elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: [I] accepted turnover for flight with one of the ETOPS alternates being MDY (Midway Island). MDY has NOTAM for ASOS not providing visibility or altimeter setting. Contacted MDY Operations last week via e-mail via response; and they had stated that during daylight hours they would provide observations. This e-mail was forward to rest of department for all to benefit. When I looked at e-mail again today; realized that they had also mentioned that their observations would not include altimeter setting. I reviewed the Commercial Charts for all of the approaches into MDY; and they all require a local altimeter setting or else they are not authorized. At this point; flight had not entered the ETOPS area of operations; and I elected to change his ETOPS alternates. [NOTAM:] MDY SVC AUTOMATED WEATHER BROADCAST SYSTEM VIS; ALTITUDE AND DENSITY ALTITUDE NOT AVBL[I] advised crew that MDY was not a good ETOPS alternate and we would have to drop it. The remaining ETOPS alternates did not cover the area of operations; so changed all of the alternates; resulting in the crew being given RJCC/CDB (Cold Bay). [I] sent the appropriate amendments to the crew along with weather; NOTAMs and a new ETOPS critical fuel summary. Crew accepted the changes and pressed on.




Synopsis: A Dispatcher dispatched an oceanic flight with MDY as an ETOPS alternate but it was not legal because of inadequate weather information.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
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
Aircraft component: Pressurization Control System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Shortly after reaching cruise altitude at FL 330; we noticed a pressurization issue. The cabin was at 8;900 ft.; the cabin rate was +100 and the pressure differential was 6.8. We descended to FL 310 and the cabin stabilized at 8;700 ft. Notable in this incident was there was no indication on the EICAS of any problem; no warnings; cautions; alerts or status messages. The only indication was the displayed cabin altitude; cabin rate and pressure differential at the bottom of the CRT that displays engine indications. These three items are displayed in a fairly small font and what caught our eye was the cabin altitude was displayed in yellow instead of white. With all the other items displayed on the multiple screens in a 787; it was mostly luck we noticed the cabin altitude. After discussion with [Technical Support Maintenance Control] and Dispatch and further research into our issue by [Technical Support Maintenance Control]; no solution was found. [Technical Support Maintenance Control] said he could see all 4 cabin air compressors functioning normally and the outflow valves were 100% closed. He speculated we had a large air leak via a duct somewhere in the pressurization system. It was obvious to me we needed to descend and return to ZZZ. I mentioned this and [Technical Support Maintenance Control] and Dispatch agreed. We coordinated with ATC a descent to 20;000 and a clearance back to ZZZ. A fuel jettison was accomplished to bring our landing weight below the max allowable landing weight. The return flight and landing were uneventful.




Synopsis: B787 Captain reported an air turnback after loss of pressurization control.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 190/195 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: Pressurization System
Component problem: Failed; Malfunctioning
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Aircraft had an MEL for ENGINE BLEED on the number 1 engine. Icing conditions were not forecasted. At FL210; 300KTS; ICE CONDITION and STALL PROT ICE messages illuminated followed by the automatic opening of the wing anti-ice valves. Shortly after; the BLEED 2 LEAK message illuminated. I continued as the pilot flying and the Captain went through the QRH procedure for BLEED 2 LEAK. Additionally; FL230 was requested in order to remain above the cloud layer. Following this; the A-I WING FAIL message illuminated and the Captain accomplished the associated QRH procedure. At this time; with BLEED 1 inop due to the MEL; and BLEED 2 off due to the QRH procedure for the leak; the CABIN ALT HI message illuminated. Oxygen masks were immediately donned; and a descent was initiated. The Captain [requested priority handling] with ATC and we descended to 7000. No icing was encountered during the descent and the cabin altitude had not gotten high enough to deploy the passenger oxygen masks. A normal approach and landing were accomplished.




Synopsis: EMB-190 pilot flying reported a loss of pressurization and immediate descent.
Date: 202106
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was Pilot Flying. I triggered a stick shaker/pusher at the Final Approach Fix. I recovered per SOP.[There was] a northbound squall line west of the field. A last minute wind shift caused us to switch runways. Although it was fast; we were able to set up and brief before intercepting course. ATC forgot to turn [us] on the ILS; so we went through the localizer course. This led to reactionary vectors and the aircraft doing S turns until we passed the final approach fix. At this point we were flaps 30 with the power reduced. I called for the go-around; but when I pressed the autopilot disconnect button; I became fixated on the lack of a missed approach course. (I didn't press the TO-GA button.) While troubleshooting; the airspeed continued to decrease leading to a simultaneous stick shaker and pusher. I lowered the nose and recovered per the training; paying special attention to the radar altimeter. I briefly oversped flaps 8 on recovery.Stall recovery training works. I was able to accomplish the recovery quickly without having to think about it. However; it shouldn't have gotten that far. It was my first go-around since OE. I was task saturated and in the moment couldn't remember where the TO-GA button was. We were able to handle weather; ATC error; runway changes and an instrument approach at the same time. However; because our go around was triggered at a relatively untrained aircraft state/position; I missed a critical aspect of the maneuver. I don't believe this is a common problem; but incorporating go-arounds during recurrent in various positions may be beneficial.




Synopsis: CRJ-900 First Officer reported experiencing a stick shaker on go-around following an unstabilized approach.
Date: 201903
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 6
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: J3 Cub
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Baron 55/Cochise
Aircraft component: Air/Ground Communication
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Piper J-3 was on a ferry flight direct ZZZ VFR without a radio due to technical troubles. The Cub was going to enter a final for Runway XX at ZZZ however noticed an aircraft at the hold-short of YY [intersecting runway] and decided to enter a 45 for a right downwind YY. The pilot fixated on the Cessna at the hold-short and didn't clear final prior to making the base turn.Beechcraft Baron was on a final approach to Runway YY trying to hail the Cub over the radio. Piper J-3 was on right base for Runway YY with no radio due to technical failures when noticed [the] Beech Baron on short final. The J-3 was not visual [with] the Baron until noticing the Baron was taking evasive action to avoid collision. Piper Cub took evasive action to the left departing the pattern before returning to the airfield.There were many human factors going on with the pilot of the Piper J-3. The pilot was rushing back to ZZZ to get in his car and meet his wife at the hospital. With these factors it must have drove his attention elsewhere and broke down his visual scan for other aircraft.To mitigate this in the future it is imperative that pilots evaluate themselves with some sort of IMSAFE checklist to make sure they are good to fly. Even though the pilot thought he was good to fly it was evident his mind was elsewhere and he was 'not safe' almost causing a terrible accident.




Synopsis: J-3 pilot reported a NMAC while in the traffic pattern of a non-towered airport without a operable VHF radio.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZDV.ARTCC, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm; Turbulence
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZDV
ATC / advisory: Center ZDV
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Workload; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Weather; Procedure
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: During our descent into COS the storm cell had moved off the field but ATC informed us that there was a micro-burst alert and they assigned us to hold at the VOR. We discussed our plans if we were not able to get into COS. We settled on DEN as a good plan B. As we held it became apparent that we may not get into COS. I told ATC we'd like to divert to DEN. They informed us there was now a ground stop into DEN. Since we were holding over the PUB airport that became the clear alternative. We checked with dispatch and we could have landed there but there was no fuel available. Our only option then became to [advise ATC of our fuel situation] so that we could get into DEN. Just as we made the turn to DEN ATC informed us that the winds appeared to be dying down in COS. We had just enough fuel to get in so we gave it a try and were able to land without incident. We continued into COS with the priority because if we had gone missed we would have had to go direct to DEN given our fuel situation. While everything worked ok alright as we held and burned fuel our options especially in the inter-mountain west became fewer and fewer until we had no choices left except to [advise ATC of the situation] and head to DEN.




Synopsis: An EMB-145's filed destination closed because of weather and a microburst alert so the crew planned a diversion but were advised of a ground stop. As the crew prepared for a diversion; their destination airport opened and the crew continued on.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: L30.TRACON, NV
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B LAS
ATC / advisory: TRACON L30
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working Departures. Aircraft X departed and then told me they had a cargo door issue and needed to return. I cleared them back to LAS via radar vectors. I told the supervisor. I handed off the aircraft to the final sector. I climbed the aircraft to 6;300 feet to comply with the MVA (Minimum Vectoring Altitude). I gave Aircraft X a 210 heading and switched him to the finals sector. I did not realize I gave him the wrong frequency. I said 135.1 not 135.0. I didn't know this until I listened to the replay. We tried on guard and everyone in the room tried on their frequency to get contact with the aircraft. He went into a 6;500 foot MVA and then a 7;000 foot; and then an 8;300 foot MVA before the adjacent Approach said they had the aircraft and they were switching him to us. The final Controller climbed and turned the aircraft out of the higher MVAs. I should have given the correct frequency and made sure they had it before letting them go. I should have known that they went to 135.1 and reached out to the facility who owns that frequency for help before the aircraft got into those higher MVAs.




Synopsis: L30 TRACON Controller reported they issued a wrong frequency to an emergency aircraft on a vector causing it to be NORDO and it flew below the Minimum Vectoring Altitude.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PHX.Airport, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
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 B PHX
ATC / advisory: TRACON P50
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were being vectored for Visual Approach to Runway 25L in PHX. We were slowed to 170 knots and were vectored to a very long final. Eventually; we were given a long left dogleg to join final for Visual Approach to Runway 25L. We saw the RJ (Regional Jet) being vectored to a right base for Runway 26. We commented that it looked like it would be a conflict if he overshot. Shortly after that; we received a TA on him. Right about then; ATC called him out as traffic. We responded that we had him in sight. We continued our approach and began a left turn to join extended final. We were in a left turn and couldn't see the RJ under us. I was monitoring his position on the TCAS display. It turned red and directed an RA climb. I remember seeing it close and 400 ft separation. My F/O initially rolled out of the left turn and leveled his approach. I directed him to climb to match the TCAS guidance. We informed ATC that we were climbing for an RA. They gave the RJ an avoidance vector. Our TCAS changed from a climb to level flight. I noticed that we had slightly overshot final while following our RA guidance. Eventually; the TCAS announced; 'Clear of Conflict.' ATC sent us to Tower. My F/O reattempted an approach; but we were high and fast. We requested an S-turn; but Tower was busy with other aircraft and did not grant our request. We approached our 1000 ft slot on glidepath; but too fast to make the approach. We initiated a go-around. Tower asked us why; we informed him that we had to respond to the RA guidance that that put us too high for landing. They issued us instructions and switched us to Approach. We came back around for an uneventful approach and landing. Normally; TRACON staggers the approaches to prevent these conflicts. For some reason; it didn't work out this time; probably because they slowed us to 170 knots while on downwind; changing the typical approach timing.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported executing a go-around at PHX following an unstable approach that resulted from an RA encounter with parallel traffic.
Date: 201904
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: NCT.TRACON, CA
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E NCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Approach
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight

Narrative: I had an aircraft filed IFR to NUQ airport. I asked the pilot if they were actually landing NUQ because that requires a PPR (Prior Permission Required) and its unusual for an Aircraft X to land at NUQ. The pilot; or who I assume was the instructor informed me that they wanted to fly the ILS Approach and break off the approach; cancel IFR and fly VFR to SQL. What I failed to notice was that the ILS for NUQ was out of service. I transferred control to the Arrival Sector who then cleared the aircraft for the ILS. The aircraft somehow descended on a nonexistent glideslope and had a MVA (Minimum Vectoring Altitude) violation. Tower informed Arrival Control about the issue and then re-sequenced the aircraft. I wasn't aware about the MVA violation until I was informed by the supervisor the next day. The status information display is full of information and I missed the ILS being out.


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


Synopsis: Controller cleared an aircraft for an ILS; not aware that the ILS was out of service.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: HSV.TRACON, AL
Aircraft: Globemaster (C-17)
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: Center ZME; TRACON HSV
Second aircraft: King Air 100 A/B
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft Z was climbing out of 8;000 feet for 10;000 feet and higher with the Center. Aircraft X was switched to Center frequency north of HSV airport. Aircraft Y was climbing to 10;000 [feet] westbound. Aircraft X apparently heard the wrong Center frequency and subsequently never got a higher altitude. A few minutes later; Aircraft X called back to verify the frequency and was re-given the correct center frequency. At the time; Aircraft Z was inbound at 11;000 [feet] from the west so the Center could not climb Aircraft X since his communications switch was delayed due to the wrong frequency. Since Aircraft X never got his climb; Aircraft Y was on a conflicting heading with Aircraft X; now level at 10;000 [feet]. Center called to ask what was going on. I immediately issued a 180 degree turn and called traffic to Aircraft Y to increase separation. I am unsure of the distance between Aircraft X and Aircraft Y when the turn was given; it appeared to be less than 5 NM. The volume of traffic was high and the complexity was avg. There were numerous VFR pop up aircraft and military practice approaches at the time of the event. The airspace at HSV should be split off (east radar and west radar) more often but we cannot due to staffing. Our minds are not 100% where they should be because we are having to worry about money. We are not being paid this week and I have numerous bills. I am check to check and this added stress could be a factor to me not seeing the conflict.




Synopsis: Huntsville TRACON Controller reported a loss of separation due to one aircraft not hearing the climb clearance.  Reporter also stated position should be split; and was worried about money during the government shutdown.