elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202106
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZAN.ARTCC, AK
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Military
Operator: Military
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Tactical
Flight phase: Initial Approach; Descent
Airspace: Class E ZAN
ATC / advisory: Center ZAN
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Airspace Structure; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I cleared the aircraft at pilots discretion to 5;000 feet. He was entering a 4;400 foot MIA (Minimum IFR Altitude); then a 3;200 ft MIA. Aircraft was cleared for approach and told to maintain at or above 3;200 feet until inbound at the Initial Approach Fix. Aircraft descended to 4;000 feet in 4;400 foot MIA. I need to re read approach clearance phraseology; I believe there was better phraseology available to clear the aircraft.




Synopsis: A Center Controller reported their use of improper approach clearance phraseology resulted in an aircraft descending below the Minimum IFR Altitude.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: A80.TRACON, GA
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Climb
ATC / advisory: TRACON A80
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: While working north departure A80's ARTS interface with all adjacent facilities failed. I first noticed that the next sector wasn't taking my hand offs; and then all departing aircraft began to flash 'DM'; indicating that a FDIO departure message was required. I informed the CIC immediately. All aircraft had to be manually tagged up; departed in the FDIO; and handed off to the next sectors; and all arriving aircraft had to be manually handed off to us from ZTL. The fact that the interface failed isn't necessarily the problem. The complete lack of expeditious handling to fix the problem was the greater evil; as the situation did not get fixed until well into the mid shift. After asking several people involved; it seems the nature of the failure is still unknown; and just seemed to 'fix itself' hours after the failure. I feel the situation was lucky in a way because it happened during beautiful VFR conditions when we weren't very busy. That being said; had this happened during a busy push in IFR conditions I believe it could have resulted in such a way that safety could be compromised and efficiency would be down the drain. We have a lot of people on staff to maintain this equipment and correct any problems that occur. I find it hard to believe that 5-7 hours is an acceptable time frame to remedy an ARTS outage. It's not safe; and our customers deserve much better. Recommendation; when things break; the people that fix them need to identify the problem and fix it. Either more training or better support might be needed. A debrief for those involved identifying the problem and outlining the corrective actions taken is already overdue in my opinion. What broke? Why? Why did it take so long to fix? We had to work hours in bad conditions and I would like to know what is being done to prevent a repeat situation. Also; some recurring training on manual hand off procedures at ZTL may be in order. It seems that automation is relied on so heavily these days that some folks forgot the old trusty 7110.65. That's embarrassing.




Synopsis: A80 Controller voiced concern regarding a recent ARTS failure and the time needed to correct the problem. The reporter recommended a detailed post review on the event.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While climbing out through 4500; the FO called out 'airspeed' and I immediately increased my climb rate and slowed to 250. Apparently; 250 was never entered into the box (L2) and neither one of us caught in on the preflight. The highest I saw was approximately 280 knots.


Second narrative: While programming VNAV climb data at gate prior to departure; FO neglected to place 250 kt. restriction in L2; although he did place CMS in L3. CA did not cross-check VNAV climb data. Climbing out of SFO on TRUKN2 RNAV departure; the FMC reverted to ECON mode out of 3020 feet; commanding a climb speed of ~310 knots. The CA; hand-flying; followed the flight director. The FO noticed an airspeed of about 280kts indicated around 4500 feet only after noting a lower-than-normal rate of climb. The CA reduced power and pitched for 250kts; putting the aircraft back on-profile.


Synopsis: First Officer failed to enter the 250 kt speed restriction during preflight. During climbout at 3010 feet the aircraft accelerated to 280 kts. The error was detected at 4500 feet and the aircraft slowed.
Date: 201504
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MCO.Airport, FL
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: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower MCO
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: We were cleared for takeoff.  The aircraft that had just departed reported 'we may have hit something.'  Since it was night time and below 80 knots; I elected to abort the takeoff and wait for a runway inspection. Re-ran all the checklists and re-ran [Onboard Performance Tool] data. We departed as normal.


Second narrative: After the Captain set takeoff thrust; the Tower told the preceding aircraft (another carrier) to contact Departure. The other carrier acknowledged and said 'sorry to do this to ya; but we hit something on takeoff'. Tower said 'Company (us) did you hear that?' I stated 'what was it?' Other carrier said they didn't know what they hit. The Captain elected to reject the takeoff. It was at night; so we wouldn't be able to tell if it was a low risk strike like a bird; or something higher risk like a deer; alligator or aircraft part on the runway.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew executed an RTO at approximately 70 KTS when a preceding aircraft advised Tower that they had hit something on their takeoff roll.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MGM.Airport, AL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 6
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D MGM
ATC / advisory: Tower MGM
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Landing Without Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We were a flight of 2. Tower cleared us to enter left downwind for landing on 28R. At midfield downwind; tower cleared the flight to land; number two; behind traffic on short final. When lead was at 400 feet on a close in left base; tower asked flight to extend downwind for landing straight in jet traffic. Lead made a climbing right turn to extend downwind. At some point during this arrival; the second aircraft developed a radio problem and was NORDO; and continued to a landing.  Tower told jet traffic to execute a missed approach.




Synopsis: The wingman in a flight of two light aircraft reports being cleared to enter a left downwind and cleared to land. After the lead aircraft turns left base the Tower issues instructions for both aircraft to extend the downwind for jet traffic; but the wingman does not hear the instructions and lands. The jet is issued a go-around.
Date: 201408
Location: DCA.Airport, DC
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZDC
ATC / advisory: Center ZDC
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We exited holding and we were cleared to RANJR to cross at 280 on the TRUPS RNAV STAR to DCA. Once turning toward RANJR; we were advised of a storm cell in the vicinity by ATC and then requested left deviations. We were cleared left deviations and USAAY when able along with an expedited descent to FL210. We made our deviation about 15 degrees to the left and began the descent. Shortly thereafter; we received a frequency change. When I checked in with the new frequency; I advised that we were deviating left for weather; direct USAAY when able. While reprogramming and briefing the arrival and approach; the controller asked us where we were going. I said again left deviations and then USAAY when able. What appeared to be a supervisor jumped on the frequency and advised us that we were coming down on top of everyone. We were given a new altitude of FL230 and a 150 heading. They stopped another aircraft at FL220. We were eventually cleared to 14;000 feet and direct to SUPRT to rejoin the arrival. Shortly thereafter; we were handed off to Potomac Approach. The rest of the flight continued normally.




Synopsis: When the B737-700 crew; flying direct to cross RANJR at FL280; was cleared to deviate off the TRUPS RNAV STAR for weather;'...direct USAAY when able; descend and maintain FL210;' they did so. After a frequency change an urgent response from ATC advised they were descending into traffic and to stop their descent at FL230 and fly heading 150 for traffic.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: C83.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: Marginal
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Trainee
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The controller working Flight Data at the time cleared an aircraft off of C83 via the obstacle departure procedure (ODP). Flight Data then coordinated the departure climbing to 4;000 ft. on the ODP with me. I was working the sector responsible for the airport at the time and released the departure. I radar identified the departure aircraft; verified altitude and climbed them to 6;000 ft. As the aircraft was maneuvering in the climb it appeared they were not on the ODP. I then asked the pilot to verify they were climbing via the ODP. The pilot responded that they were direct to a fix but have the terrain in sight. At this time the aircraft was climbing through 2;600 ft. in a 3;000 ft. MVA (Minimum Vectoring Altitude) on a heading towards higher terrain. At this facility we are able to vector below the MVA as long as the aircraft is not restricted below the MVA and within 900 ft. of the MVA. Using the '900 ft. rule' I issued a low altitude alert and a turn away from higher terrain. I also re-cleared them to climb to 6;000 ft. immediately. After the aircraft was above the MVAs I continued vectors to destination and issued a Brasher warning with a number to call upon landing.I believe this event was the result of a pilot deviation. I do not think anything could have been done to prevent this event as a controller.


Second narrative: Departed C83 airport IFR; I deviated from the ODP (Obstacle Departure Procedure) because I had relatively good visual with the ground and was proceeding direct to destination; when ATC informed me of the error of my ways and vectored me back to the ODP heading. The weather was marginal VFR to the point that sky diving was going on at the airport. I realize now that ATC has no idea that I had visual with the ground and that I increased their workload to handle my errant ways.


Synopsis: TRACON Controller and the pilot reported the pilot deviated from the local Obstacle Departure Procedure.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; 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
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Climbing through 10;000 feet right over ZZZ VOR; I noticed an ozone/oil odor in the cockpit. I mentioned it to my FO and he said he smelled something abnormal as well. Immediately; I received a call from my Flight Attendant asking if we smelled anything. We donned crew oxygen; ran the QRH; [notified ATC] and diverted back to ZZZ. After landing; we had ARFF inspect us and taxied back to the gate. Upon removing our oxygen masks; we still smelled the fumes - as did Maintenance Personnel when they entered the aircraft. The Flight Attendant mentioned that passengers as far back as row 13 could smell the fumes as well.


Second narrative: Approximately 10 minutes after departure [at] 13;000 feet; CA mentioned an abnormal odor possibly ozone or oil burning. I confirmed I smelled something abnormal as well. A few moments after CA mentioned the odor; Flight Attendant called the cockpit and asked if we smelled an odor and we confirmed the odor was in both in cockpit and cabin. At that time the CA donned his oxygen mask. CA then asked to run the QRH. I donned my mask and ran the QRH. CA then decided to divert back to ZZZ and [notified ATC]. CA flew the plane while I maintained communications with ATC and provided updates and requests. Upon landing; CA communicated with emergency vehicles and confirmed no signs of smoke or fire. We taxied to the gate and CA shutdown the aircraft. Identification: CA initially noticed the smell. I concurred. The FA also called to notify us of a cabin smell as we were discussing the smell. Unknown at this time what caused the odor.


Synopsis: EMB-145 flight crew reported detecting an 'ozone or oil' odor during climbout. After completing the QRH procedure crew executed an uneventful return to departure airport.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were completing checks and briefings; about to depart ZZZ with a full aircraft. There were 2 cockpit jumpseat riders. I; as Captain; heard the verbal request for clearance to close the entry door. I was unable to turn my head around to see; but I heard the request; and we were ready to close the entry door; so I stated that it was okay to close the door. The door subsequently closed; and we went on our way to ZZZ1. After the entry door was closed; but prior to closing the cockpit door; the Number 1 Flight Attendant advised me that the door had been closed by the agent without her permission. I told her what had happened; and we noted that there had been a miscommunication. After the flight; in ZZZ1 during the debrief; we noted that the agent should not have closed the door without talking to the Number 1 Flight Attendant. Also noted was the fact that due to the busy and crowded flight deck; and the difficulty for me to turn around; and see if the person asking if it was clear to close; I apparently had given clearance to close to the agent and not the Flight Attendant. We agreed that agent was in the wrong to have closed the door without coordinating with the Number 1 Flight Attendant.Agent closed the door without the consent of the Number 1 Flight Attendant. This occurred because the agent failed to follow the correct procedure. The Flight Attendant is supposed to close the door; not the agent.Agents need to be trained that they must have the Number 1 Flight Attendant there to close the entry door. Pilots should make every effort to see that the person they are giving clearance to close is the Number 1 Flight Attendant and not the agent; although; as I stated this can be difficult to do at times with a busy crowded cockpit and doorway. The most important thing is that the agents not close the door without the Flight Attendant.




Synopsis: A319-100 Captain reported the gate CSR did not follow company policy during the final passenger boarding procedures.
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZDV.ARTCC, CO
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Night
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZDV
ATC / advisory: Center ZDV
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: During our preflight crew briefing; I had advised the crew of the expected turbulence on the flight plan; the maximum listed was a '1.' We were west of GLD and had started deviating for weather. I had instructed the cabin crew to go to moderate turbulence procedures. The ATC report from aircraft ahead of us was for continuous light occasional moderate turbulence. We had nothing other than green displayed on the radar in the immediate vicinity of the aircraft. We were more than halfway through the area of weather when the green area on the radar began to expand. The other colored areas remained the same size. We were in a left turn to take us further away from the storm area abeam GLD; when without warning; we hit an area of heavy moderate almost severe turbulence. The autopilot disengaged and the aircraft was push upward about 900 FT. The VNE and VLE bars closed in on each other. We attempted to keep the aircraft in a level pitch attitude. The First Officer notified ATC we were unable to maintain altitude due to turbulence. The turbulence lasted for about twenty (20) seconds. At the end of the turbulence we gently descended back to FL330. We called the cabin to check on possible injuries. The A Flight Attendant stated that one of the other crewmembers had spilt coffee but there were no injuries known at the time. I had the crew remain seated. When I was confident that we were clear of the turbulence area I had the cabin crew get up and check on the passengers. The A Flight Attendant reported no injuries. No other aircraft before or after us reported turbulence of this nature.




Synopsis: A321 Captain describes an encounter with unexpected moderate to severe turbulence at FL330 causing the aircraft to climb 900 FT before returning to assigned altitude.