elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: HCF.TRACON, HI
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Airspace: Class E HCF
ATC / advisory: TRACON HCF
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Departure; Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Training / Qualification; Workload; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Enroute; Approach; Departure
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Every day; the TMU assigns flow control. The problem is; the TMU doesn't always tell the controllers they are assigning flow control; nor tell the controllers when there is no longer flow control. We need to constantly look up at the ACE/IDS (Automated Surface Observing System Controller Equipment-Information Display System) to see if flow control is now on the board. We will receive our relief briefing; and there is no flow control listed; then all of a sudden; flow control will pop up on the board; the TMU will not tell us that they are having us issue flow control. And; they will just remove the flow control and not tell the controllers; and we are still vectoring aircraft; assuming flow control is still in effect.A specific instance is today; I sat down; and was told (and it was noted on the ACE/IDS) that there was flow control from XA:00 - XA:45. The R7 controller was giving me at least 10 miles in trail with all aircraft to comply with the 10 miles in trail and 250 knots at BAMBO. At XA:08; I looked up; and there was no longer flow control listed on the ACE/IDS. If the TMU is going to cancel flow control in the ACE/IDS; they need to tell us there is now no longer flow control into Honolulu. This is an ongoing problem. They do this daily; and it really should be part of the job to tell the controllers; if they put in flow control.If we do not know there is flow control; we cannot issue the flow control. And; conversely; if they cancel the flow control; they need to let the controllers know; because we are vectoring aircraft excessively for no reason; other than the laziness of the TMU to tell us flow control has been canceled.


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


Synopsis: Honolulu Control Facility Controller reported that the Traffic Managers do not advise the Controllers when flow is needed or canceled verbally.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Aircraft: B787 Dreamliner Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft was approaching [coordinates] in continuous moderate turbulence. First Officer began to plot new turbulence report utilizing Rte 2 page. Shortly afterwards; Captain became aware that the aircraft was showing significantly RIGHT of course from magenta line. A turn to the left was executed in order to rejoin the established course. Shortly after turn initiated; ZZZ [ATC] contacted flight with information that it was deviating LEFT of course and issued clearance to deviate as necessary. Captain became concerned as to the accuracy of magenta course being displayed on moving map and a direct course to [coordinates] was then executed and a new position report sent. A careful examination of flight plan was made and compared to loaded route. Waypoints; distances and courses were carefully verified. Flight proceeded to [destination] normally. It would appear that that during the plotting of the turbulence that Route 2 was inadvertently activated. How this happened is not known.


Second narrative: Relief Pilot and I found out about the occurrence during the post flight debrief. As a member of the crew; we felt we should submit as well. I can attest to the rough ride and know the pilots were trying to avoid an area of forecast turbulence.


Synopsis: B787 flight crew reported flight plan course deviation by inadvertently activated secondary route in the FMS.
Date: 201708
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZLA
ATC / advisory: Center ZLA
Second aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Clear to descend the HLYWD 1 arrival. At FL280 we were hit with wake turbulence; it was brief; one thump. The aircraft in front of us was also [a] B757 at FL260 and 8 miles ahead. I asked SoCal [and] he told me what type and how far. I called in the back to make sure everybody was OK. [One] FA bumped her shoulder. She said she was OK.




Synopsis: B757 Captain reported encountering wake turbulence from a preceding B757 on arrival into LAX.
Date: 201904
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: HAZMAT was held off ramp loaded in the nesting system.




Synopsis: Air carrier Ground Personnel reported Hazmat cargo in 'Nesting System.'
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Leading Edge Flap
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Going into [destination airport]; with the weather around 300 and 2 (lower at times); on the ILS; at the marker I called for gear down FLAPS 15 then 30. At that time we noticed the Amber Leading Edge (LE) FLAPS TRANSIT light on. We then executed a go-around; told ATC of a possible flap problem and then started to run the LE FLAPS TRANSIT checklist from the QRH to include a FLAPS 15 landing and check of the NON-NORMAL CONFIGURATION LANDING DISTANCE TABLE. We then [advised ATC of] emergency and proceeded with vectors back for another ILS. Landing and taxi in to gate [were] without further problem.


Second narrative: On short final to ILS we received a LE FLAPS TRANSIT amber light with an accompanying LE amber light on #5 slat on the overhead LE Devices annunciator panel. Also received an aural 'too low airspeed' caution at normal speed for configuration. I believe this happened when the Captain called for 15-30 flaps. Gear was already extended. Due to the uncertainty of our problem; and the IMC flight conditions on short final the Captain elected to execute a missed approach. On the missed approach I immediately noticed that we were at roughly 1900 feet and were not climbing. I loudly stated that we were not climbing and that we needed to climb immediately. I called positive rate and for gear up. It was later determined that the Takeoff Go Around switch was not properly depressed; which led to confusion on our airspeed delay.


Synopsis: B737NG flight crew reported executing a go-around after receiving a LE FLAPS TRANSIT caution light. Flight landed safely after running the QRH procedure.
Date: 201409
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZMA.ARTCC, FL
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Tactical
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZMA
ATC / advisory: Center ZMA
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While working an adjacent sector I witnessed aircraft spilling out of W168. The briefing package at the sector was vague and had no detailed information on the UAV aircraft or the mission. It was just a black and white map. Not even sure if lined up exactly with the warning Area W168.Procedures and the Military desk should prepare and distribute a comprehensive detailed package to brief ongoing missions and particularly these missions. The briefing package should include times; altitudes; call signs; aircraft types; routes; maps; frequencies; etc and should be available for controller reference and briefing prior to assuming the position. When this type of aircraft is involved it should include lost com procedures and operator/pilot phone numbers. Lost link procedures and possible 'Loiter Points' and loiter altitudes as well as frequencies and radio capabilities.




Synopsis: ZMA reports of an aircraft spill out that area had no information about.
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: MHT.Airport, NH
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Gulfstream IV / G350 / G450
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower MHT
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Flight Data / Clearance Delivery; Ground; Local; Supervisor / CIC
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working alone in the tower; with all positions combined to the flight data position in the tower cab. A departure strip for Aircraft X printed out; filed IFR to MIA. This was the original flight plan; with no revision number; however there were some remarks in block 9 of the departure strip. The issue I found was that on the strip; the remarks read as follows: ' o SAT PHONE [number removed] F***'. At MHT; we get departure strips fairly often that have phone numbers and pilot contact information in the remarks section of block 9; especially for GA aircraft. After looking at the departure strip; I stuffed the strip in a holder and set it in the clearance delivery strip bay. I then gave a few other clearances for different aircraft and then went back to the strip for Aircraft X when I had a free minute to FR [full route] the strip from the FDIO. When the full route printed; I saw that the truncated 'F**' at the end of the remarks was an 'FRC (full route clearance).' Had I not full routed the departure strip; I never would've known that the clearance was marked with an FRC. As an FLM; I am very comfortable with working the tower combined and caught the FRC; however; I am concerned that had it been a less experienced controller; the FRC could've very easily been missed.My recommendation would be that anytime an FRC is needed; that it be put first in the remarks section of block 9 on the departure strip. As a tower controller; an 'FRC' is far more important than the pilot's SAT Phone number.




Synopsis: MHT FLM reports of receiving a clearance on an aircraft and while not busy; he full routes it. He didn't notice before he did the full route; that in the remarks section is did say FRC. FRC was hidden by the pilots' phone number. FLM is concerned that an inexperienced controller would have missed the FRC.
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LAS.Airport, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B LAS
ATC / advisory: TRACON L30
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Captain
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Prior to arrival into LAS; we were assigned 280 knots.  At some time during the arrival; we were cleared to descend via the SUNST 3. We set the VNAV and verified that the aircraft crossed FUZZY at 16;000 feet and slowed to 250 knots.  A short time later; ATC queried us about our airspeed.  We replied that we had slowed to 250 to comply with the arrival.  He stated that he thought that we had been assigned 280 knots.  We replied that we had; but that our understanding was that speeds on the arrival superseded previously assigned speeds.  At no time prior did the Center Controller ever say anything along the lines of 'DISREGARD SPEEDS AT FUZZY' or similar.We believe that we were correct in our interpretation of ATC directives as they were given to us; even if it wasn't what the Controller intended.The Approach Controller stated that it wasn't a problem; he was just expecting us to be doing 280 knots and wanted to make sure we were all on the same page.


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


Synopsis: An air carrier flight crew slowed to meet the charted RNAV arrival speed constraint after being cleared to 'descend via' the arrival. ATC advised that they were expected to maintain the previously assigned speed.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet CL65; Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Pneumatic Valve/Bleed Valve
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: [We were] climbing out of FL210 for FL280 when the flight crew was notified via ED1 of a left and right Engine Bleed Warning Message. Checked the ECS page which showed both engine bleeds were closed and the aircraft was depressurizing. The QRH was conducted under the Bleed Warning Tab. While running the QRH it ordered us to prepare the aircraft for unpressurized flight. We advised ATC that we need to stop the climb and descended to 10;000 MSL due to the loss of pressurization. At this point we were north of any mountain terrain and then talking to Center. After following the QRH the aircraft was fully depressurized and we were level at 8;000 MSL. We then contacted Dispatch and told them of our condition and that we needed to divert. Since this was an international flight we told Dispatch that we would like to divert to ZZZ since it was a Company Operation and had Customs. All of us concurred that ZZZ would be a good place to divert too. At that point I believe ZZZ was 80 miles away. We then informed the flight attendant's and the passengers of our aircraft condition and that we were going to divert to ZZZ. The aircraft landed safely without incident; and the passengers deplaned and cleared U.S. Customs. We did not declare an emergency since we were able to descend down to 10;000 MSL; without having the cabin climb above 10;000 MSL; while following the QRH; nor were there any issues with the crew or passengers due to the depressurization. We landed with approximately 10;500 LBS of fuel on board. After landing Maintenance was contacted and the maintenance issues were written up in the maintenance log. Also; Dispatch and Scheduling were contacted. The flight was then canceled.




Synopsis: CRJ First Officer experiences a bleed trip climbing through FL210 resulting in loss of pressurization. QRH procedures are complied with and the flight diverts to a suitable airport.
Date: 202201
Location: DEN.Tower, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B DEN
ATC / advisory: Tower DEN
Aircraft component: ADS-B (Automatic Dependent Surveillance - Broadcast)
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Both ADS-B receivers failed on base leg. Appeared to resume normal operations on final.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported momentary loss of both ADS-B receivers on approach to DEN.
Date: 201309
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
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: Air Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Physiological - Other; Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Diverted; General Maintenance Action; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: About half-way into the flight; I (Pilot Flying) noticed a haze in the cockpit that was getting progressively worse and noticed a burning smell in the cockpit.  Origin unknown.  I mentioned to the Captain (Pilot Not-Flying) that I think we're getting smoke and he began to notice as well.  He called the Flight Attendant to ascertain the severity of the smoke build-up and she said she just started noticing it when we called; along with the passenger seated in 10A noticing a noise and vibration below his feet. We ran the memory items; ran the QRH; and elected to land at an enroute with direct to the airport routing under emergency authority. The smoke seemed to dissipate after 5 minutes and we landed uneventfully followed by a look-over from the Airfield Rescue and Fire Fighters (ARFF) crew. At the gate; Maintenance appeared to have found the culprit; a total mechanical failure of Pack Number 1 (the only operating pack due to Pack 2 MEL); confirming the concerns of the passenger in 10A.The threats were the smoke itself; risk of escalation to fire; and the decreased ability of the crew to communicate normally due to O2 masks.  There were no apparent errors or undesired aircraft states. As an experienced crew; I feel we handled this event properly. I had experienced a similar emergency previously and felt comfortable with every crew decision we made.




Synopsis: An EMB-145 crew detected a haze and burning odor in the cockpit while the Flight Attendant and passenger identified floor vibrations. An emergency was declared; the QRH completed and after landing Maintenance discovered a Pack 1 failure.
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: FRG.Airport, NY
Weather elements / visibility: Clear; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D FRG
ATC / advisory: Tower FRG
Second aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: [I was the second] of two consecutive departures on fairly busy day. Expedited departure for landing traffic. Runway 19 in use; moderate wind from southwest. On take off; drifted to east of runway and overtook C172 that taken off ahead of me. The C172 maintained runway heading and turned west and I drifted west. The combination of me overtaking and shortcutting the circuit resulted in a close call. I now realize the importance of flying a crisp pattern and adding more situational awareness. Because of the nose high attitude; I lost sight of the C172 and basically intercepted that aircraft in the pattern. I will work on better pattern control and be more aware of slower planes.




Synopsis: C182 pilot reports turning crosswind early and catching up to the slower C172 that had departed ahead into the VFR traffic pattern. The C172 traffic is not sighted after takeoff until quite close resulting in an airborne conflict.