RNAV Y 13C and Visual Approach 13C all afternoon. Typically; when 13C is in use; ORD protects for the MDW 13C ILS. However; since the ILS was not in use today; ORD was operating as normal with their southbound departures off Runway 22L. When traffic to MDW was light; it wasn't really a big deal. However; with the evening rush; it became more of a problem. Due to MDW's size and also the vast sea of orange lights that is the Metro Chicago area; visuals became a bit more difficult to achieve after sunset. Right now; only one airline is certified to use the RNP Y 13C Approach; and even then; not all of their aircraft are capable. The evening rush included several GA aircraft along with other air carriers which really forced our hand to use visuals. Earlier in the shift; I had asked a CIC to call MDW and see if we could use Runway 31C since the winds were fairly light. I saw one air carrier proceeding on a wide base leg; outside of the RNP Y final approach course. I told him to turn right to heading 090 to continue following the traffic; to which he replied; 'roger; we still have our traffic in sight.' I then switched the aircraft to Tower frequency about 7 miles from the airport. Just then; I saw an air carrier departing ORD Runway 22L southbound; climbing slowly; but assigned the ORD6 SID. The line's FLM-IC saw what was going on and took action to change the advertised approach in use at MDW to the GPS 4R circle to 13C to avoid further issues. I was later told that separation was lost. Under light traffic; using this combination of visuals and RNP Y 13C approaches works; however; under any real load; it quickly becomes a difficult operation which has no built-in safeguards to protect MDW inbound traffic from ORD departure traffic. If Runway 13C is required; then ORD needs to protect for it.




Synopsis: C90 Controller described a loss of separation event involving arrival traffic into MDW and departure traffic from ORD; the reporter suggesting amending procedures when this combination of runways are required.
Date: 201710
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 120
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Single Pilot; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon my arrival into the [Airport] area; I was experiencing great difficulty in locating the Airport. This was my first time flying into [this airport] and unfortunately; my aircraft was not equipped with GPS or navigation radio… communications only. When I called the tower; thinking I was about 5 miles north the controller advised me that I was actually 3 miles and had violated their airspace and was conflicting with his traffic.I have grounded my aircraft until ALL radio-navigation communication equipment is upgraded to suitable standards; and from now on I will call the tower much further out regardless whether I can see the field or not.




Synopsis: C120 pilot reported that due to older avionics he entered a Class D airspace prior to getting clearance.
Date: 201207
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: TUS.TRACON, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E TUS
ATC / advisory: TRACON TUS
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Coming in for a visual approach and landing at Tucson to end our duty day. It was night; VFR. Our clearance was to proceed direct to CALLS and descend to 6;000 FT. As we descended; we got and maintained visual contact with Runway 11L. I checked the minimum altitude for CALLS; which was 5;000 FT and confirmed that altitude with the First Officer. While I knew the high terrain was just to the west of centerline; I did not verify the altitude of the terrain; which was 4;600 FT. As we approached the terrain; I continued to crosscheck the terrain display on my instruments. The First Officer backed it up as well.Soon after we passed through 6;000; we got a 'Caution Terrain' warning. As I was reaching to take control of the aircraft; the caution changed to a GPWS 'Pull Up Terrain' command. The First Officer stated we have to perform a terrain avoidance maneuver as I was switching off the automation. I added power and was approaching a 20 degree deck angle when we passed through 5;700 FT and the Terrain Warning terminated. I leveled the plane; captured ILS glide path prior to CALLS; and completed the approach and landing. At no time did we lose sight of the runway.I should have taken the time to review the elevation of that terrain before the approach. Definitely don't descend below 6;000 FT until past that hill.


Second narrative: On a visual approach to 11L in TUS; we received a 'Caution Terrain' followed by 'Pull Up Terrain' Warning at 5;500 FT MSL approximately 17 NM from the airport while following another aircraft.Next time approaching 11L from the northwest; I will tune the ILS at a point outside of CALLS to provide terrain clearance around CALLS.


Synopsis: On a night visual approach to Runway 11L at TUS the flight crew of a B737-700 received Caution Terrain and 'Pull Up Terrain' EGPWS warnings roughly 17 NM from the airport.  They complied with the terrain avoidance maneuver; tuned the ILS and intercepted the GS from below; then continued to landing.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MIA.Airport, FL
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B MIA
ATC / advisory: TRACON MIA
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: On the arrival into MIA we started picking up strong wake from the aircraft in front of us which I believe was a heavy.  There was no wind and looked as if we were going to be in the wake for an extended period of time.  So I went to vertical speed to stay above the wake.  Taking a quick glance at the arrival they were all at or above altitude constraints.  A couple minutes later thinking I was well above all constraints I noticed on the navigation display an amber circle.  At that moment I realize I was below an 8;000 feet altitude constraint and was at 7;600 feet.  I disconnected the autopilot to level off. About the same time ATC asked about our attitude and gave us a heading and lower altitude.  Fortunately; there was no traffic below us.[Caused by] wrongfully thinking by slowing my descent I was going to be at or above all my altitude constraints and some weather near the arrival that created a distraction.




Synopsis: A321 pilot reported overshooting a crossing restriction on arrival into MIA; citing concern about possible wake turbulence as a contributing factor.
Date: 201205
Location: CLT.Airport, NC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp CLT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: This is a general report on conditions at the CLT airport ramp area. Over a period of 6 days; we witnessed Regional Jets with careless taxi (too fast). We were cut off by a Dash 8 [one night]. The ramp workers are continually driving in an unsafe manner. An aircraft can be stopped with nose over the equipment road and there is no consideration by operators of the aircraft or conditions at the time. They simply run around the nose of the aircraft (without even slowing and it appears without a glance to one side of the other); certainly without looking at the aircraft or crew. Local attitude is the issue; and I believe they have gotten away with it so far. The real problem is when something happens I have the impression we are going to get someone killed. I believe there needs to be an adjustment in the operations of ramp and possibly and adjustment in how aircraft on end concourse are pushed so as to not require aircraft wing or nose to intrude on ramp road area.




Synopsis: An Air Carrier Captain comments about the unsafe CLT airport ground operations by taxiing aircraft; ground crew; ramp operations; and conflicts with aircraft pushed from concourse end gates onto ramp roadways.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: TEB.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Global Express (BD700)
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B EWR; Class D TEB
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Aircraft component: Altitude Hold/Capture
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Time Pressure; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Weather; Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Takeoff Teterboro Runway 24; winds variable 320-360 degrees; 12 KTS gusting to 30 KTS. Altitude Select set to 1;500 FT. LNAV Departure; VS as vertical mode. Departure - fly 240 degrees to WENTZ Intersection. Cross WENTZ at 1;500 FT - right turn to 280 degrees to RUUDY and maintain 2;000 FT. Windy conditions on departure and liftoff. At 1;300 FT and leveling; the autopilot disengaged due to moderate turbulence and strong winds. Immediately took control of the Global and flew manually. Due to turbulence I was unable to level at 1;500 FT. Global climbed to 1;800 FT - 1;900 FT when I finally was able to start descent to 1;500 FT approaching WENTZ. Crossing WENTZ I turned 280 degrees; turned back on the autopilot; called for 2;000 FT in the Altitude Select and climbed to approaching RUUDY. At no time was the aircraft out of control of in conflict with other aircraft.




Synopsis: A Global 700 autopilot disconnected on the TEB Runway 24 RUUDY 4 Departure at 1;300 FT due to turbulence and the pilot descended from 1;800 FT to cross WENTZ at 1;500 FT.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: KZAK.ARTCC, HI
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; Windshear
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A KZAK
ATC / advisory: Center KZAK
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: 160 nm east of waypoint DUSAC over the Eastern Pacific we experienced a quick moment of severe turbulence which caused the aircraft to bank as much as 45 deg. Altitude FL370. Mach .80. Wind 260 @ 110. VMC on top. Layer 4;000 feet or more below us. LNAV/VNAV on. Autopilot on. Seat belt sign on due to continuous light chop.Aircraft slowly began to roll (similar to a mountain wave event) which got our attention. Seconds later aircraft began to bank right excessively and rapidly. Autopilot and Autothrottle were disengaged and a recovery to straight and level flight was achieved. Recovery was smooth and forceful but not abrupt. Bank angle may have reached as much as 45 deg right. Airspeed remained within limits. Descent was arrested manually before -300 feet. No significant sink rate. Engine instruments normal. No ECIAS or STATUS messages.After autopilot reengaged and flight seemed normal; FO called FAs to make sure both they and pax were okay. No reported injuries. A few minutes later I made a passenger announcement. No one seemed to care. It just felt like turbulence to them. There were two aircraft below us at 360 and 350 about 10-20 miles ahead. There was another aircraft (likely a 737-800) 2;000 feet above us but far enough ahead to be out of TCAS range. In my professional opinion (25+ years) this was not a wake turbulence event. A blind announcement was made on guard. As air was again relatively smooth; returned to Mach .80 speed and continued flight with no further incidences. Normal landing in HNL. No apparent damage on walk-around.I think this was a case of wrong place at wrong time. According to WX charts; we were likely in the vicinity of the crossing of a 120 kt. jet stream at both FL340 and FL410.




Synopsis: B757 Captain reported experiencing an uncommanded 45 degree bank angle at FL370 that the reporter felt was related to jet stream activity.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZBW.ARTCC, NH
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZBW
ATC / advisory: Center ZBW
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Confusion; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: 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; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After HYLND intersection we were cleared to MERTO intersection both crew members failed to recognize that METRO was typed in the FMC; incorrectly. The aircraft turned west instead of North. ATC asked us to clarify the waypoint. We corrected the active waypoint to MERTO and proceeded on course.Aircraft was late to arrive. During the rush to get the flight ready I told the First Officer that I would load the FMC while he did the walk around and ice check. During our preflight duties the First Officer checked the route; briefed me; ran the checklists; and proceeded with the deicing coordination. Once airborne and past HYLND intersection the aircraft turned west toward METRO intersection instead of MERTO. ATC asked us if we had turned west which we had. He told us that there had been confusion in these two waypoints in the past and cleared us direct MERTO.




Synopsis: A B737 had a track deviation when a rushed crew entered waypoint METRO instead of MERTO. ATC commented the error had occurred before.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Second aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Supervisor / CIC
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I am a FLM that was training on the arrival position. Weather was VFR and visual approaches were working well; we had approval to use the inboard runway. Air Carrier X was on an adjacent RADARS frequency on approach to 24R; Air Carrier Y was on approach to 25L on my frequency; and Air Carrier Z was on a vector to be paired up with Air Carrier Y for 25R. I did not slow Air Carrier Z in time to keep in a good position to see or follow Air Carrier Y; my instructor had to take over to prevent the situation from becoming worse. On play back we became aware we may have lost standard separation between Air Carrier Z and Air Carrier Y and Air Carrier Z and Air Carrier X. Air Carrier Z overshot final; because his speed was too fast and the Controller had to expedite Air Carrier X through 050. Air Carrier Z was restricted to 060; above both aircraft; but both the straight in traffic had not descended through 050 before we lost 3 miles. Both aircraft were observed vacating 060; but I don't know if the vacated altitudes rule applies here or not. I have been assigned to the area for almost 2 years; but so much of my time is spent on FLM duties; my training on RADAR is sporadic. I would like to see training be made the priority for new FLMS that come to the area and allow them to become fully certified in the area prior to taking operational duties. I feel I have not been given enough time to train to stay proficient in what I've learned in the past and then given a chance to apply lessons learned in future training sessions.




Synopsis: TRACON Supervisor (FLM) receiving training reported a loss of separation event; noted the training provided on the position has been very sporadic and not in keeping with a reasonable chance to learn the sector.