elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZLA.ARTCC, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZLA
ATC / advisory: Center ZLA
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Troubleshooting; Confusion; Distraction
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Upon departing LGB and after a few handoffs and climb instructions; one Controller at LA Center gave us a re-routing.  This new route included adding two new fixes to our flight plan: FIXIT & IKAYE.  So the new route was direct to FIXIT - IKAYE - RZS.  As the pilot flying I was focused on aircraft control while the pilot not flying was making the appropriate changes on the FMS.  I acknowledged the first direct (to FIXIT) and proceeded to engage LNAV to FIXIT.  We were not too far from this fix by the time I proceeded direct to this fix. Moments after crossing FIXIT the pilot flying realized that we were proceeding to RZS instead of IKAYE and notified ATC of this deviation.  Workload in the cockpit prior to receiving the re-route was above normal.  The new route was properly received; acknowledged; and read back to ATC.  The pilot not flying and I were not familiar with this fixes; and the pilot not flying had to confirm the spelling of both way points; and then properly identify them on our navigation charts.  We feel that we were too close to the above mentioned fixes in order to properly (and correctly) load the fixes on the FMS and perform a cross check with both pilots about the new FMS changes.  The deviation was discovered by the pilot flying just moments after crossing the first new fix (FIXIT) and I proceeded to make an immediate right turn towards the fix while the pilot not flying informed ATC about this error.




Synopsis: Pilot complains about re-route with fixes they are not familiar with and having to enter them to the FMS; while flying close to the first intersection.
Date: 201901
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While in cruise at FL370; the flight crew noticed the cabin altitude started to increase. A few seconds later; they noticed their ears starting to pop in relation to the changing cabin pressure accompanied with a whistling sound. The cabin altitude continued to increase and reached the point where the aural warning was alerted. The CA told the FO to put on his oxygen mask and that we would be starting an emergency descent. The CA then informed the FA of the situation and instructed her to put her mask on as well. The flight crew performed the rapid cabin depressurization and emergency descent checklists. The CA then informed the dispatcher of the situation via ACARS and notified him of the diversion. The crew performed a successful emergency landing and taxied the aircraft to the gate. The cause was due to the aircraft's pressurization system failure to maintain cabin pressure.




Synopsis: EMB-145 Captain reported pressurization system failure during cruise.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZDV
ATC / advisory: Center ZDV
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Company Policy; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: We were filed to DEN on the AALLE1 Arrival. At some point we were given delay vectors and received a clearance direct AAILE; AAILE ONE arrival. I was unaware that ATC pronounces AALLE as AAILE. The only arrival that ends in AIL is the QUAIL 1. A quick look at fixes into DEN also shows a waypoint FLAIL on the AALLE arrival. I expected AALLE to be pronounced like ALLEY. In any event there are too many waypoints that sound similar flying into DEN.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported similar sounding fix names AAILE/FLAIL caused confusion and a route deviation during arrival to DEN airport.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SR22
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was in cruise flight when I suddenly heard a 'thump;' felt a slight vibration; and heard the engine sounds change. It also felt like the engine power decreased slightly. The engine indications on the MFD were all in the green. I had been taught that any sudden decrease in engine power should be assumed to be caused by a fault in the turbo normalizing system. This could cause hot exhaust gases to enter the engine compartment and possibly cause a fire. I immediately informed TRACON of my rough running engine and received vectors to [a nearby airport]. The controller gave me the weather and asked the skydiving operation on the field to hold their jumpers until I was on the ground. The airport was close and I was unable to lose enough altitude to make a normal approach to the best runway for the wind. I joined the pattern after broadcasting my intentions and made a downwind landing on [the opposite runway]. I stopped on the runway and pulled off into the transient parking area.The company that manages the airplane sent a mechanic out to the airport and he gave the engine a brief examination and did a run-up. He was unable to find any anomalies. The airplane is going to be ferried back to its home base and will be checked out by the A&Ps there. I am still glad that I made a precautionary landing because I had no idea what caused the changes in the engine sound. I am lucky that the winds were not strong and the runway was long enough to do a downwind landing without an overrun; but I have already contacted my instructor to get more instruction in emergency descents; steep spirals; and downwind landings. The controllers did an outstanding job in getting me to a field where I could get on the ground safely.




Synopsis: An SR-22TN pilot reported he diverted because of a rough running engine. No anomalies were found by the mechanic.
Date: 201903
Location: ZAU.ARTCC, IL
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Traffic Management
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Operations Manager came to NAS Desk advising they couldn't find a rocket launch waiver due to local KSN issues. TMU had a hard copy of the waiver available.OM advised TMC that the person named on the waiver called in to begin launch operations.I quickly put out information to the affected areas and facilities. However; on reading the waiver; I found a 1 hour minimum facility notice requirement prior to actual launch start. The OM should not have approved the operation to begin at XA00.The NOTAM was out for the operation; but I don't know if it was 6-72 hours before launch.Don't approve operations with late notice and otherwise ensure adherence to agreement.Don't have a different positions approve and coordinate operations to the extent practical.




Synopsis: Chicago Center Traffic Management Controller reported a problem with a rocket launch waver.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZAU.ARTCC, IL
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZAU
ATC / advisory: Center ZAU
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Workload; Time Pressure; Confusion; Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: ZOB Cleveland Center routinely takes handoffs late. By late I mean with less than 2 minutes flying time to their boundary. ZOB also routinely doesn't answer landline calls in a timely fashion; for; e.g.; handoffs. So one is repeatedly in the frustrating position of having to 'sweat' handoffs to Cleveland Center. Today; Litchfield sector (C14) didn't take the handoff on Aircraft X; FL210; MIZAR3 arrival to DTW until 1 min flying time to their boundary. This is unacceptable.Low and high altitude sectors have minimum nautical mile distances outside of their airspace that they have to look (I believe 25NM for high alt and 15NM for low alt sectors). I don't believe many ZOB sectors abutting ZAU airspace look the proper distance out; or even if they do they still don't take handoffs in a timely fashion a good percentage of the time (in my case I'd estimate 15% of handoffs are not accepted in a timely fashion). I'd recommend ZOB controllers get remedial training on handoffs. The irony that ZOB flashes aircraft at ZAU 10+ minutes from our boundary and we as a culture mostly take their handoffs 2-5 minutes flying time from our boundary seems to be lost on ZOB controllers who routinely wait until the last second. This is extremely annoying on the mid shift as well because you don't want to sweat the one plane in your sector being accepted by ZOB.




Synopsis: ZAU Controller reported that ZOB is routinely late on taking handoffs and that they do not answer landlines in a timely manner.
Date: 201406
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SJC.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Airspace: Class C SJC
ATC / advisory: Tower SJC
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: This was not a deviation from an ATC clearance. Upon discussion; we decided this was the best option to allow filing of report.  On approach into SJC [in the late afternoon] we noticed a large red rectangular glow in the distance. It pulled my vision off of the approach. I was pilot monitoring.  The lighted rectangle proceeded to change colors; continuously. It is in direct line of sight above the departure end of Runway 30L.  A B737 landed on the parallel runway a few seconds after us. They queried the Tower about this object. We were then informed that the new stadium has installed this lighted billboard...'and it is the size of a building.'  ATC has a deep concern about this installation. They mentioned that our distractions occurred during daylight hours. 'Just imagine this at night'...it will be illuminated 24 hours a day. ATC also mentioned their concern for approaches flying directly over this lighted billboard for approach into Runway 12.  Both the B737 crew and I agreed this would be very distracting.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain comments on how distracting the video screens at the new stadium are during a daylight approach to SJC from the south.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 2 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Landing Gear
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Gear Up Landing
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Evacuated
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After two touch and go's my student and I prepared for a full stop; no flap landing. The traffic pattern was busy with other traffic; and we were switched to land on a different runway. It was the first time I flew with the student in the twin; and during the last lap in the traffic pattern I began to explain the procedures and approach speeds for the no flap landing. On the downwind leg we were cleared for a full stop landing. The before landing checklist was called; however; I do not recall verifying the gear selector was in the down position nor verifying a 'three green no red' indication. I also do not recall hearing the gear warning horn. The horn sounds very similar to the stall warning horn which I am used to hearing activating all the time. During the final approach segment in the traffic pattern I was focused on keeping the approach speed slightly higher at 90 kts. The aircraft impacted the runway and I took over controls to maintain centerline and avoid colliding with any obstacles. After the aircraft came to a complete stop; I immediately shut down and secured the aircraft and ordered an evacuation. Looking at the aircraft; the landing gear appeared to be stowed in the up position. There were no injuries to either of us on board the aircraft; and there did not appear to be substantial damage to the aircraft.




Synopsis: A light twin Flight Instructor experienced a gear up landing while instructing. Preparations for a no flap landing and an ATC assigned runway change may have gotten in the way of completing the landing check.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: AMA.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C AMA
ATC / advisory: TRACON AMA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: At 5;000 FT MSL roughly 15 nm SE Runway 31 at AMA we accepted a visual via direct IMOBE then Runway 31. We don't have a RNAV 31 chart but it's in the database. We had previously been given direct from FUZ to AMA and that put us just a little east of the final for 31. We flew to IMOBE in LNAV and I selected 4;200 FT in the MCP and started to descend via V/S. I was tired and just assumed we were in Class B airspace. Wrong; it's Class C. The Airport and Runway were in sight but everything felt low and I realized I was going through 1;400 FT AGL so I leveled; slowed and configured and continued to IMOBE using the PDI in VNAV. (All we ever heard from ATC was cleared to land and afterward cleared to the hangar.)




Synopsis: An Air Carrier First Officer reported feeling low on approach about 15 NM from AMA and realized he was 1;400 FT AGL so he leveled; slowed and configured for landing. ATC was silent.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Cessna 402/402C/B379 Businessliner/Utiliner
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Landing Gear Indicating System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: When I extended the landing gear on visual approach for Runway 33R I observed the right main landing gear down light was not illuminated. I executed a missed approach and advised Tower of the situation. I requested delay vectors while I troubleshot the problem using the aircraft's QRH. I also contacted Company Operations and notified them of the issue. Once established on delay vectors I used the QRH Abnormal Checklist entitled 'Changing Landing Gear Indicator Light Bulb'. After the checklist was complete the right main landing gear down lock light was still not illuminated. I continued with the QRH Abnormal Checklist entitled 'Landing Gear Will Not Extend Hydraulically'. As part of the procedure the landing gear was extended using nitrogen or 'blown down'. Finally I did a low approach over 33R while Tower looked at my landing gear. Tower confirmed that all of the landing gear appeared to be down. I consulted with base Maintenance and they agreed with the procedures I had done and had nothing else to recommend. I notified the passengers of the emergency extension of the landing gear; which the gear appeared to be down; and we would be landing shortly. I executed a normal landing; all landing gear remained down and locked; and I cleared the runway. I wrote up the landing gear discrepancy in the aircraft logbook and called our company Maintenance Control.




Synopsis: When the right main landing gear safe light failed to illuminate the pilot of a C-402 executed a missed approach; accomplished the associated QRH checklists; did a fly-by with the Tower for a visual inspection and ultimately landed safely despite the light remaining extinguished.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PKMJ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Equipment Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: It appears the PKMJ PAPI is not correct.  We flew a RNAV approach to minimums and the PAPI indicated 4 white lights all the way to RNAV minimums (510 feet) and only indicated 2red/2white at approximately 50 feet AGL.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported the PAPI was showing all white lights while flying the RNAV approach to PKMJ airport. Only at minimums did the PAPI show 2 white and 2 red. The Captain states the PAPI may not be correct.
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SJC.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class C SJC
ATC / advisory: Tower SJC
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: While on a Night VMC final for visual approach to Runway 30L SJC the extremely bright stadium board display lights were on at full illumination and were an extreme visual distraction to us and other pilots on final approach. SJC Tower acknowledged our report and added that all pilots had commented on the distraction. The worst problem will be night games at the stadium when the weather is IMC and Instrument approaches are in effect at SJC or NUQ. The condition may create a problem of Flicker Vertigo for pilots.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reports being distracted by the new stadium display during a night visual approach to Runway 30L at SJC.