elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201309
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ONT.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ONT
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Workload; Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While pushing back out of ONT gate onto Taxiway S via Taxiway S2; Ontario Ground Control cleared a single engine aircraft to taxi to parking via Taxiway S2.  Ground Control cautioned the single engine aircraft of a 757 pushing back onto Taxiway S2.  While in the throat of Taxiway S and S2 under the control of the tug with wing walkers; the single engine aircraft taxied past our aircraft on the east side of Taxiway S2.  From our viewpoint in the cockpit the single engine aircraft was outside of the confines of Taxiway S2 on the east side of the taxiway.  The single engine aircraft came very close to our wing walker and the tug. The tug driver came to an emergency stop until the single engine aircraft passed.  We contacted Ontario Ground Control and reported the incident.Poor guidance by Ground Control and poor judgment used by the pilot of the single engine aircraft.Ground Control could have given the single engine aircraft a hold short until we were clear of S2. Ground could have also asked the single engine aircraft to hold short of S2 and asked us to do a long push on S Taxiway and hold until the single engine aircraft had entered the Ramp via S2.




Synopsis: ONT Ground Control cleared a single engine aircraft to park via Taxiway S2 which forced an air carrier tug and wing walkers pushing an aircraft onto S2 to take evasive action until the single engine aircraft passed.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SLC.Airport, UT
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Snow; 1
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B SLC
ATC / advisory: Tower SLC
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: IFR flight to SLC.  Weather conditions at SLC were reported as 1 mile visibility; Overcast 500; light snow.  Cleared to proceed from QWENN Arrival at 11000 feet to HLMET intersection and commence the LDA 35 Approach.  Mins of 4480 MSL were set into the FMS previous to commencing the approach.Tracked the LOC inbound and altitudes met at waypoints prior to waypoint WEEL.  WEEL waypoint is 2 miles to Runway 35 threshold and altitude is listed at 4900 MSL.  Just short of WEEL; aircraft inadvertently descended below 4900 MSL. Tower made low altitude call and asked if there was a problem and to climb; additionally the aircraft terrain avoidance system activated and called to climb. Correction was immediately made to climb back to 4900 MSL.   Once aircraft was back at 4900 MSL; aircraft continued to VDP at which time Runway 35 was visible and uneventful landing was made.Once the aircraft was shutdown; PIC and SIC debriefed why descent below published altitude at waypoint WEEL happened.  PIC had visual contact with the ground prior to WEEL and inadvertently allowed aircraft to descend below published altitude.  Crew discussed importance of situation awareness and crew coordination throughout entire phase of flight to shutdown.  Also discussed importance of flying a stabilized approach throughout to landing. Multiple lessons learned today.




Synopsis: Captain reported loss of situational awareness; allowing aircraft to descend below approach altitude in IFR; resulted in GPWS and ATC low altitude alerts.
Date: 201409
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZAB.ARTCC, NM
Light: Night
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZAB
ATC / advisory: Center ZAB
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: The pilot of Aircraft X entered my airspace at FL270. The Pilot requested FL350 and direct LBL just south of CME. He stated that the aircraft was equipped to fly in Non-RVSM airspace. I climbed the aircraft. The pilot and I had a somewhat long discussion as to whether or not he could legally enter RVSM airspace. After questioning him; I got the unfortunate impression that it was legal for him to enter that airspace. It turns out that he could enter the airspace because he was a 'test flight' but he obviously needed the required 2000 feet separation and proper coordination; neither of which I conducted. Aircraft X didn't violate anyone in my airspace; but I'm sure he did later on during the en-route phase of his flight. Aircraft X was also filed as a /L but he was really a /G hence; no coral box.Pilots need to file proper flight plans; especially concerning their equipment suffixes. Also; I as the radar controller could have used better communication with the pilot as far as NON-RVSM airspace is concerned.




Synopsis: ZAB Controller describes a situation where the aircraft suffix is different then what it actually is. This error may have led to a loss of separation throughout the flight of the aircraft. The aircraft suffix was actually a G but filed as a L; which allowed the aircraft to be in RVSM airspace.
Date: 202002
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
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 Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Fatigue
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We had an early morning showtime in ZZZ of XA:45am. There was one pack inoperative on our aircraft. There was previous overnight snow; low visibility; deice required; involved mountain airport departure and EO (Engine Out) procedure; so there was added workload for departure. On climbout through FL220; the remaining pack did not maintain pressurization; the cabin was climbing slowly through 10;000 ft. We slowed the climb; then eventually descended to get the cabin altitude lower; but still could not control the cabin pressurization. The Captain [requested priority handling] with ATC; and we made an emergency descent and diverted into ZZZ1. After almost 5 hours on the ground; maintenance fixed the aircraft and we departed to ZZZ2. We received notices from the crew desk that they wanted to re-assign us to fly another flight upon arrival in ZZZ2. This would have taken us within an hour of our [duty time]; and would have extended our duty day to over 12+ hours. I declined the re-assignment and declared fatigued upon arrival in ZZZ2.




Synopsis: A319 First Officer reported diverting due to the aircraft's inability to maintain cabin pressure.
Date: 201403
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: B737-300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Diverted; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While climbing to cruise altitude after leaving ZZZ; #1 Engine A system pump low pressure light illuminated. The A hyd level went rapidly to 1/4 full after about 15 min it went to E and the electric A pump low pressure light illuminated. Ran checklists and reviewed the procedure for lowering gear. After ACARS to Dispatch; we elected to declare an emergency with Center and divert to a nearby airport where we made a normal landing.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information]


Synopsis: A B737-300 flight crew diverted to a nearby airport after suffering the loss of the A hydraulic system.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LGA.Airport, NY
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower LGA
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Cleared to taxi into position and hold Runway 4 LGA. Later cleared for takeoff. As we began our roll; power was set and I saw [an aircraft] rolling across our runway. At the same time tower cancelled our takeoff clearance. I reduced power to idle and applied brakes. I estimate we were less than 60 knots. I took the next taxiway to the left and FO ran rejected takeoff checklist and informed tower we needed 15 minutes for brake cooling.Either wait for landing aircraft to exit runway before issuing takeoff clearance; or have landing aircraft apply brakes harder and get off runway.




Synopsis: CRJ900 Captain reported being cleared for takeoff on Runway 4 at LGA then told to cancel takeoff clearance as an aircraft landing Runway 31 rolls through the intersection. The takeoff is rejected at 60 knots.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Super King Air 300
Operator: Personal
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Oil Temperature Indication
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On second start of the day after morning sortie; right engine oil temperature began to rise. At 109 degrees and climbing; PIC decided to secure engine. Oil temperature continued to rise to 115 degrees after shutdown.  Submit to maintenance for a detailed investigation of malfunction.




Synopsis: King Air pilot reported high engine oil temperature after engine start.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B747-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Autopilot
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During cruise at FL340; First Officer was in First Officer's seat. Autopilot 'B' engaged. I went to the bathroom. Aircraft entered moderate turbulence. I notice as I returned to my seat that aircraft was in a 30 degree bank turn to right. First Officer was hand-flying airplane while autopilot 'B' still engaged in command. First Officer told me the aircraft rolled by itself left. At first; First Officer selected Heading Mode to correct deviation. There was no response; aircraft continued to roll left. He recovered from the impending upset and returned the aircraft back to course hand flying it. Altitude remained at FL340 +/- 50 FT. There was no warning: (WAILER or LIGHT). All GPS parameters were normal; Hydraulic System #2 (power to autopilot B) normal. ATC asked us if all was OK; we told them yes. First Officer engaged autopilot 'A' and we proceeded with out incidence. There was no warning: (WAILER or LIGHT). All GPS parameters were normal; Hydraulic System #2 (power to Autopilot B) normal.




Synopsis: A B747-200 autopilot 'B' entered an uncommanded left turn and did not respond to Heading Mode inputs so autopilot 'A' was selected which corrected the deviation.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 0601-1200
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: Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Check Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At cruise altitude had a very strong burning smell in cockpit and cabin. Notified ATC; descended and returned to ZZZ.


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


Synopsis: EMB-145 flight crew reported executing a return to the departure airport after noticing a strong burning odor throughout the aircraft.
Date: 201807
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: RNO.Airport, NV
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C RNO
ATC / advisory: Tower RNO
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While on a visual approach (monitoring the ILS glideslope as backup) to 34L at RNO; the flight crew noticed a discrepancy in altitude at the appropriate 'crosscheck' altitude point. The 'crosscheck' altitude at EPOSE is 8300' MSL. While visual with the runway and passing EPOSE; the aircraft was on the ILS glidepath; however; the altitude displayed on both PFDs indicated a lower altitude than the expected 8300' MSL at EPOSE. We (the flight crew) verified between each other and confirmed that the same and correct altimeter setting (30.06) was set. We also verified altimeter setting and altitude at EPOSE with Tower. Additionally; altitude readouts were verified within tolerance pre and post flight on the ground. This is a Safety concern; because all systems (aircraft and airfield) seemed to be working properly; yet the altitude was off at the crosscheck point. Additionally; on a previous occasion; a similar situation was experienced; as well as hearing the same from another aircraft from another carrier on the same day.

Callback: Reporter stated that with the verified altimeter there was a 200' discrepancy. The historic altimeter settings for that day; from NWS; indicated pressures of 2995-2986 were discussed.  Reporter stated there was a significant pressure difference from nearby departure airport to RNO. There were no aircraft issues prior to; or after this event.



Synopsis: B737 pilot reported the altitude displayed on both PFDs indicated a lower altitude than the expected at FAF.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MYF.Tower, CA
Aircraft: Super King Air 350
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class D MYF
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT; Tower MYF
Second aircraft: M-20 Series Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X was on a SCT North Sector data block and was on a visual approach while Aircraft Y was on SCT East Sector data block on an RNAV approach; SCT did not coordinate with MYF Tower to provide visual separation with these two aircraft. I was training a student on Local.  We were already in communication with Aircraft Y when Aircraft X checked in; and I asked our Local Assist if SCT had coordinated with us to provide visual separation. Local Assist responded negative. I immediately notified the OS [Operational Supervisor] of the situation and told him there was going to be a LoSS [Loss of Standard Separation] very soon. Aircraft X made it to the Runway 28R final approach course about 1 mile in front of Aircraft Y at approximately same altitude. After PRB [Position Relief Briefing]; I asked the OS [Operational Supervisor] if he had the info he needed for the report. He seemed reluctant to file a report; and I was interviewed by the ATM [Air Traffic Manager] shortly after.  The ATM [Air Traffic Manager] stated that since I had observed the aircraft [and] was providing visual separation; no loss had occurred. I disagree with this assessment since it is SCT's job to provide separation between IFR aircraft and they did not properly apply visual separation. The MYF ATM [Air Traffic Manager] directed the OS not to file a report.North and East sectors need to improve their required coordination.




Synopsis: MYF Tower Controller reported an unsafe operation by the overlying TRACON not asking Tower to provide visual separation.
Date: 202004
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Flap Control (Trailing & Leading Edge)
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Check Pilot; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Workload; Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: First Officer was pilot flying during IOE. We were in clear VMC at 3;000 ft. Flaps were selected to 20 at 200 kts. on a visual approach to Runway XX. EICAS indicated flaps deployed to 20. Cleared for the visual; approximately 3 miles from ZZZZZ; gear was selected down and flaps selected 30. Airspeed upon selecting flaps 30 was 175 kts. I noticed the flaps not moving on EICAS; as well as not feeling any change in the flight characteristics of the aircraft. FLAPS FAIL caution was annunciated. We coordinated a go around with ZZZ approach. They gave us delay vectors while we ran the QRH. We completed the QRH procedure and a landing with flaps 20 and a Vref speed of 137 kts. ATC vectored us to another visual approach to Runway XX and cleared us. In the turn to final the winds picked up a bit and the First Officer got behind the airplane. I took the flight controls and the landing was normal.




Synopsis: CRJ-200 Captain reported a failure of the flap system on approach.