elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202003
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
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: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Confusion
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: We had an unplanned fuel diversion on our scheduled flight from ZZZ1 to ZZZ2. ATC rerouted us around ZZZ3 Center Airspace due to ZZZ3 Center closure.  Before approaching ZZZ3 Center's airspace; ATC asked us if we'd like to stay at FL430 and reroute; or descend to FL230 and keep the route we had. We determined that we had sufficient fuel to keep our current route and advised ATC that we could descend to FL230.  However; after our descent to FL230; we were assigned a new route that took us around ZZZ3 Center airspace. This added about 150 miles to our original flight plan. Because we were burning more fuel at the lower altitude; and the distance added; we decided to contact Flight Control and ATC to advise of our plan to divert for fuel. We then diverted to ZZZ4 to take on additional fuel before taking our passengers to ZZZ2.In the current environment with COVID-19; we should plan on taking on additional fuel for such abnormalities.


Second narrative: We had to make an unplanned fuel stop on our flight from ZZZ1 to ZZZ2 due to ATC rerouting and closed airspace.  I knew ZZZ Center airspace had some closures and planned extra fuel but it wasn't enough.  As we approached ZZZ Center airspace ATC gave us the option to stay at FL430 and reroute; or descend to FL230 and stay on our current route.  We had plenty of gas so I decided to stay on our current route and descend to FL230.  Once we arrived at FL230 we were then rerouted anyway on an arrival that took us west and added aprox 150 miles to our flight plan.  Because of the added distance and we were burning more fuel at FL230 we decided to contact flight control and divert to ZZZ3 to get more fuel before continuing to ZZZ2. During these uncertain times I will plan to take much more fuel in the event of unforeseen route changes. If I could do it again; I would choose to stay at a higher altitude to conserve fuel.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported issues with a Center being ATC Zero and having to divert to obtain more fuel to reach their destination airport.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Workload; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Staffing
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Flight was dispatched with ZZZ listed as a destination alternate. After taking a delay for a late inbound aircraft; this delayed the flight out past the time for ZZZ to be a legal alternate for his eta as ALT MINS NA WHEN TOWER IS CLOSED. This was an oversight by the dispatcher who was dealing with a weight and balance issue out of ZZZ1 and ZZZ2; reroutes out of ZZZ3; and holding for ZZZ4. I attempted to have other dispatchers on duty to possibly assist me in shedding workload; but they were also saturated with similar issues to my own. At the time; most dispatchers had 10-15 flights airborne each. Adding additional staffing; by either dispatchers or support personnel; would have prevented the saturation. Additionally; a thorough review of the NOTAMs before issuing the release time would have prevented the issue. I did check the weather conditions an additional time but missed the NOTAM.




Synopsis: Air carrier Dispatcher reported that a delayed flight departed with an inappropriate alternate due to a NOTAM not reviewed during planning. Staffing issues were cited as contributing factors.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: DFW.Airport, TX
Aircraft: MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B DFW
ATC / advisory: Tower DFW
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: I took local control; I had no departures during my two minute overlap due to wake turbulence separation. When my next departure went I couldn't recall if he had told me we were on vectors so I looked at the Information Display System (IDS) and it had no information; it usually says vectors or RNAV. I then launched five aircraft on RNAV departures with appropriate RNAV separation. After I had cleared the fifth aircraft the ground controller advised me we were supposed to be on vectors. I had one aircraft at departure end and one lifting; I called down to the departure controller and told her I forgot we weren't RNAV. I then switched my other two aircraft to her. About twenty minutes later the TRACON called the tower to notify us that one of the aircraft had complained. I was explaining one of the reasons I had confusion was from the IDS. The other controllers didn't understand what I was talking about since their screens showed vectors. We then figured out that when the RVR's are pulled up on the page it removes the vectors comment at the top of the page.Fix the glitch where the departure status disappears when the RVR page is brought up.




Synopsis: DFW Tower Controller mistakenly departed aircraft using RNAV departures rather than vectors. The information display system wasn't showing the types of departures in use.
Date: 201304
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic Main System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Relief Pilot; First Officer
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Low center system hydraulic quantity; ran checklist; all system operated normally. Declared an emergency; landed. Towed to gate.


Second narrative: I was on break in the crew rest seat when most of the events unfolded. Flight attendant woke me and told me my break was over; after checking my watch I saw we should be landing in about 45 minutes. When I entered the flight deck I saw and heard the Captain on SATCOM talking with [Maintenance]. The Relief First Officer briefed me on status of Center Hydraulic System and what checklists were being performed. I noticed the C HYD QTY EICAS MSG and saw the level to be about .48 and steady. The HYD QTY Non-Normal checklist had been completed to the deferred items part; the remainder of checklist would be completed on the approach descent check and on the actual approach. Captain completed call with [Maintenance]; and briefed us on that conversation. After a discussion on all systems affected by C HYD and options available the Captain decided we would declare emergency with [ATC] and land at [destination]. The Purser was briefed and PA was made to passengers. The Relief Officer and I reviewed HYD PRESS-C procedure in case all we lost the remaining fluid and systems affected; also checked landing distance abnormal or irregular configuration chart in case we lost the C system and confirmed [destination] had adequate length runways for that situation and briefed Captain. Emergency was declared and descent was initiated into [destination]. The remaining checklist items were completed; landing gear was extended early as well as flaps. QTY was never totally lost and at no time did we receive any HYD PRESS lights. Normal landing and roll out. Captain confirmed we had nose wheel steering. After clearing runway emergency personnel noticed leaking hydraulic fluid and the decision was made to shutdown engines and be towed to the gate.


Synopsis: B767 flight crew reported partial loss of hydraulic fluid in center system. They declared an emergency and a normal landing ensued.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pneumatic Duct Fire/Overheat Warning
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
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; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We departed Runway 27X in ZZZ in Aircraft X. Climbing through 7500 MSL the No.2 Engine Bleed Leak EICAS message came on(XA45); and less than a minute later the No.1 Engine Bleed Leak EICAS message came on as well(XA46). We were cleared to climb up to 12000. At around 9000 MSL we asked to level off a 10000. We ran the QRH checklist for the No.2 Leak first and advised ATC we need to return to ZZZ. We asked for an immediate turn and descent onto the Runway 27Y LOC (XA47). Conditions were VMC with the exception of a thin cloud layer around 8000-8500 MSL. We continued the checklist and addressed the No.1 Bleed Leak. The flight attendant and passengers were notified that we were returning for maintenance and that we would be landing in about 8 minutes. We prepared for a normal landing. ATC asked if we were declaring an emergency; to which we responded no. We diverted back to ZZZ and landed at XA57. No additional assistance was requested or needed and we taxied back to the gate using standard taxi. We were back at (XB07). We disembarked all the passengers. We contacted maintenance and made an appropriate write up and powered down the aircraft. We swapped into another aircraft and departed for [our destination.]EICAS messages and crew awareness.We had a dual engine bleed leak occur during climb.QRH procedure was complied with followed by an immediate return to field.[Suggest] better maintenance of Packs and Bleeds on the entire E145 fleet. There are frequent problems with both the packs and bleeds on a number of our aircraft.


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


Synopsis: EMB-145 flight crew reported they got EICAS messages for Number 1 and Number 2 ENG BLEED LEAK.
Date: 201311
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Normal Brake System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate; Taxi
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: About 30 minutes before departure we got Brakes System 1 Fault ECAM and notified Maintenance. They deferred Brake System 1 and we blocked out 4 minutes late after having to wait for the maintenance release. After start and before taxi we got N/W STRG Fault ECAM and I contacted Maintenance Control. He had me cycle the A/Skid and N/W STRG switch which cleared the ECAM. During the short taxi to the runway; I had to hold full left rudder or about 10 degrees left with the tiller to track the taxiway centerline. The First Officer and I both agreed that this was not acceptable and we returned to the gate. Maintenance replaced the BSCU black box which cleared the Brake System 1 deferred item and completed the autoland test to return the aircraft to CIII status. Maintenance finished the repairs and after a discussion with Dispatch about fuel for the flight we were OK with the same planned fuel and called for the fuel truck while they boarded the flight. After about 40 minutes and six calls to Operations and no fueler; but were told each time that the fueler was on the way; I called Dispatch again and raised the fuel 700 LBS to generate a new fuel request and advised him of our problems getting fuel. He said that he would advise Load Planning as they had a direct line to the fuelers. After a two hour maintenance delay this additional delay was NOT acceptable. The taxi and takeoff were normal. After landing we got Brake System 1 Fault and Steering ECAMS with some erroneous steering inputs that I corrected with differential braking and we exited the runway onto taxiway. During the rollout the Tower cleared us to cross the parallel runway but without steering I stopped short of the runway and we advised Tower of our mechanical problem and would need a tug to be towed to the gate. The First Officer contacted Maintenance and they wanted us to reset several circuit breakers which I declined after having just experienced the steering failure. I did not want to risk blocking the runway as just past the hold short line is a sharp turn that I did not want to attempt with differential braking between landing aircraft if we had another failure.




Synopsis: A320 Captain experiences brake and steering faults prior to departure and Maintenance replaces the BSCU. After landing at destnation the same faults return and the aircraft is towed to the gate.
Date: 202112
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While taxing out; I received a call from the No1 Flight Attendant. She asked me to come to the forward section of the aircraft. While walking up the aisle; I noticed an odor that smelled like dirty socks mid cabin. I asked No1 and No2 to go back and reconfirm my interpretation of the odor. They returned and confirmed the smell. I entered the cockpit and advised the Captain. We returned to gate and deplaned passengers (2). Later I was informed the reason the flight was deferred from the previous night was because of a suspected fume event. We deadheaded home to ZZZ1 on next flight.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported an odor that smelled like dirty socks mid cabin.  Plane returned to gate and passengers were deplaned.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: Citation V/Ultra/Encore (C560)
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While leveling off at FL270; my aircraft experienced a pressurization failure and at the same time a radio communications failure with ATC. The pressurization failure necessitated a descent to 10;000 feet. Unable to contact ATC; as PIC (Pilot-in-Command); I began [the] descent. Passing through 12;000 feet; radios began working again and reestablished contact with ATC. ATC acknowledged our situation and the flight continued to its destination which was approximately 20 minutes away. Advised ATC that we no longer needed assistance and landed uneventful at destination. Maintenance will be performed on the aircraft to determine cause. Due to the quick action of the crew; the aircraft and its passengers were able to land safely without incident.




Synopsis: CE560 Captain reported a pressurization and radio failure during cruise resulted in an immediate descent to 10;000 feet. Flight landed safely at destination.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: NCT.TRACON, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B SFO
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Human factors: Workload; Distraction; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Procedure; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: During the arrival (STAR) to landing phase at SFO; we experienced numerous changes and non-normal phraseology/arrival instructions from ATC.  From XXX pushback through just prior to descent into SFO; the flight was uneventful.  Just prior to our Top of Descent; ATC cleared us to descend via; the SERFR 2 RVAV into SFO.  The clearance was then amended to descend via except maintain 10;000' MSL.  We were then transferred to NorCal and cleared to descend to 6000' MSL.  Additionally; we were given clearance for the TIPP TOE Visual to Runway 28L to cross MENLO at or above 4000' MSL.  I loaded this approach in the FMS and was prepared to fly it.At around 9000' MSL we received a call from NorCal that said we were departing Class B airspace and would re-enter in approximately one mile and given a new frequency to contact NorCal on the other side.  This seemed a non-standard phraseology and gave me pause; as if we were not following our assigned clearance.  Both Pilots confirmed; we were on the correct routing; airspeed and altitude/path.  Following check-in with the new NorCal frequency; our clearance was changed to an assigned heading and cleared for the ILS 28L; to cross HEMAN at or above 3100' MSL.After the ILS was intercepted; and we were on final; we were again instructed to side-step to Runway 28R for landing on that runway.  That approach and runway was loaded into the FMS by the Pilot Monitoring and the approach and landing was flown without incident.  After shutdown; both Pilots discussed the high number of changes and the non-standard Class B airspace call during arrival into SFO.  While all changes were handed well by both Pilots and we were able to stay ahead of the changes; there was the high potential for error/safety incident in the dynamic high traffic ATC/SFO environment.In the dynamic and high traffic volume SFO airport; ATC should refrain from multiple changes; if possible. All these changes challenged the Crew to stay ahead of the aircraft and maintain Situational Awareness.  During this arrival; it was a very high work load that was challenged by a nonstandard Class B airspace call and multiple changes.  While both Pilots successfully/expertly aviated through the challenges; it allowed the potential for errors and/or a safety hazard.']




Synopsis: B737-300 First Officer expressed concerns with TRACON's excessive clearance changes during arrival to SFO airport.
Date: 201301
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: [There were] two cards. One I requested for Runway XX using Flaps 5. I looked at the reduced speeds and thought it was high for a 210;000 LBS B757. The [other] card was sent by request from Dispatch. The only environmental difference between the two is the new one is for 209;400 LBS vs. my 210;800 LBS card on the left. Vr and V2 are 13 and 12 knots less on the Dispatch message. Something is screwed up in some database or in the programming. When I tried to bug the first speeds; the V2 bug was within 13 knots of F5 Maneuvering Speed. I have never seen V2 that close to F5 Maneuver speed. I know there can be differences between Reduced and Max Power numbers; but look at the Max numbers at the left card versus the reduced numbers. The fact that Dispatch generated more reasonable numbers means the cockpit was accessing something else. Even after getting airborne; I was able to consistently generate unreasonably high reduced V-speeds at all sorts of weights. It shouldn't be 13 or 15 knots high. I'd hate to think of someone doing a high-speed reject at those unusually high numbers.




Synopsis: B757 First Officer questions takeoff V speeds generated by the FMC and asks Dispatch to send new numbers; which are significantly lower. The Dispatch numbers are used for takeoff.