elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Supervisor / CIC; Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Training on local. South flow VFR conditions. Aircraft X checked on 20 south to land; I told him to enter a left downwind for Runway XX. He never entered the downwind. He flew straight for the airport. Aircraft Y called ready to depart and I cleared him for takeoff Runway XX heading 230. I thought it would take him far enough west to not be a factor. As he got airborne; I called traffic then turned Aircraft X eastbound. Aircraft Y had to turn to a 250 to avoid the conflict. They passed and Aircraft Y got switched to departure. [I] should have turned Aircraft Y to a 270 or held him on the ground.




Synopsis: Tower Controller reported a NMAC between a departing IFR aircraft and an arrival aircraft which was too close.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Fatigue
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Holding number 1; Tower asked us; '[Call sign]; are you taking off VFR today?' We replied 'No.' We did not understand the reason for that unusual question; nor did we query the Tower Controller; nor did the Controller elaborate. We were given a vector for takeoff and instructions to stay with Tower frequency. After takeoff; Tower (or Departure Control after switching; do not remember which); asked us to verify our squawk. We realize at that point we did not enter a squawk and what Tower was covertly implying. We had not done a detailed departure briefing clearance. Fatigue was an issue.While the major fault was not setting a squawk and doing a detailed briefing; Tower appeared they were aware of the error. They could have been handled it in a different or more elaborate manner. Also; Ground Control did not notice us taxiing without a squawk. The ramification was that there was an extra workload in retrieving the squawk and entering it during a higher workload and task saturated environment. Fatigue report submitted.Not cutting corners in presenting briefings assuming procedures were done correctly. Understanding how insidious fatigue onset can be. Query Controlling Agencies as to unusual questions.


Second narrative: I the FO (First Officer) and was out of the flight deck. The Captain received the CPDLC and made inputs on the MCP but forgot to input the squawk; so we were squawking XXXX. No communication from Ground about the squawk. Tower asked us if we were flying VFR. That question didn't make sense to us. On initial climb out; Tower asked us what our squawk was. We then understood and put in the proper squawk. I should have verified all inputs from the clearance. The Ground Controller should have asked us to check our squawk. The Tower Controller should have used proper phraseology.


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported departing with an incorrect squawk code due to fatigue.
Date: 201812
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Fatigue; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Staffing
Primary problem: Staffing

Narrative: There are too many desks closed to meet the requirement 121.395. My desk has about 17 flights in the air at a time all over the 48 states with mod turb and as many as 28 released. I am concerned with maintaining operational control 121.533 and being able to provide timely safety info to my flights 121.601.




Synopsis: Dispatcher reported a concern with maintaining operational control because of the large number of flights assigned to them.
Date: 201904
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ABQ.Airport, NM
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C ABQ
ATC / advisory: Tower ABQ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: FO (First Officer) was flying the RNAV Z Runway 26 Approach at night into ABQ. Weather was VMC and the autopilot was on. During the arcing portion of the approach; we received two 'Caution Terrain' Alerts in quick succession. We were on the lateral and vertical path of the approach so it caught me off guard. According to company policy; we should have executed a go-around because it was night time. However; I feel this situation was somewhat unique because executing a go-around while in the base to final turn could cause the pilot flying to roll wings level; which in this situation would change the flight path to the north and towards the highest terrain. My instinct was for the FO to continue flying the approach because the lateral course was turning us away from the terrain. We landed without incident.We could have done a better job briefing the hazards on this approach. The airport had just changed runway configuration; so we had briefed a different approach runway prior to Top of Descent.


Second narrative: We were cleared to descend via KRKEE 3 RNAV Arrival for Runway 26 at ABQ at night in VMC conditions. Approaching point CHNGA on the RNAV (RNP) Z to Runway 26. Our configuration was gear down and at flaps 15 speed. We had 38 knots of wind from the West at 7000'. We were on the lateral and vertical paths with zero set in the altitude window. We received the GPWS caution 'CAUTION TERRAIN'. We received the caution as the aircraft crossed point CHNGA and was turning left to LEETR. Before we could even begin to go-around; the caution cleared. We did not go around and kept the aircraft coupled in LNAV/VNAV PATH. We configured to flaps 30; completed the Before Landing Checklist and landed on Runway 26.Surprised we received a GPWS Caution while established on a segment of a published RNAV approach. We briefed the rising terrain to the east and noted the spot elevation of east of CHNGA. I think we received the caution due to the strong winds from the West. ABQ page recommends flying an RNAV approach for terrain separation. Perhaps add a secondary note to be prepared for a GPWS Caution if there are strong winds out of the west near point CHNGA.


Synopsis: Flight Crew reported GPWS Alert during approach to land to ABQ.
Date: 202011
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Please strongly address the lack of cooperation on the part of some pilots regarding mask wearing.  Flight attendants are not comfortable being in a small enclosed area with fellow employees not following the mask mandate. We are not concerned about what they do when we are not doing lavatory breaks; but are requesting that they follow company policy for the short amount of time we are required to be in the cockpit. This is as much for their safety as ours as we are indeed the ones in contact with dozens of individuals in the cabin.




Synopsis: Flight attendant reported lack of cooperation from pilots when it comes to wearing masks while flight attendants are performing their duties in the cockpit area.
Date: 201901
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
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: Fuel Distribution System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Flight crew arrived at cruising altitude of FL370. We immediately notice a fuel imbalance. As Captain; I proceeded with the fuel cross feed procedure to no avail. The left tank continued to burn fuel at a much higher rate than the right tank. We got an amber Fuel Imbalance Caution. I called for the Fuel Imbalance QRH procedure. We noticed after about midway through the procedure the fuel levels stabilized and began to correctly balance. We then finished the QRH procedure and pressed on towards ZZZ. Upon arrival in ZZZ; I immediately called Dispatch to arrange a three-way call with Maintenance. Manager on Call sent a Maintenance Officer to the aircraft to conduct a further inspection. As the flight was in smooth air continuously and the imbalance was less than 3000 pounds; Maintenance signed off and returned the aircraft back into service. The reason for this [report] is 1) the fuel imbalance exceeded the limitation of 1000 pound imbalance (our imbalance reached 1800 pounds before it corrected itself with the cross feed procedure activated) and 2) that this; being the first flight of the day for this aircraft and temperatures close to freezing; Maintenance suspected a possible stuck valve due to the frigid environment.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported fuel distribution system malfunction which ultimately self-corrected.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZOB.ARTCC, OH
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Staffing
Primary problem: Staffing

Narrative: The staffing numbers were supposed to be three people staffing until midnight. We only had two people until midnight making staffing a very unsafe situation. I am not sure how only two people got scheduled to work till midnight; but management knew of this at least the day of and did nothing to get another body in to help if needed (hold people over; call people in early). Running with only two people on a shift while two sectors need to be open are unsafe and should not happen. We were one body under for the day; and shift notes were requesting one 4-12 overtime to get called in and it did not happen. Worse case; solicits to have someone stay late or come in early one way or another. Especially when you are aware of the issue and do nothing to fix it.




Synopsis: ZOB ARTCC Controller reported that management allowed under staffing against facility operations requirements; consequently compromising safety.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Operating a through flight with an aircraft and terminal change in the hub. Dispatch release received with tankering fuel. I did not thoroughly review the release (down to the last pound of fuel/minute of flight time); so I missed that the flight plan was short both time and fuel. If you look at the last segment; it shows from the VOR to the airport; a distance of 21 NM; would take 1 (ONE!!!) minute. It actually took 16 minutes. Our burn was 1;000 pounds over release fuel. Dispatch is trying to tighten up on fuel and at the same time the dispatchers are not adjusting the poor flight plans. The result is the pilots having their necks hanging out. Here is the list: dispatcher training; new flight planning system; get Management off the dispatchers' backs regarding fuel loads (putting a dispatcher in for an above and beyond award because he made his restricted fuel quota for the month sends a very bad message.)




Synopsis: A320 Captain reports being shorted on fuel for the planned flight which resulted in using fuel that was being tankered.  New dispatchers and new dispatch planning software were cited as factors.
Date: 201504
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: FPR.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D FPR
ATC / advisory: Tower FPR
Aircraft component: Fuel System
Component problem: Design; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: My student and I were in the traffic pattern at FPR practicing landings on Runway 10L. While my student was flying and on the third take off during the crosswind leg at an indicated altitude of about 800 feet; the engine stopped; went silent. I then immediately took controls; pitched for best glide speed; turned back toward Runway 28R and started to troubleshoot as per the checklist but could not find anything amiss. While gliding back engine came back to life again briefly for about 10 seconds at which point I decided to land on Runway 10R; but then the engine again stopped running. We then communicated this to ATC and we were cleared for; and glided to a landing on Runway 14. After landing the engine started running again and we taxied back to the ramp after being cleared to do so by ATC. During the post flight inspection it was discovered that there was fuel leaking at the point where the fuel strainer is connected to the fuel line and the electric fuel pump. This was not observed during the preflight inspection.Examine the fuel strainer more closely by opening the cowling and checking it for leaks while draining it. This is an area that is susceptible to fatigue because the fuel strainer is drained twice before every flight.




Synopsis: A small aircraft's engine intermittently shutdown after takeoff so the instructor took control from his student and returned to land where a fuel leak was discovered at the fuel strainer. Frequent fuel strainer examination may lead to fatigue failure.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SMO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class G SMO
ATC / advisory: CTAF SMO; Tower SMO
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Distraction
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: At the time; SMO was under about a 1;000 foot MSL marine layer (i.e. low cloud stratus layer) extending from the west to just east and encompassing both north and south of the runway. I was flying under an IFR flight plan and had already been cleared for the approach. Because the Tower was closed and because I could see that I could see the airport (coming from the east looking at Runway 21) I cancelled IFR and continued inbound on the visual making appropriate calls on the CTAF. As I got to a 1 mile final (which was called out on CTAF); Aircraft Y began turning base to final and asked where I actually was as he did not have me in sight. I advised him that I was at his 2 o'clock. It would appear that he never had me in sight as he continued his turn to final. He ended cutting me off ending up just left and about 50 feet above/in front of me. I informed him that he had cut me off; but he continued on course and descending. Because of the situation; I decided the best course to avoid a collision was to make a right turn. I also noted that the marine layer cloud edge extended out to the position where I made the turn (3/4 mile final) I then proceeded to continue that right turn into a 360 to rejoin the final and then landed. It is notable that because of the marine layer; the likely student pilot in the Aircraft Y; should never have even been flying the 'standard' pattern' (i.e. left traffic 21) as it was not legal to do so because the VFR requirements for the overlying Echo airspace could not be met (i.e. 1;000 feet above the clouds) due to the height of the marine layer. Thus; his descent to turn base at around the freeway clearly violated VFR minimums. I did inform the person who runs the school of the situation. He informed me that he himself had an NMAC just the very day before. Had the Tower been operating on normal or slightly longer hours at the time; such incidents would not have been able to occur. The currency reduced Tower hours should be extended ASAP; in order to prevent an accident as the airspace is very busy; and can be challenging in the event of a marine layer; which precludes the use of the pattern.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported a NMAC on final to SMO airport. Tower closure was cited as a contributing factor.
Date: 201211
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying; Relief Pilot
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Speed All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was the relief pilot on this ferry flight with a Captain and First Officer; no other passengers or crew were aboard. The First Officer was on break and I was sitting in the right seat as the flying pilot. During cruise at FL400; I noticed our airspeed decaying significantly. I applied max thrust to the engines and arrested the airspeed from slowing further. We realized the right engine was indicating very low on the EPR gauge; near a flight idle setting; despite having the trust lever in the full forward position. The right engine gauges then began to surge wildly from a flight idle position to approximately 55-60 N1. We initiated a right turn to offset 15 NM right of the track; announced our intentions on the radio. The right thrust lever was placed in the flight idle position to prevent the engine from surging. The Captain instructed me to focus on flying the airplane and then called the First Officer from break to assist with the QRH. The Captain and First Officer communicated with ATC to facilitate a clearance to the nearest suitable airport. I was able to avoid traffic and slowly descend to FL290 initially. Eventually we obtained clearance from ATC at FL280. After completion of the QRH the First Officer sat in the right seat and I manned the cockpit jump seat for the eventual landing by the Captain.




Synopsis: B757 relief pilot experienced airspeed loss then engine surging at FL400 during an oceanic crossing. The crew retards the thrust of the surging engine; turns off track; and descends then receives ATC clearance to the nearest suitable alternate.