elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LGB.Airport, CA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E SCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X was on the new METROPLEX RNAV approach inbound to LGB. The pilot was given the phraseology to descend via except maintain 5000. The pilot read back everything correctly but was confused by what that meant with the new procedures. The pilot immediately started to descend to 5000 instead of complying with the crossing restrictions of the arrival. Since it's a new procedure; I asked the pilot if he was descending with arrival which the pilot responded yes. When I pulled up the map he was way below the arrival and also below the MVA.It's early in the Metroplex implementation but some of the pilots still seem confused on what they are supposed to be doing with the procedure changes.




Synopsis: SCT TRACON Controller reported confusion from an inbound LGB pilot on a the new Metroplex RNAV Approach clearance.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: On descent encountered severe turbulence FL306 through approximately FL260. ATC cleared us from FL360 to FL280 told us there had been turbulence reported FL330 to FL300 but no specific area or intensity. Seat belt sign was on already so I tried to expedite through the altitudes we were warned of and descended at .76 Mach to 280 knots for turbulence penetration. Severe lasted about 2-3 minutes and we got clearance to continue descent to FL240; about FL260 it smoothed out. As soon as we were able we checked with the FAs and learned one was injured. [Advised ATC] and were given priority handling. EMTs met the plane and she and a passenger complaining of back pain were taken to the hospital.




Synopsis: B737-800 pilot reported encountering severe turbulence on descent that resulted in injuries to a flight attendant and a passenger.
Date: 201812
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Cockpit Window
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At cruise altitude of FL280; Flight Crew noticed that the CA (Captain) side windshield was developing a crack. Flight Crew immediately notified ATC and requested a lower altitude and after careful evaluation; requested vectors to [an alternate airport]. Shortly after; the windshield shattered; now obstructing the CA's view. Flight Crew then accepted vectors to [the alternate].Visual scan by the Flight Crew of the cockpit and outside. First noticed brown crack along the top half of the windshield; along with some additional cracks toward the edges. Over the next few minutes; Flight Crew took note that these were possibly expanding; and were now developing air bubble-like patterns. Cause of the windshield fracture is unknown at this time.CA assumed PF (Pilot Flying) duties; and directed FO (First Officer) to notify Center of the situation and to request a lower altitude. Center cleared us down to lower altitude and shortly after cleared us to 10000 feet. Passing through FL200; a loud pop was heard by Flight Crew; and this was accompanied by the now shattered windshield. By this time; the decision was made to request radar vectors to nearest airport. Controls were once again transferred to the FO; and CA assumed monitoring duties; including setting up for an approach. Dispatch was notified via ACARS. FAs (Flight Attendants) were notified and briefed. Passengers were notified that flight was being diverted due to maintenance issue; and that more information would be available on the ground; once at the gate. Around this time; Flight Crew got a 'L WSHLD HEAT' caution message. CA ran appropriate QRH and message was extinguished. This message came on two more times prior to landing. Flight Crew was given vectors for a visual approach. Flight landed and safely taxied to assigned gate.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information]


Synopsis: CRJ-900 flight crew reported diverting to an alternate airport after the Captain's side windshield shattered.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B757-200
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: Aircraft Auto Temperature System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Troubleshooting; Physiological - Other; Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Cabin temperature was uncontrollable. At one point First Class temperature read 95 degrees and economy showed 92 degrees. After Captain conferred with Maintenance Control and Dispatch; decision was made to divert to a nearby airport which was along our route of flight. Center helped coordinate.




Synopsis: A B757 Cabin temperature became uncontrollable while in cruise at FL370 so the flight diverted to a nearby airport.
Date: 201405
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Other N/A
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: New Briefing Page format and major changes. We were enroute to ABQ and were discussing the arrival to Runway 26; the active runway at the time.  We talked about the high terrain east of the airport and plotted some references in the FMGC and discussed that although there are two RNAV approaches in the database; we have no charts for those approaches (turns out they are RNP and NA).  I had looked at the Briefing Page earlier to review how close the nearest alternates were and added some fuel because of the distance and the winds.  I also noted the format and thought how difficult it was to read because of the typeface and font size.  We both looked at the Briefing Page while planning the landing phase; primarily for gate information and I glanced through the notes and thought there was a lot less information than before; I believe turbulence and wind shear used to be discussed.  The safety alert (in relatively big print and boxed) discusses arrivals to 26; but nothing about not using the runway.  After discussing our arrival plan; I took another look at the Briefing Page; and saw; in very small type; that 26 was not authorized at night.  My First Officer and I both thought 26 was a better option than Runway 30; which is only 6;000 feet long at the high altitude airport; but because of the recent change; it was our only option.  Fortunately; the winds died down and ATC was able to fit us onto Runway 30.  I called Dispatch and he was not aware of the change either and thought (as do I); that this should have been a NOTAM.  I contacted [a fleet Captain] for the A320 who confirmed this was a recent change; he was also surprised at the Briefing Page format.  He told me that a published visual approach is being worked on; but when winds are out of the west; the current situation is not good.  When major changes to an airport's operation are made it should not be buried in small print.  It is not even prominent in the Runway 26 notes; it is last.  In journalism; they call it burying the lead!  Finally; the [old] format is much easier to read; especially at night and THERE ARE REVISION BARS!  That way; changes; even if buried; would be more apparent.




Synopsis: A319 Captain reports discovering enroute to ABQ that night visual approaches to Runway 26 are no longer authorized by his company and that the change is not obvious when scanning the Briefing Page.
Date: 201302
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Fighting Falcon F16
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Second aircraft: Fighting Falcon F16
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X initially checked in indicating he was on the straight in; non-standard approximately 7 mile final. I issued a landing clearance and traffic; 'F16's will over take you high in the overhead; currently at 5;000 feet.' Aircraft Y checked in almost on top of Aircraft X and I immediately asked him if he had Aircraft X in sight ahead of him. He said 'RADAR contact; but no joy' which meant to me he had them on RADAR but not visually in sight out the window. I instructed Aircraft Y to maintain his current altitude and that traffic was 200 feet below him. Then I issued a follow up traffic report that it appeared that he was between the 2 non-standard F16's on the straight in. Aircraft Y eventually reported climbing to 4;500 feet and proceeding to initial. In my opinion the mistakes were made due to traffic volume and no assist position being manned in the arrival position. The Arrival Controller was over saturated and couldn't keep up with the traffic and proper scratchpad entries. The aircraft were handed off to me on top of each other; above the overhead pattern altitude without each other in sight.




Synopsis: Tower Controller described a conflict event when one flight of military fighters passed another flight on final; the reporter claiming the RADAR Controller was saturated and should have had some assistance.
Date: 202003
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty); Flight Attendant In Charge
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Other / Unknown; Distraction; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After we arrived in ZZZ; we left XX passengers on the plane before the next crew was at the aircraft. We left for our next flight. We had a medical incident onboard during the flight. While our CRM was effective; there were many decisions to be made. While our country is currently in a national emergency; any serious medical event leads to uncertainty. All three flight attendants were in constant communication with the Captain. At first we were told no passengers could leave the aircraft when we landed. We had passengers who were aware of the situation and wanted to be involved. Of course our first priority was the safety of our passengers and crew; we also were aware of the effect any decision would have on the company. After discussion with Station Ops and Dispatch; the Captain was instructed to not hold the passengers; and that the aircraft would be cleaned upon arrival. We also spent the entire flight containing the incident so all passengers felt at ease about their safety. I felt we were successful. However; in this coronavirus environment; it was very stressful and we had to remain calm and in control. We were dealing with many different situations and important decisions during the flight.


Second narrative: After the deplaning of Flight XYZ from ZZZ to ZZZ1; the one of the crew members failed to stay with the XX through passengers. During this flight; we encountered many distractions including a passenger that vomited in the forward lav and we alerted the Captain due to the national concern over the scare of the coronavirus. The crew maintained excellent CRM skills when communicating with the flight deck. The flight deck notified medical service and Dispatch. I was also comforting a woman who was flying to see her gravely ill mother.


Synopsis: Flight Attendants reported concerns about a sick passenger in their flight.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SAT.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground SAT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Excursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airport; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: Upon landing on RWY 13R at SAT; we cleared the runway at taxiway D and proceeded to taxi straight ahead to the terminal. Apparently a new 'island' has been installed at the intersection of taxiway D and G that is not depicted on the 10-9 plate dated 17 Nov 17. There is a large gap in the taxiway blue marking lights right at the end of taxiway D. I ended up taxiing straight ahead between this large gap and transgressed into the island area. We realized that we were in the island area and started to taxi clear; but stopped because we might hit one of the ground taxi lights. We called Ground Control and advised them of our situation. We also called Base Ops and requested they send the tug out to our position. Ground Control sent over an operations vehicle to see if we could taxi clear of island without hitting any taxi lights. The Ops personnel informed us that we did not hit any taxi lights but might not clear them if we taxied clear of island. I decided to shut down both engines and have the tug hook us up and tow us clear of the island and to the gate. This is what we did and there was no damage to aircraft or any ground equipment or taxi lights.From the communications with SAT Ground Control; this new island has caused numerous problems with other aircraft exiting the runway at taxiway D also.  Poor island placement and poor lighting depicting it. It was not depicted on the most recent 10-9 SAT Airport diagram. Night time arrival. Update the 10-9 Airport Diagram to depict the new island and possibly put a Hot Spot area at intersection of taxiway D and G. Also 1 or 2 additional blue taxi lights should be placed in the large gap at the end of taxiway D.


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


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported entering an uncharted and poorly lighted island area while taxiing at SAT airport.
Date: 201407
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: AMA.Airport, TX
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Airspace: Class C AMA
ATC / advisory: TRACON AMA
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Descending into AMA and given the GPS 22 approach cleared direct to a transition fix; cleared for the approach. Both FMS's looked good. Hit the fix and aircraft started turning the wrong way. As I was checking what might be the reason and about to ask for a heading; the Controller said I see you turning off course; what do you want to do? I said the FMS's still look good but aircraft turned the wrong way; give us whatever heading you need. We will reset the FMS's; request vectors to the approach. He gave us a couple of headings; asked if we were ready for the approach; I doubled checked everything; said yes. He cleared us for the approach and we flew the approach with no problem; landed. Thought about it a lot; First Officer and I talked about it. Still not sure why the aircraft did that as the courses looked good. The course lines were connected on both FMS's. We had already flown two other GPS's on this trip; one earlier that day with no problems. It shows the importance for the non-flying pilot's duty of monitoring the approach all the time in case of a glitch like this; rare as they are.




Synopsis: EMB-145 Captain experiences a turn in the wrong direction during a GPS Runway 22 approach at AMA; with the FMS and autopilot controlling the aircraft. Vectors are requested and the second approach is successful.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Indicating and Warning - Hydraulics
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification; Troubleshooting
Second reporter function: Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During Descent and going through FL220; EICAS showed a R HYD QTY and also RSVR light on the overhead panel.  Status page of engine showed an 'RF' on the right system and also a QTY indication between .04 and .09. QRH was checked and landed the aircraft without incident.  Emergency was declared.

Callback: The Reporter stated that all quantity indications returned to normal after landing and maintenance determined that the hydraulic quantity sensor failed.



Synopsis: A B757 EICAS alerted R HYD QTY; the RSVR light illuminated and the quantity indicating 0.09 so the QRH procedure was completed; an emergency declared followed by a normal landing after which all quantity indications returned to normal.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I received a 4 chime call from our Number 1 Flight Attendant. In a panicky voice; I was informed that there was fire and smoke in the cabin; and that we need to land immediately. We advised ATC and started our divert. During our descent; My First Officer suggested that we add the drag to help get the descent going as I started to slow through 265 as we were approaching 10000 ft. I thought we were fine. As we continued coordination with ATC; AARF; and Flight Attendants - I then decided that the gear would be a good option. I was hand flying and proceeding directly to the outer marker. I glanced at the airspeed and thought I saw 265 again and called for gear down; My First Officer put gear down as he was saying verified. And then said not verified and immediately put the handle back up. The gear never moved. Just the handle. I was around 285. So either I misread the airspeed and thought I was at 265. Or I was at 265 and pushed the nose over while hand flying and called gear down and airspeed crept up quickly. The correction was so swift that I quickly dismissed it. The rest of divert went well.Nothing I would change as I thought I saw the correct gear speed. If anything; slow a little bit down. Pressed a little [more] than other emergencies due to it was smoke in the cabin and hearing the panic in the flight attendant voice.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain reported the landing gear lever was moved to the down position at a speed higher than authorized during a rapid descent.