elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201512
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Medium Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Second aircraft: Medium Transport
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; 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; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A supervisor from Traffic Management Unit came over and asked myself and my radar assist position 'What's up?' He said hi and I said what's up with you. He said he was living the dream. I was a little busy giving clearances and when I got a break; I turned around and he was gone. I immediately smelled something bad. I looked at the radar assist controller and asked him if he smelled something rotten. He turned around and said he smelled something really bad! It got so bad that it distracted me from the traffic I was working. I gave a clearance to aircraft X to descend to 18;000 feet to miss opposite direction traffic at 19;000 feet. I then told aircraft X to descend to 16;000 feet with no delay. Aircraft X never heard me say no delay and was descending at only 500 feet a minute. I had a J-Ring up on aircraft Y; the aircraft at 19;000 feet. Both aircraft Y and aircraft X started to flash with a conflict alert. I turned aircraft X 40 degrees to the right to miss aircraft Y. This whole situation could have been avoided if I wasn't distracted by the extremely offensive odor left by the supervisor.Please don't come over and say hello to me if you are feeling sick or have to go to the bathroom.




Synopsis: A Controller descended an aircraft to 18;000 feet with opposite direction traffic at 19;000 feet. The descending aircraft did not descend at the expected rate so the Controller vectored the aircraft off course to ensure separation.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: The new procedure of calling out everything that is pushed and display in the cockpit during a change; makes the cockpit too busy and talking in critical stages of flight; during climb out it caused three missed radio calls and subsequent instruction. This goes along with excessive information on arrival and departure briefings; some have gone on for 10 minutes; glossing over what is important and setting a scenario of it getting lost in the small info.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported that new checklist response procedures and policy are interfering with cockpit and radio communications.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Data Processing
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I have flown the MAX aircraft for four legs on two separate occasions. The first time I flew it we landed and taxied clear at Bravo and I went to call Ground. I had gotten used to looking for the flight number in its new location; digitally displayed on the dash. I keyed the MIC and looked for the call sign; only to see that it had disappeared. While this only caused a temporary distraction; at busy airports it's not ideal. Since the flight number disappearing on landing doesn't make any sense at all; I figured it was an anomaly to that particular aircraft. However; I noticed the same occurrence on all four legs that I've flown MAX aircraft (2 different aircraft). The last time this happened was [a flight the day prior]. From best I can tell; the disappearance of the flight number is linked to either weight on wheels or airspeed. For example; when the airspeed drops below a certain value; the flight number disappears. Nonetheless; this is very distracting and occurs at absolutely the worst possible time as things get very busy for a First Officer (FO) as we exit the active runway; call Ground; and get our taxi instructions to the gate. Even more frustrating; is that it makes no sense whatsoever for the call sign to disappear at that time in the flight. It would seem that it should disappear once the aircraft blocks in at the gate. I'm hopeful that this [report] may shed some light on this issue and create an impetus for a software fix to allow the call sign to remain visible until the aircraft blocks in at the gate.Preventative Measures: 'I think this whole issue could be fixed with a simple software change. Please inquire to see what possibility exists to allow the flight number to remain visible until the aircraft blocks in at the gate.'




Synopsis: B737 Max First Officer reported that the flight number disappears from the digital display after the aircraft has landed making it difficult to communicate with ATC from landing to the gate.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: T75.TRACON, MO
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Cloudy; 2
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B STL
ATC / advisory: TRACON T75
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Being vectored for ILS 30R in STL. Approach told us to maintain 4000 ft; fly heading 270 and join the 30R Localizer. We intercepted the 30R Localizer and asked Approach if we were cleared for the approach. No response. The First Officer asked if we were cleared for the approach two additional times with no response. When we finally got clearance for the approach; we were one mile from the FAF and 1000 ft high on the glideslope. We told Approach we were going around and were vectored to the west to rejoin the ILS 30R. The same thing almost happened again; it took the First Officer three tries to get us a clearance for the approach; but he managed to get it in a timely manner and allowed us to commence a stabilized approach. Inside the FAF; Tower told us to 'maintain maximum forward airspeed to the airport' in actual IMC conditions.ATC needs to quit trying to fly everyone's aircraft and do their job; which is to coordinate traffic. STL simply forgot to issue us an approach clearance once we had joined the 30R Localizer. And to almost do it again after we went around the first time was unsatisfactory. Only continued persistence by the First Officer got us in the second time.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported being cleared to intercept the localizer at STL; but after intercepting cannot obtain clearance for the approach until it is too late to start. The second approach results in nearly the same scenario and only persistence by the First Officer produced a timely clearance.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm; Turbulence
Light: Night
Aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
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; Relief Pilot
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: I had just returned from my rest break and the First Officer (FO) and International Relief Officer (IRO) had climbed to FL360 in an attempt to find a smoother ride. At the time we had been in constant light turbulence with an occasional moderate bump. We were advised that we could find a smooth ride at FL240. After contacting Center we asked for clearance to FL240. As we descended through FL290 the ride improved considerably. As we passed through FL250 we encountered a small area of precipitation followed by a single severe bump. Both weather radars were on and there was not any weather painting. The IRO called to the Flight Attendants (FA) to see if they were OK. The lead told him that some of the FAs in the rear of the cabin had been hurt. After realizing there were injuries we declared an emergency and proceeded directly to the airport. Dispatch was notified and coordinated for medical personnel to meet at the gate.The fasten seatbelt sign had been on for quite some time prior to beginning descent. Several announcements had been made to insure everyone remained seated with their seat belts on. The flight attendants had been advised to discontinue their service and remain seated well before we began our descent.


Second narrative: We were approx. 1:15 from destination in a descent for ride conditions. All 3 pilots were in the cockpit. The Flight Attendants (FA) were notified to not do the final service and be seated for ride conditions. We asked for FL240 for a better ride and were descending through FL250 when we received a moderate to severe jolt. We were informed that several FA's were hurt and needed medical attention. We coordinated through dispatch and station for medical personnel to meet the flight.


Synopsis: B767 flight crew describes the conditions leading up to an encounter with severe turbulence that injures several flight attendants.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LAS.Airport, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZLA
ATC / advisory: TRACON L30
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification; Distraction
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; 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
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were descending on the KEPEC3 RNAV Arrival into LAS. We were cleared to cross CLARR at 13;000 feet and 250 kts. I used open descent to get down to altitude so that I would be at 250 kts early. As we approached CLARR we were told to descend via the arrival except maintain 210 kts at IPUMY. I was the pilot flying so I put in 8;000 feet in the altitude window and pushed the altitude button for a managed descent. At this point Las Vegas Approach told us to expect Runway 19R for landing. We had 25L set up and briefed. I was surprised by this and asked [First Officer] to set up the runway in the arrival. I looked in my approach plates for an approach to 19R and realized that we would need to request the RNAV visual. At this point I looked up to monitor the aircraft and noticed that we were in a descent through 11;000 feet. I felt that this was wrong and went back to the arrival chart to double check. I saw that we were below the arrival altitude and went to vertical speed 0; put 13;000 feet back in and did an open climb back to 13;000 feet. We crossed KEPEC at 13;000 feet and continued with the descent. I believe we were between 11;000 and 10;500 feet when I made the correction. We never got a call from approach control.I realize how dangerous this was and I failed to verify on my PFD that I was level at 13;000 feet and in managed descent. I took [the First Officer] out of the monitoring position by having him put in the new runway. I got distracted by looking up the approaches and took too much time away from monitoring by set up the [charts] to have the approach page ready. It was a clear night and I had terrain selected in my Navigation Display (ND); but this was a huge mistake. Should always have one pilot monitoring. Should have transferred control to [First Officer] and set up the runway and approach myself.


Second narrative: Being new to the Airbus; the Captain was unsure about 'managed' approaches. Our divided attentions at the time; due to FMS inputs; took attention from our crossing restrictions.


Synopsis: A320 flight crew reported overshooting a crossing restriction on an RNAV arrival into LAS when they were distracted with a late runway change.
Date: 201303
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Aircraft Logbook(s)
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Other Daily
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Company Policy; Logbook Entry; Procedure; Manuals
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: This is to bring awareness to a problem that affects all airplanes maintained at an Air Carrier Line Maintenance [Station]. This Station has had a large number of mechanics that do not have line experience. The training and direct supervision that is required for a safe operation is very poor. Per Air Carrier X General Maintenance Manual (GMM) XX-20-05 and ETOPS Manual YY-01-03; an Aircraft Airworthiness Release may be issued by a 14 CFR 65 Certified person possessing APPROPRIATE AUTHORIZATION (AW - Airworthiness qualified) as described in the Manual. In part this requires fleet specific formal training for each airplane type. The new mechanics are led to believe by verbal influence that they can sign-off their work- Airworthiness Release- based on just the possession of an Airframe and Powerplant (A/P) license. This confusion is enhanced by the use of electronic signatures. The screen in which work is being signed-off (by file number and password) does not reflect that an 'Airworthiness Release' is taking place by the input of the file number and password. These problems could be remedied by:1) Have the computer block access to the Airworthiness Release for those who are not qualified in the same way it blocks a Maintenance Release (MD) from being generated by someone who is not qualified. 2) An electronic sign-off block that reads - REQUIRED AIRWORTHINESS RELEASE SIGNATURE. 3) [A] clear identity of the person who is to give direct supervision for the work performed by those not authorized to sign for the work and what entails [describes] direct supervision. 4) On the job training (OJT) by someone who has experience for the aircraft type. 5) Formal training to learn an aircraft type along with a defined period of time for practical experience before AW authority is given. 6) Teach what is taking place with each electronic signature.




Synopsis: A line Aircraft Maintenance Technician (AMT) reports his station has a large number of mechanics that do not have line experience and training with direct supervision is very poor. They are led to believe that they can sign-off their work based on just the possession of an Airframe/Powerplant (A/P) license. Issues with electronic signatures were also raised.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Second aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: [While] taxiing off the ramp at ZZZ our left wing tip struck another aircraft's right wing tip. The event took place between Taxiway XX and XY while approaching Aircraft Y. There was a Ramp Employee in position to provide wing clearance of both wings. As we approached Aircraft Y; the Employee gave us the 'thumps up' all clear signal. As we continued to taxi the aircraft; it felt like someone tapped the brakes. I immediately stopped the aircraft. No one on the ground approached our aircraft to indicate we had struck Aircraft Y. At this time; our male passenger came up to the cockpit and informed us that we had struck the Aircraft Y. He also stated that he saw the Employee give us the 'thumps up' signal.We then were directed to park our aircraft by a different Ramp Employee. We parked the aircraft; shut down; and escorted our passengers off our aircraft. Upon making contact with the Captain of Aircraft Y; he stated that he saw the Ramp Employee give us the 'thumbs up' as well. There were no injuries to any passengers; ground employees; or crew members of both aircraft. Only names; emails and phone numbers were exchanged between the pilots and the [FBO Company] Manager. [This statement] is from the Captain of Aircraft Y. While parked and performing post-flight duties at ZZZ; I observed Aircraft X taxiing along the west side of the ramp between our [aircraft] and the grass median separating the ramp from Taxiway XZ. There was one Ramp Worker positioned on our wing who gave the crew of the taxiing Aircraft X a thumbs up as the aircraft approached ours. As soon as the aircraft was close to passing our winglet; he seemed to realize the aircraft would not clear and was unable to signal Aircraft X's crew to stop. They subsequently impacted our winglet with theirs.




Synopsis: Corporate jet Captain reported striking the wing tip of another aircraft while taxiing.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZLA.ARTCC, CA
Light: Daylight
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 ZLA
ATC / advisory: Center ZLA
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Airspace Structure; Company Policy; Procedure; Manuals
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Worked with the new OAPM (Optimization of Airspace and Procedures in the Metroplex) procedures and Aircraft X did not have the COMIX STAR onboard so they were unable to fly the STAR. Update system.




Synopsis: ZLA Center Controller working with new OAPM arrival procedures received an aircraft that did not have the new procedures available in their navigation database.