elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LGA.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Regional Jet CL65; Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B LGA
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Second aircraft: Boeing Company Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: ATC mixed up an instruction meant for a company aircraft with a similar call-sign and gave it to us; descend 4;000' [from 7;000']. Captain read back the instructions correctly. They quickly gave us a climb back up to 7;000'. I was adjusting the V/S (autopilot was on) to a climb; but Captain suggested I hand fly back to 7;000' to expedite the climb; as a B737 departing Newark was quickly approaching. I did just that and climbed back up to 7;000'. Captain challenged the controller at a later time but he was brushed off. He later called the TRACON on the ground and cleared up that it was ATC error and not our error. It was a very busy time for the TRACON and ATC instructions were rapid with few to no pause in between transmissions.Avoid using nearly identical flight numbers in highly congested airspace.




Synopsis: First Officer reported impending conflict due to ATC clearance issued in error; which was attributed to similar call signs and congested airspace.
Date: 202002
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 50
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: About 300 ft. engine [rolled] back to about half power for 2 1/2 seconds then came back to full power. I turned right to the nearest runway [and] landed safely.




Synopsis: PA28 pilot reported executing an immediate landing after experiencing loss of power shortly after takeoff that lasted a few seconds.
Date: 202104
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZLC.ARTCC, UT
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZLC
ATC / advisory: Center ZLC
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Distraction; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Airspace Structure; Chart Or Publication; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: I was conducting training. Aircraft X was level at 12;000 feet. The trainee noticed Aircraft X was about to enter into a higher Minimum IFR Altitude (MIA) due to Minimum Safe Altitude Warning (MSAW) alert. Unfortunately a minute passed before he noticed due to handling a new VFR flight following on the other side of the scope. At the time I was on the information display looking up an approach plate. The nearest display was not configured for use so I was with my back to the scope on an adjacent sector. My trainee issued a 15 degree turn and climb to 13;000 feet and then issued a low altitude alert. The pilot unfortunately did not appear to begin his turn or climb for approximately 40 seconds. The turn is first seen on the radar right before the aircraft enters the 12;700 foot MIA at 12;100 feet and the trainee turned the aircraft an additional 30 degrees (45 total degrees) and the pilot complied immediately. Separation from the MIA was reestablished.With the help of the radar replay we identified that when the training team had pulled up the route to check the MIAs; the route line obscured the '27' of 127 and unfortunately we didn't notice and we both individually believed the route and altitude were safe. If either one of us had immediately observed the MSAW or if the pilot turned and climbed in a timely manner instead of delaying; I believe the aircraft wouldn't have entered the higher terrain box. As an aside; the event occurred before a position relief briefing had begun; but the relieving Controller was plugged into the position. I will use this as a reminder to carefully check routes for minimum safe altitudes and keep in mind that the route line can cover the text. I will and remind my CPCIT to use the phraseology 'immediately' for pressing clearances. I will remain vigilant; especially during times when I am training.




Synopsis: ZLC Center Controller conducting training reported he and the trainee did not realize an aircraft was on a route that placed it below the Minimum IFR Altitude.
Date: 201211
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: PSP.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class D PSP
ATC / advisory: Tower PSP
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Distraction
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading 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 Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At 400 FT; NAV was selected; aircraft track was within limits on the departure procedure. ATC questioned our position and said we were well left of course. The weather was clear and no other aircraft was in our vicinity. He then gave us a follow on clearance which negated the rest of the procedure. Our systems did not appear to be at fault. I would suggest fly the procedure using raw data instead of NAV.

Callback: The Reporter did not remember the heading but the weather VMC was not in any danger from terrain.

Second narrative: We had just taken off from Runway 31L in Palm Springs and were flying the Cathedral Departure. As soon as we checked in with Departure the Controller told us to fly direct to our Victor Airway NAVAID upon reaching 5;000 FT. We were in the turn when the Departure Controller asked us what the winds were. I told him about 4 KTS out of the north. He then said that several of the flights that had departed PSP; including ours; had been well left of the runway heading that the departure called to fly. I told him we were flying the GPS NAV and that we were right on the line. He then asked another aircraft ahead of us if they had flown the GPS NAV and they answered that they had. He then switched us to LA Center but before I switched over I asked him if there was an issue with course in question and he answered that he was going to check into it. We need to check the track of the magenta line and compare it with the heading on those departures that call for a heading to be flown rather than relying on the magenta line. We then should make ATC aware of the difference or go to heading select.

Second callback: The Reporter did not check the aircraft's heading during this event but remembers that visually the aircraft was not on the ground track that he was used to seeing. When he did look at the compass; they had already turned to the new ATC clearance off the Cathedral One.

Synopsis: An air carrier aircraft departed on the PSP Cathedral One and had a track deviation to the west of the 310 degree track in the GPS nav mode. ATC commented that other aircraft had the same behavior.
Date: 201309
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28R Cherokee Arrow All Series
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
Aircraft component: Cylinder Head
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At the time I was practicing maneuvers in preparation for my Initial Flight Instructor practical test. I was flying a Piper Arrow PA-28R-200 operated by the flying club. When I applied power to climb out of eights on pylons; the engine started running very rough. I picked a field and set up to land. Engine quit when power was reduced to idle. I landed without putting a scratch on the airplane. The Mechanic went out the next day and determined that the #3 cylinder had failed. Upon further investigation; it turned out that the valve stem broke from the valve head; destroyed the piston; and the cylinder head got stuck in the piston. The valve stem was separated from the valve head and part of the stem was still in the valve guide. Debris had then gotten from the #3 cylinder into the #4 cylinder; causing damage to the #4 cylinder as well. The Mechanic came out to the field for a few weeks and replaced the cylinders and parts that had failed and were damaged. Three weeks later; it was flown out of the field and returned back to its home.I was advised that you might be interested in this for the records. It was not a reportable incident or accident so it would normally not show up in any statistics; etc. P.S. - I passed my CFI check ride 2 months later after the airplane was repaired




Synopsis: The valve stem of a PA-28 broke which destroyed the number three cylinder and piston; subsequently damaging cylinder four. The engine then quit but the pilot made a successful off airport approach and landing.
Date: 201807
Location: ZHU.ARTCC, TX
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; 2
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: S-76/S-76 Mark II
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E ZHU
ATC / advisory: Center ZHU
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Normal Gulf of Mexico IFR operation. There [are] one or two controllers at the helicopter sector who do not understand the procedures on issuing an IFR clearance to an aircraft in uncontrolled airspace. I know that at least one controller will deliberately withhold a clearance because the aircraft cannot climb VFR. I have been a controller and I can listen and hear that the reasons given for not issuing a clearance were false. This particular controller will ask if the aircraft can climb VFR. If the answer is negative he will not issue a clearance. This controller and maybe others on that sector need training on where their responsibility ends and begins. Their responsibility does not include the aircraft's flight conditions. Deliberately withholding a clearance in adverse weather is not acceptable for conditions of flight and it can cause problems for the aircraft.




Synopsis: S76 pilot reported ATC had improperly withheld issuing IFR clearances.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: D01.TRACON, CO
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent; Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B DEN
ATC / advisory: TRACON D01
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Distraction; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related; Software and Automation
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Descending on FLATI arrival into DEN airport approx 25 nm northwest; got ADS-B RPTG 1/2 Fault caution [message] and associated GPS primary lost on NAV display. No degradation in navigation. Captain hand flew ILS approach to Runway 35L; no issues with radar altimeter.




Synopsis: Air Carrier First Officer reported on arrival into DEN the aircraft's navigation system lost the ADS-B and GPS signal.
Date: 201903
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Student
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Aircraft; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Object; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: It was my second solo and flight. I did my pre-flight and the weather briefing before the flight. Weather was good. Sky was clear and visibility was 10 SM. Winds were 5 knots.I was doing traffic pattern on Runway XXL. I did 8 takeoff and 7 landings. In the last landing after a smooth touch down on center line; I applied the brakes to stop the aircraft but I lost the directional control so aircraft skid off the runway and went into the grass and hit the taxiway sign D. [Aircraft went] further [and] came out of the grass and hit another aircraft by my right wingtip to his propeller. At that point; I secured the aircraft and evacuated quickly and waited for the ground assistance. Nobody suffered any kind injury. I have talked to my Instructor and we will do the additional training to help me improve in the areas lacking. I will have my pre-solo check again with Chief Flight Instructor before I fly solo again.




Synopsis: PA-28 student pilot reported a loss of control on landing that resulted in a runway excursion and contact with a taxiway sign and a parked aircraft.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: JFK.Airport, NY
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: B737-900
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B JFK
ATC / advisory: Tower JFK
Second aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We were cleared for takeoff on runway 31L full length. Shortly after liftoff; we experienced wake turbulence that rolled the aircraft into an approximately 15 degree left roll before I could stop the roll with a right aileron input. This stopped the roll; then a few seconds later the aircraft rolled to wings level. Prior to our departure; a B757 departed. When we were cleared to takeoff; the B757 was 500-1000 AGL on the upwind. As you may be aware; the FAA changed the criteria for wake turbulence separation for aircraft following B757 aircraft in December 2015. Prior to the change; the B737 was required to have a two minute or 4-5 mile radar separation behind a B757 before being cleared to takeoff. Under the new rules; there are no time or distance requirements for large aircraft; such as the B737; to depart behind a B757. Since the B757 has a higher thrust to weight ratio than the B737; it is often impossible for the B737 to rotate after the point of rotation of a B757. Therefore; wake turbulence encounters are sure to increase under the new rules for B737's departing after B757's. In the future; I will request a two minute delay from the tower prior to accepting a takeoff clearance behind a B757; unless I am light enough to be sure I can rotate and climb above their path.

Callback: Reporter expressed additional concern about recent FAA changes to in-trail procedures.



Synopsis: B737-900 Captain reported encountering wake turbulence departing JFK in trail of a B757.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: P50.TRACON, AZ
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: TRACON P50
Aircraft component: MCP
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: BRUSR1 RNAV arrival into PHX. Need I say more?Briefed as a threat and even mentioned the number of ASAP's related to this arrival. Issued by ATC a separate altitude at TENTS that was not published on the arrival. Issued an early speed reduction not published. Issued another early speed reduction that was not published. We told ATC we would not make the crossing restriction of 9000 at ZILUB due to the speed reduction and they said that was okay. We went to LVL CHG to descend as quickly as possible at 210 knots and received a TCAS alert which took both of our heads outside to look for traffic. When we came back inside we were at 7800' slightly below the BRIEZ restriction between 8000 and 9000. We leveled off immediately and resumed the arrival. ATC never mentioned anything and he flight continued uneventfully.Totally our fault for not resetting the MCP altitude window when we left VNAV; but that TCAS was perfectly timed to distract us. We failed to reset MCP altitude when switching from VNAV to LVL CHG due to a TCAS distraction.As a regular line pilot who reads the ASAP news; what in the world has to be done with this arrival into PHX? We either fly the arrivals as it is published or the controllers should revert back to issuing clearances. If they aren't going to just issue descend via then get rid of the arrival. We had 1 altitude and 2 speed reductions that weren't published within 100 miles. That can be a normal thing; but the speeds and altitudes they issued were impossible to make. If they give a speed reduction they should know we can't make the altitudes and then just issue a descend and maintain clearance. I know we messed this up; but this arrival is an ASAP waiting to happen when ATC gets involved; which it seems like they always do.




Synopsis: B737-700 First Officer reported missing a crossing restriction on the BRUSR1 RNAV to PHX. ATC had assigned one altitude change and two speed adjustments during the arrival and the crew experienced a TCAS event just before the altitude overshoot.