elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 140 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Shortly after takeoff in climb out we experienced a pack 2 valve close that could not be reset. Determined max alt of 25;000. We leveled at 24;000 and worked fuel numbers for the remainder of the flight. Shortly after; a pack 1 overload message appeared and both packs shut down. We [notified ATC] and began a descent to 10;000 ft requesting vectors to return to [departure airport]. Determined that we were roughly 2500 lbs overweight and began burning fuel for a normal landing. Once landing weight was achieved a normal ILS approach then accomplished with no further incident.Cabin pressurization system failed.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information]


Synopsis: EMB-140 flight crew reported returning to departure airport after first losing one pack and then the other.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZLC.ARTCC, UT
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZLC
ATC / advisory: Center ZLC
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: A B737 declared a medical emergency and was cleared direct to SLC. I took a point out on the aircraft and gave away control for anything that they needed as I was working an arrival sector. I heard SLC approach call Sector 3 so I picked up the line and heard the Sector 3 Controller tell Approach that they were turning the B737 back to go over SPANE on the arrival. The Approach Controller told him NO clear him direct SLC; all of the coordination had already been done Controller to Controller. I hung up and almost immediately received a call from Sector 3 saying point out we are turning the B737 over SPANE. I asked why they were going to put him over SPANE when the Approach Controller had just called them and said to clear the aircraft direct to SLC. He said he was working on it; I told him unable on the point out then; clear him direct to the airport. Anyway; shortly thereafter the aircraft turned back direct SLC. The whole point of this report is when there was a medical emergency; the controllers took care of the coordination to allow the aircraft the type of service required to get the aircraft on the ground ASAP. Flow control then gets involved with SLC approach and they decide to turn the aircraft back over the arrival which would cause this emergency to fly longer and further then if they had left the aircraft on the original route. This happens all of the time. Apparently there is some type of LOA that mandates the two flows get together and work out how they are going to handle emergencies and emergency aircraft. There is something seriously wrong with the way we deal with emergencies and emergency aircraft. SLC Approach will cry that they have mountains and so it is more efficient for them to fly the arrival routes. I am a pilot and absolutely disagree. It is a cultural thing and the delays that we cause; case in point -tonight; may cost lives in the future because of the convoluted inefficient way we do business. Tonight having flow direct the Sector 3 controllers to turn the emergency aircraft that had already been approved direct back over the arrival fix was unconscionable and embarrassing. Had I been working that sector I would have refused and left the aircraft direct. Something needs to be done.




Synopsis: ZLC Controller voiced concern when Traffic Management refused to permit a direct airport routing for a medical emergency aircraft even after all controllers involved voiced approval.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown; Ground Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Other Person
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: My student pilot was taxing on their solo and while going to refuel the aircraft they hit the wing on a fence near the fuel pumps. I was not there to witness this. My student was unfamiliar with the area they were taxing in. This same situation has happened to other aircraft in the past couple months. In order to keep this from happening in the future I think the airport needs to paint a taxi line so pilots have some guidance on where they are in this tight area.




Synopsis: C172 instructor reported student pilot hit wing on fence near fuel pumps due to poor condition of painted taxi lines.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZTL.ARTCC, GA
Light: Night
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZTL
ATC / advisory: Center ZTL
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X was enroute to ZZZ. I initiated a handoff in a timely manner. As the aircraft's one minute vector line neared the adjacent ARTCC boundary; I call the [sector] to take the handoff. I called a second time and was forced to hang up the line and answer another aircraft. I put a heading of '270' in the fourth line of the data block; sent the [sector] a data block (PVD); and called for a point out. When I received no reply; I issued the turn to Aircraft X. A moment later; I called again for a point out and received the reply 'point out approved.' In my opinion; there were no extenuating circumstances that would preclude the next sector from accepting this handoff. I could not observe any limited data block that would be in possible confliction with Aircraft X. Traffic volume in either facility was not high. I instructed Aircraft X to make a 'left 360' and proceed direct ZZZ VOR as previously cleared. By this time; my Front Line Manager was calling the adjacent facility to determine the reason for this situation. The [sector] controller called me and asked if I called for a handoff (which is not required by the 7110.65). I replied 'twice' and the [sector] controller said 'sorry; radar.'Many controllers are under the false notion that there is a requirement to call for a handoff. These numerous calls for handoffs are used in place of poor scan and situational awareness. There is no requirement to call for a handoff. There is; however; a requirement to keep aircraft out of sectors without a handoff or pointout. Controllers are getting lazy in their scan to evaluate traffic and accept handoffs in a timely manner. Some controllers are setting their sector maps up with no space outside of each sector to see traffic coming. These controllers should re-evaluate each sector map setting and the time that handoffs are accepted.




Synopsis: ARTCC sector was handing off a data block to an adjacent sector. The receiving sector was not taking the handoff and would not answer the landline when called with verbal coordination. The Controller working the aircraft had to give the aircraft a 360 degree turn to not enter the next sector.
Date: 202002
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
Aircraft component: Normal Brake System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: The aircraft to be used for training was previously squawked for a front nose wheel shimmy. Maintenance at our flight school looked it over as well as the main wheel brakes prior to my scheduled flight and said that the aircraft was safe to fly. My student and I followed the correct procedures and checklists for engine-start and taxi. Both the student and I checked the brakes prior to taxi and found them functioning properly. As we were on our taxi for departure and while making a right-turn (at a safe speed) onto D from B; our left brake locked and caused our aircraft to exit the taxiway just east of [taxiway] pointing toward the active runway. I immediately reduced power and pulled the mixture to I.C.O to stop our aircraft. I reported our deviation to Ground Control and requested assistance and then informed them that I would contact our school. The school's maintenance personnel helped us unlock the brake and we were able to taxi back to the school ramp. Maintenance then investigated the issue in more detail.




Synopsis: Pilot reported a main wheel brake locked up on taxi; causing a taxiway excursion.
Date: 201403
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Light: Night
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Aircraft Documentation
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher; Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Other Pre-Departure
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: 14 Active Placards showing in Display View (DV) for a B777aircraft. Called Maintenance Control; they verified clean aircraft.  There are NO placards on the aircraft.  Attached are the screenshots and messages sent to those in Management.  This issue happens A LOT.  Has been going on since I have been on SABRE/DV.  Not getting resolved quick enough in my opinion.  May lead to safety of flight and or violation.

Callback: Reporter stated mechanics and Maintenance Control use SCEPTRE and they see all maintenance items; but Dispatch uses the SABRE System computer program and their system does not see all aircraft items; such as some 'open' logbook items or cleared placards.  So Dispatch has to use Dispatch View (D/V); a user interface program that allows dispatchers to see what Maintenance Control sees in SCEPTRE for individual aircraft.  Dispatch View (D/V) really is just a 'work around' approach to address the information limitations of the SABRE System that Dispatchers have to contend with. The recent situation he referenced in his report; involving a B777-200 aircraft showing 14 Active Placards in their Dispatch SABRE System that were displayed prior to his issuing a Dispatch Release; is just the tip of the iceberg and is not an isolated incident. Especially since Maintenance Control; while using SCEPTRE; said the B777 aircraft was 'clean' and no placards existed on the aircraft. Reporter stated that since the merger of the two airlines; the different computer systems that Maintenance and Dispatch uses makes the actual 'status' of the aircraft difficult to determine due to a lack of compatibility. He sent this report; hoping that awareness of the problems within air carriers that operate computer systems that do not talk with each other; except through a limited 'band-aid' approach; will be made known. He works midnight shift.



Synopsis: An air carrier Dispatcher reports about the difficulty dispatchers have determining the actual 'status' of their aircraft due to a lack of compatibility between Maintenance Control's SCEPTRE computer system and the SABRE system that dispatchers have to use.
Date: 201905
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Other Training
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Other Person
When detected: Other In Training
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: When I was going down to do door training on a A320; I noticed the safety lights were positioned wrong. The cabin pressure light was on the left side of door and the slide indicator was on the right. This needs to be fixed before there is an accident.




Synopsis: Air carrier employee observed incorrect placement of safety lights on a A320 cabin door.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LAS.Airport, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B LAS
ATC / advisory: TRACON L30
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On approach into LAS; RWY 26L visual. ATC turned us close behind preceding traffic.  As we approached the FAF; our separation decreased to a point where ATC directed an S-turn on final for spacing. As we got really busy monitoring the turn altitude and airspeed in the S-turn; the 1000 foot and 500 foot call was late. As Pilot Monitoring; I inadvertently set Vref speed instead of approach. Pilot Flying caught and maintained extra speed. Airport conditions included gusty winds and wake turbulence on final.




Synopsis: B737NG Captain reported a tight turn to final at LAS led to some procedural errors.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 3
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 36
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On my initial climb out I set my autopilot to heading mode and altitude at 3000'. I turned heading to 130 to intercept the [on-course] radial and continued to climb. I was instructed by ATC to continue my climb to 6000'. As I was talking to ATC and setting up altitude changes my autopilot must have disconnected. As I looked back I saw that I had entered an unusual attitude and began a recovery sequence. I recovered the loss of control of the aircraft but had lost significant altitude and my heading was stabilized in somewhat of a westerly direction. I was given further instructions by [ATC] with a vector to intercept the airway. The remainder of my flight to destination was uneventful.I can only add that I am so thankful to the many instructors who schooled me on upset recovery procedures. This was indeed a very sobering experience and has given me a new perspective on IFR flights. Number one lesson learned is to not trust the autopilot without constant monitoring of the flight instruments. Number two; although a successful outcome; I believe I could have controlled loss of altitude better. I practice upset recovery with my instrument students teaching them proper procedures as a CFII but that should not be a substitute for my own personal practice which I will now incorporate in my practice sessions.




Synopsis: Beechcraft A36 pilot reported recovering from an unusual attitude after the autopilot disconnected without his knowledge.
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ORD
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Distraction; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; No Specific Anomaly Occurred Unwanted Situation
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: While taxiing E on H from Z; I noticed that the airport signage was still incorrect. The sign showing the direction of turn from J onto SS is incorrectly depicted as a 135 degree turn; instead of the actual 45 degree turn necessary. Airport or city personnel's failure to correct this error in a timely manner; since I first reported the issue to Tower on [date 1]; and again on [date 2]. Figure out who is responsible for correcting the error; and implement a more proactive and timely method for correcting the error.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported incorrect taxiway signage at from Taxiway J onto SS at ORD depicts a 135 degree turn when it is a 45 degree turn.
Date: 201211
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B767-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Right engine lagged behind left engine on descent and descending through approximately 8;000 feet; right GEN OFF EICAS message appeared followed by right engine low oil pressure.  The right engine then flamed out.  We declared an emergency with Approach Control; followed by an uneventful landing.  The flight attendants and passengers were briefed for a precautionary landing.




Synopsis: B767-200 Captain reported right engine flamed out on approach. An emergency was declared and the flight landed without incident.
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZFW.ARTCC, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: MD-82
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZFW
ATC / advisory: Center ZFW
Second aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: I was the pilot flying. We were in level flight at FL280 on the BYP arrival indicating 310 KTS assigned. We were just inside 10 miles in trail with a Boeing 767; as [the B767] flight was cleared to descend through our altitude. The wake turbulence event began with increasing vibration both heard and felt in the controls followed by an uncommanded roll to the right of almost 30 degrees. I disconnected the autopilot and corrected with aileron and slight rudder inputs to regain control of the aircraft. We leveled off momentarily and then continued our descent. The Captain called back at this point to check on the flight attendants. They were all seated at the time; as were the passengers; and no injuries were reported. The Captain then made a short PA to the passengers to explain the event. As we continued our descent; I slowed the aircraft to 280 KTS and shallowed our descent rate. However; passing through FL260; we encountered a similar wake turbulence event that was handled in the same manner as the first. At this time; I began a turn to the right to get out from behind the preceding aircraft and the Captain informed ATC that we had experienced a wake turbulence event and were turning off course. ATC approved the turn and after enough time had elapsed to provide ample divergence between our course and that of the aircraft ahead; we were cleared back to BYP and flew the remainder of the arrival. After each event; the controls displayed a slight vibration that lasted for several minutes after the wake turbulence event ended. After a few minutes; the vibrations dissipated and the aircraft flew and operated normally. We reported the event in the [log] and requested an inspection from maintenance to confirm the condition of the aircraft.


Second narrative: [No additional information in narrative 2]


Synopsis: An MD-82 flight crew reported a wake vortex encounter from the preceding B767 on arrival into DFW that resulted in an uncommanded 30 degree roll and some flight control vibration that persisted beyond the event.