elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZBW.ARTCC, NH
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZBW
ATC / advisory: Center ZBW
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Completely saturated sector.  Aircraft X checked on climbing out of MHT on PPORT SID; and I climbed him to FL230.  I was also working on a three-way BGR tie further north in the sector; vectoring to BOS; and issuing an instrument approach.  A contributing factor was the high sector; 01/02; was completely saturated as well and unable to provide sequencing to me on handoffs descending into my sector.  Training on my D-side with a relatively green trainee that wasn't contributing much to the operation.Shortly after the Aircraft X was issued a climb clearance the pilot said something to the effect of 'request vectors to avoid traffic'.  My eyes immediately went back to him even though I had much higher priorities; and I saw a mode C intruder target that had already merged with him at his altitude (085).  At that same moment the Boston Approach controller (East sector) called on the land line; but we were just way too busy to even begin to answer.  I can only assume he was calling about the Aircraft X and the VFR traffic. As I was unable to determine a safe course of action for the Aircraft X; and didn't want to make the situation any more dangerous.  I just told the pilot he was cleared to maneuver at his discretion (the targets had already merged).  Almost seconds after; I observed the Aircraft X leaving FL091 and stated 'traffic no factor'.  The pilot then casually commented about how 'that could have been bad'; and I agreed with him.I can't say I feel good about the situation.I honestly don't know that much could have been done differently here; other than Boston Approach not shipping Aircraft X until he was clear of the VFR traffic; or calling me well ahead of the targets merging.  The sectors could have been split which would have provided more range.More importantly; I think the high side should have been split long before.  It was being staffed by a non-Certified Professional Controller (CPC) radar controller and non-CPC D-side controller.  They handed me lots of traffic conflicts that required increased amounts of attention.




Synopsis: A Boston Center (ZBW) Controller reports of an airborne conflict between an IFR and a VFR aircraft. The Controller did not issue traffic as they didn't observe it until the pilot called about it.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: A300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Climbing through FL 320 we received an Excess Aft CG ECAM (red) warning. We followed ECAM protocol and selected the Trim TK Mode switch to FWD. This transferred approximately 1500 pounds of fuel into the center tank from the trim tank. Upon leveling at FL 34O the ECAM items were completed and the CG was within a normal range of approximately 28.5 with approximately 1800 pounds in the Center Tank. The Pitch Trim Indicator was within the white band. We referenced the QRH then confirmed the numbers entered into the APS were correct by comparing them to the Final Weight and Balance. They were. There were no additional warnings or cautions for the remainder of the flight. Remainder of the flight was uneventful. Aircraft pitch and airspeed appeared normal throughout the event and for the rest of the flight. [Maintenance] entry upon arriving [at destination].




Synopsis: A300 Captain reported observing a Center of Gravity warning after takeoff.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZID.ARTCC, IN
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: 25
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZID
ATC / advisory: Center ZID
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: When receiving my clearance I first had the INDY6 and it was changed (during taxi) by ground control to ROCKY8 Departure. Immediately after departure I was cleared direct to TTH. Prior to arriving at TTH I received a clearance to ROCKY intersection; but I misunderstood and thought he said ROKNE intersection which was along my route of flight. I read back 'ROCKNE' and asked him to make sure that I was correct; and he confirmed my read-back. I think that one or both of us misunderstood what the other person was saying. About 20 minutes later Center asked if I was on course for ROCKY and I told him that I was on course for ROKNE. He said that was not correct; I told him I would correct the error; and he then told me to continue to ROKNE. Primary cause.... poor communication from beginning to the end.




Synopsis: A Pilot departed IND flying the ROCKY 8 Departure. When cleared direct to ROCKY Intersection; the Pilot verified ROKNE with the Controller since it was on his route of flight. Later ATC asked the pilot to verify direct ROCKY but the Pilot reported direct ROKNE; 386NM Southwest of ROCKY.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On climbout above 10;000 feet the FO and I noticed a vibration in the floor that was getting worse then better then worse again. At that time the Flight Attendant called and said 'I feel a vibration in the floor and I can see it moving'. At that time we contacted the Dispatcher and Maintenance and told them the situation and we all agreed to return to [our departure airport]. The threat was we had an aircraft that had a vibration and we did what we thought was the safest thing to do and bring it back to get it looked at.




Synopsis: EMB-145XR Captain reported returning to departure airport after experiencing vibration that was felt in the floor of the aircraft.
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CRQ.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E SCT
ATC / advisory: Tower CRQ
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Police / Security Involved
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Southbound on descent into Palomar one mile past the VISTA reporting point. Silver drone traveling opposite direction passed very close by. No time for evasive action. Reported incident to the Tower Controller within about one minute. Tower advised other traffic to be on lookout and asked that I call Tower on landing. I did as requested and they said that a report would go to the FAA. Never received a call back. Tower did advise that a permit request for drone activities was approved for the general area of the sighting that day but the altitude limit was set to 400 ft; over 1;000 feet lower than where we observed the [drone].




Synopsis: C172 pilot reported a NMAC with a UAV on descent into CRQ airport.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Caravan 208B
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Landing
Aircraft component: Main Gear Tire
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Ground Excursion Runway; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Landing roll
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Evacuated
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: As I was on final for Runway 04 (hard surface) I elected to land on the adjacent grass runway in order to decrease the wear on the right main tire which was showing wear into the cords. The aircraft touched down without issues in the grass at approximately 75 KTS.As the aircraft continued to roll on the grass it encountered a slight change in surface/bump (a hard surface taxiway leading to Runways 04/22). When the aircraft rolled over the taxiway; it became airborne. The aircraft then touched down on the other side of the taxiway; in the grass on three points of contact. The aircraft bounced on the three points a second time and the front nose wheel collapsed; causing the aircraft's engine to have a propeller strike; and come to a complete stop. At this point; the idle cut off; throttle and fuel selectors were turned off; as well as the battery power and stand-by power switches were placed in the off position. The single passenger and I exited the aircraft; and moved to the rear of the aircraft. The ELT was triggered; and was turned off after approximately five minutes. There were no injuries to the passenger; or myself. The State police as well as the local FSDO were notified and a report was filed.




Synopsis: When a C-208 pilot opted to land on the grass 'adjacent to' the paved runway at a small uncontrolled airport he lost control when the aircraft bounced while rolling over a crossing hard surface taxiway. When the aircraft touched down again the nose gear collapsed and the prop struck the ground. The reporter opted to land on the grass due to the worn condition of the right main gear tire.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZLC.ARTCC, UT
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZLC
ATC / advisory: Center ZLC
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Airspace Structure; Company Policy; Manuals; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: The new method of 'Next Gen' ATC of Time Based Flow Management is an unacceptable method of controlling aircraft. I understand this method is to prevent aircraft from holding over fixes and is to create time based spacing of aircraft inbound to a specific airport; adding a number to the bottom right of each aircraft's data block and is sector specific. We were given multiple turns and slowed over Utah. Not knowing how long a delay vector is going to be; not being told how many turns we will actually do across a course is unacceptable for the purposes of fuel planning and is therefore a safety of flight issue and causes the possibility of busting regulations regarding fuel requirements for holding; alternates etc.  Flight computers calculate a final exit time with which the crew uses to exit a hold and proceed to an alternate airport for fuel. We cannot ascertain this information by just flying over a desert in a random course. I understand the program is designed to either utilize vectors or speeds or a combination of both and changes as each aircraft passes from sector to sector. Fuel planning is tight when you're flying from coast to coast; especially in dealing with alternates and bad weather planning for crossing the country.  When we finally got back on course; we weren't minimum fuel; but we didn't have a lot to mess around with either. Had we been issued a hold; we would have been able to formulate some sort of action plan. Which is kind of what you pay us for. Please work with the FAA it's employees at ATC to realize that this method of service is unacceptable and DANGEROUS. Don't use Time Based Flow Management and fly planes all over the country in random directions. Assign holds at fixes to allow for fuel planning.




Synopsis: A321 First Officer reported being issued numerous delay vectors based on ATC Time Based Flow Management requirements. The pilot was concerned about not being able to plan for enough fuel.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZBW.ARTCC, NH
Flight conditions: IMC
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 ZBW
ATC / advisory: Center ZBW
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Failed; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Workload; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: BLEED 1 pressure fluctuating between 0-60PSI and became unusable. Subsequently received BLEED 2 FAIL. [Notified ATC]. Received ATC clearance and descended to 10;000. Handled the BLEED 2 FAIL per QRH. Cabin pressure did not rise above 10;000. Normal landing. Bleed 1 misbehaving; Bleed 2 fail.There was a significant history of both of these bleeds having same or similar issues for 5-6 days prior to this flight. Maybe it could have been corrected by [maintenance] prior to this flight.




Synopsis: ERJ-190 Captain reported the pressurization failure was a reoccurring problem.
Date: 202012
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ATL.Airport, GA
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I signed Dangerous Goods Form for wet battery HAZMAT; only later did I realize that there needed to be a HAZMAT on board notation from Dispatch on the Dispatch Release notes section. This notation was missing. This notation is a recent change to the Dangerous Goods Form procedure.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported required Hazmat notice on Flight Release missing while reviewing flight documents during cruise.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic Main System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Workload
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; General Maintenance Action; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Loss of System B Hydraulics On arrival descending through 8;000 FT we experienced a complete loss of System B hydraulics (pressure and quantity). A Master Caution Alert notified us of the condition which occurred when Flaps were selected to 1 degree. We notified ATC immediately; declared an emergency and requested ARFF. We then proceeded to complete the QRH procedure checklist 'Loss of System B'.


Second narrative: Upon completion of the checklist; I notified the flight attendants of the situation and gave them their 'TEST' briefing. Following an announcement to the passengers; we completed all checklists and began vectors for landing. Captain landed the aircraft. Our flight landed uneventfully; and following a quick inspection by ARFF crew; we were able to taxi to the gate without further incident. All proper procedures were followed to the best of our knowledge.


Synopsis: A B737-800 'B' Hydraulic System alerted LOW QUANTITY and PRESSURE descending through 8;000 FT on approach so an emergency was declared; the QRH completed and an uneventful landing followed.
Date: 201704
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: M-20 E Super 21
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Supervisor / CIC; Ground; Flight Data / Clearance Delivery
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Police / Security Involved
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was Controller in Charge and Ground Control. Aircraft X called to taxi to the runway. Winds were moving every five minutes so I gave him the winds; and asked what runway he wanted. He said '38'. I thought this was odd. I told him there was no such thing and taxied him to Runway 30. He read back instructions without a call sign. I had him try again and he got it wrong. One of the many times I tried he got stepped on. The next time I tried to give it to him he said going to '38V 28V'. At this point I told him to hold his position. I looked at my Local Controller and said I don't want to taxi this guy out something is wrong. Local Control said ask if there was an instructor on board or if he was familiar with the airport. The pilot's response was slurred and not intelligible. I called airport operations to go check on the guy. They called on the phone and stated he was drunk. I saw the pilot was taxiing the plane back to the hangar. I called my air traffic manager and got a little more guidance on what to do. I called airport operations to suggest they call 911. 911 was called. The pilot was arrested for a DUI. Local Control; Ground Control both filled out statements on what happened.There should be some type of training to help controllers recognize these types of situations.




Synopsis: A Ground Controller reported detecting a pilot taxiing displayed signs of being inebriated. The Controller had airport operations and law enforcement meet the airplane.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ORD
ATC / advisory: Tower ORD
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: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: 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: Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On PRM 10C approach in poor visibility; and we were so concerned about visually trying to find traffic that was to our immediate left that we were late configuring the aircraft for landing. The landing gear horn sounded at 800.


Second narrative: Performing PRM ILS 10R ORD I allowed myself to be distracted by aircraft on simultaneous approach to 10C which caused me to delay gear and final flaps. The bottom line of 500 feet or mandatory go around may have been breached where a go around is mandated. The aircraft made a normal landing in the landing zone.


Synopsis: B737 flight crew forgot to lower their landing gear which led to an alarm to sound at 800 feet during approach. After lowering the gear the flight crew continued the un-stabilized approach to a normal landing.