elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZMA.ARTCC, FL
Light: Night
Aircraft: Other
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZMA
ATC / advisory: Center ZMA
Reporter organization: Government
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Weather
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Due to the lack of thorough communication between Area FLM's; TMU and inaccurate ESIS (display of information board); Weather re-routes of traffic re-routed to the Caribbean area were not clearly understood.  As a result; and based on inaccurate and/or misinterpreted information; a sector was prematurely combined to facilitate volume to do a Skill-Check; not knowing that a high volume of Fort Lauderdale Landing traffic was being rerouted due to severe weather towards this combined sector.  As a result of high volume; coupled with high complexity with weather reroutes; the Caribbean Sectors were put in a vulnerable situation with the last minute; unexpected traffic.  Nonetheless; the ATC teams worked through this well without incident. Lessons were learned with regard to the importance of thorough; timely and accurate coordination and status board displays.  Recommend focusing on thorough/complete and accurate communication transfer and information display.




Synopsis: Confused coordination/communications efforts between FLM's and the TMU and inaccurate information provided to the controllers regarding weather required re-routes in the Caribbean caused difficulty for ZMA.
Date: 201601
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 3 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Ramp requested Zero Fuel Weight (ZFW) of 298;861 for the release. They also requested ballast fuel. I sent the release without realizing that the ZFW they sent included the ballast fuel. The release was sent with a payload of 40;085 plus 38;000 LBS of ballast fuel. The actual payload was 2;085 LBS. I did not realize the error until the flight was approximately 60 minutes from destination.I relied on the ZFW that was given to me without realizing the ramp had already included the ballast fuel in the ZFW request. By doing this additional payload was on the release. I did not notice the payload when I calculated the flight as I was looking at my inputs which matched the request.




Synopsis: The Dispatcher sent a release that was for 38;000 pounds more than actual for the aircraft; as the ballast fuel was added twice. Once by the ramp with the Zero Fuel Weight (ZFW) info and again by the Dispatcher who saw the ballast fuel request; but didn't realize that the ramp had already included the ballast fuel in the ZFW.
Date: 201403
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: [Subject:] CLIMB and DESCEND VIA clearances and phraseology.Sometimes 'less is more' but the use of abbreviated clearances with something as complex as some of these STARS and SIDS is very likely to result in confusion and error for both pilots and controllers.Some of the bigger threats that these procedures contain:Similar language [with differing intent]:- '...MAINTAIN [FL/altitude XXX]...' deletes all charted altitude restrictions but '...CLIMB VIA; EXCEPT MAINTAIN [XXX IAS]...' requires compliance with published altitudes [but not published speeds].- Similar sounding clearances with opposite meanings. Example: 'RESUME PUBLISHED SPEEDS and RESUME NORMAL SPEEDS'Poor/contradictory charting: - Bold Print superseded by small print. Example: Top Altitudes may be lower than charted constraints and noted only in small print at the bottom of the chartCounter-intuitive procedures- Top Altitudes remain in effect even when cleared direct to a point beyond an intersection with a higher charted altitudeConflicting procedures- ICAO vs. FAA differences are a particular threat for long haul operations




Synopsis: A Boeing Widebody first officer addressed his concerns regarding ambiguity of abbreviated ATC/flight crew phraseology with respect to complex RNAV SIDs and STARs.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Piper Twin Turboprop Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Climbing out from ZZZ. After about 3 minutes; had some electrical smoke and odor in the cabin. Aircraft was recently out of a large inspection and repair process. I pulled almost all the circuit breakers that were not absolutely essential for flight. Left electric fuel pumps breakers in for auto pumps. Transponder for operating near a Class B air space. And all engine instrument breakers to keep track of engine temps; torque and fuel flows. Pulled most of the breakers one by one to see if any one at a time would eliminate the odor and light electrical smoke issue. Not paying good attention to aircraft during this trouble shooting process; and emergency as I considered the event; at my position and altitude while climbing; I inadvertently entered the ZZZ1 Class B airspace. By the time I realized the aircraft was in the outer ring at or above 4;000 feet after working the electrical issue; I was already exiting the airspace to the south east and had climbed to about 10;000 feet. The odor started thinning out and as each circuit breaker was reset and I turned towards my home base airport of ZZZ2 to land and report the problem to our maintenance base. Next time; I would most likely handle the event the same way because my concern was mostly an electrical fire possibly becoming a major event. I could have turned a bit more east but that was not on my mind when the light smoke and odor started to become obvious inside the cabin.




Synopsis: Piper Twin Turboprop pilot reported 'electrical smoke and odor' shortly after takeoff. Fumes dissipated after troubleshooting problem.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MMGL.Airport, FO
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground MMGL
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: Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: We departed the gate and were instructed to taxi to Runway 28 via 'D; A; A1 to the Runway 28 holding point.'  Upon glancing at the taxi diagram; referencing the our Airway Manual (AM); to verify our taxi route; I quickly realized a discrepancy between the instructions we were given and the chart -- there was no A1 taxiway that reached the runway.  Before we could inquire about these instructions; the controller gave us a 'follow the aircraft ahead' instruction.  Digging a little farther; I began to notice that this discrepancy was worth a report submittal because the 10-9 Chart for MMGL differs from the AM; and neither the 10-9 Chart nor the AM agrees with the airport in reality.  Upon your own review; you will discover that there is a difference in taxiway names between the 10-9 chart; and the AM; specifically as it relates to the A taxiway.  Additionally; in reality there is an A1 taxiway; properly signed; that parallels the A taxiway toward the approach end of Runway 28.  There is also an additional taxiway; A2; that connects the A taxiway to the runway; prior to the approach end of Runway 28 which is not charted on either chart. The airport NOTAMS reference a change in taxiway naming convention; however; the NOTAMS do not make sense with either the current charts; or with reality; and in fact lead to more confusion.  I believe that by paying attention to aircraft position with reference to the published chart; I was able to help the Captain remain in the green; and hopefully trap this threat from snaring other crews.  In deliberating whether to submit this report; I concluded that since this threat affects the broader aviation community; the report would be more appropriate for resolving this discrepancy to the benefit of everyone.




Synopsis: Air Carrier First Officer reported confusion regarding the taxi instructions from MMGL ground control and the taxi chart.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: TEB.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: HS 125 Series
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D TEB
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Upon departure from TEB we were flying our clearance which was the RUUDY 4 departure from Runway 24. The departure was briefed by both crew members prior to engine start and then reviewed again during taxi out for takeoff. After takeoff we began our climb and were following the course as depicted for the RUUDY 4 SID. Less than 1/2 mile prior to WENTZ we were at 1;500 FT MSL and I continued to the climb to 2;000 FT MSL. Upon reaching 2;000 FT MSL and just as the pilot not flying noticed the altitude and began to query me about it; ATC informed us that the initial altitude for the departure was 1;500 FT and to go ahead and stay at 2;000 FT no problem. We continued the SID with no further deviations. After further review with the pilot not flying we agreed that I had misinterpreted the departure instructions. At the time I believed we were to climb to 2;000 FT MSL as long as we made WENTZ by 1;500 FT MSL. After reviewing it I see where this mistake came from; which was reading and letting my mind see what it wanted to see and not actually what was in print. To prevent this in the future I think a more thorough pre-departure briefing between crew members is imperative and must occur every time even during VMC departures and not on a depicted SID. Although these briefings are a part of our SOP's there is obviously still room for improvement and will definitely be addressed internally in our fight department.




Synopsis: HS125 Captain reports misunderstanding the RUUDY 4 crossing restriction of 1;500 FT at WENTZ; thinking it is at or above; and continues to 2;000 FT. ATC informs the reporter of his error.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZOB.ARTCC, OH
Flight conditions: VMC
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 ZOB
ATC / advisory: Center ZOB
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: Enroute to ROD; ATC instructed us to amend our clearance: direct to KLYNE then direct to DJB and then filed route. I entered KLINE as the cleared to fix and it appeared on the FMS as reasonable slight turn left of 20 degrees approximately 40 NM ahead. The first officer agreed and I executed the turn. After a few moments ATC asked if we were proceeding to KLYNE at which time I reentered fix as KLYNE and saw that it was same relative distance from our original position but instead was approximately 20 degrees right turn. We made the correction with no further issues. No traffic conflict occurred. Due to the close proximity of these two identically pronounced fixes; it would be advised that one of the two fixes should be renamed.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported entering 'KLINE' into the FMS instead of the correct spelling 'KLYNE.' The two fixes are in close proximity and the error was not initially apparent.
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: Tower SFO
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Shooting FMS Bridge Visual 28R SFO; called B777 in sight at beginning of approach. He was low and ahead for [Runway] 28L; wind was tail wind blowing toward B777. [We] discussed wake; at about 1;800 FT we commented on how it looked like he was heading in front of us for [Runway] 28R and how at night with no depth perception this was dangerous when we noticed him turn hard left. He had overshot [Runway] 28R and was in fact turning in front of us; we immediately got a 40 degree left wing dip and added power and recovered ending back on V-path; speed and course guidance. We were above 1;000 FT with wind blowing away from us to the B777 [so we] chose to continue.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported wake vortex encounter in trail of a B777 on approach to SFO.
Date: 202103
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: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight; Routine Inspection
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Prior to pushing; the outgoing Flight Attendant told me the air bag at [Seat] XXE was out. After some clarification she meant the life vest at [Seat] XXE was falling out. This distraction had us focusing on adding the MEL to the Release. We we're subsequently given the HAZMAT Dangerous Goods Form just prior to push and failed to verify that there was no remark on the Release regarding the HAZMAT.




Synopsis: B737-800 First Officer reported Dispatch Release missing required Dangerous goods information.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Cessna Citation Sovereign (C680)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Check Pilot; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Experienced unidentifiable fumes in the cockpit accompanied by light haze in cabin. Donned mask and goggles and attempted to get through checklist while expediting return to field. Requested priority handling and landed uneventfully. Crash/fire/rescue followed us to ramp and also smelled odor but could not identify the source despite a thorough inspection.


Second narrative: Climbing out of 10;000 [feet]; crew noticed odor and slight haze in cabin. Donned mask and diverted to departure airport while attempting to run checklist. Requested priority handling; IOE Captain took controls and landed aircraft uneventfully. Crash fire rescue meet aircraft upon landing and followed us into the ramp. Fire fighters noticed odor; but could not identify source.


Synopsis: CE-680 flight crew reported fumes during initial climb. Flight crew executed a return to the departure airport.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Vnav descent into ZZZ.  Cleared approach after ZZZ intersection for 16L.  Passing ZZZ intersection; level change was set.  Altitude was set to 1;900 feet.  App mode armed.  Speed set to 180 and flaps 5 selected. Called for gear;  flaps 10 and landing checklist. Captain set 100 feet for touchdown thinking we were still in VNAV.  I did not verify that setting.  I realized we were going further below glide path and cross checked the altitude. Realizing we were low I disconnected autopilot added power and climbed gently to intercept glide path.


Second narrative: Inbound to outer marker ILS 16L ZZZ; plane descended 900 feet below crossing altitude. Pilot Flying took plane out of VNAV into LVL CHG; airplane did not level at FMC altitude of 1;900 feet. MCP altitude was touchdown zone at time of incident.


Synopsis: A B737 air crew got low on the glide slope on final approach. There seem to have been inputs made to the mode control panel; which were unverified. This led the Pilot Flying to think the aircraft was in VNAV when; in fact; it was in level change; resulting in flight below the glide path.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Flap/Slat Indication
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Logbook Entry; MEL; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Crew reported Number 2 Slat on overhead and transit light was intermittent in flight and Maintenance was checking it out downstairs [in the E/E Compartment]. I told him [Captain] to have Maintenance call me when through checking. Maintenance called and said it was the Number 3 Slat and not the Number 2; and he could find no faults. So MEL XX-X-04 was issued. After log page was entered into Maintenance Computer Program; a co-worker notified me it was entered as Krueger flap and not slat. Looked at aircraft routing and found it made a round trip (ZZZ/ZZZ1/ZZZ) and was en route back to (ZZZ). [I] took the aircraft out of service for repair. Better 'read back' procedure should have been followed. I thought the Captain was reading his write-up; but I now do not believe it was written up yet; and the Mechanic read back the MEL; and not the write-up. I should have asked him to read back the write-up.




Synopsis: A Maintenance Controller describes the confusion that led to an MEL deferral of a #2 Slat Overhead and Transit light intermittent in flight report; when in fact #3 Krueger flap was the discrepancy. The B737-300 aircraft was later removed from service for repairs.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SAT.Airport, TX
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: SAT posted 4 total delays of 30+ minutes to this flight when the plan from [company]'s stance was to push on time and attempt to get an earlier clearance time to depart. If SAT had called us to ask about a delay we would have informed them of this; but they elected to violate the FAR's and post a delay themselves in excess of their 15 minute allotment multiple times.




Synopsis: Reporter advised not being in the loop relating to delays and aircraft pushing to get an earlier release time at SAT airport.