elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: CYHM.Airport, ON
Weather elements / visibility: 2.5
Light: Night
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: Center CZYZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Relief Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Procedure
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: The flight to CYHM was turbulent and we never made it to the planned cruising altitude due to turbulence. The arrival weather was approximately a 300 ft ceiling and around 4000 meters visibility and winds gusting from 25-30 knots at approximately 80-90 degrees off of runway heading. I was sitting in the Jumpseat as an additional crewmember for the flight. The conditions in the cockpit were loud and I was unable to hear much of what was being said between the pilot flying and the pilot monitoring. I knew the planned approach was the ILS to runway 12. I did not hear much of the brief due to the noise in the aircraft. As we proceeded into the terminal area; we were cleared to the APGOM fix and cleared for the ILS. Again; I did not hear much of what was being said cross-cockpit between the PM and the PF when given the approach clearance. I did catch that the PF wanted to make sure that the aircraft was stable for the approach as early as possible. I wholly agreed with this philosophy due to conditions at the field. The approach was flown to a successful landing. After the fact I was informed by the Line Check Airman that the aircraft descended to 2200 ft (the min altitude for the no-pt (No Procedure Turn) routing) when it should have been at 2700 ft (the MSA for the sector we approached from and/or the minimum altitude for the procedure turn routing). The No-PT routing minimum altitude of 2200 ft is confusing when the MSA is 2700 ft. Additionally; the APGOM fix is depicted on the plan view of the approach plate; but not the profile view; making it difficult to determine what the minimum altitude is for that fix when cleared direct versus given the No-PT routing. The CAT-II ILS plate shows a No-PT routing from the same fix; but with a minimum altitude of 2700 ft. The approach plate is ambiguous for what altitude should be maintained when cleared to the APGOM fix and the approach.




Synopsis: Air carrier Relief Pilot reported descending to 2200 feet after being cleared for the CYHM ILS Runway 12 direct APGOM. Pilot cited confusion as to the allowable minimum no procedure turn (NoPT) altitude and noted a disparity between the ILS Runway 12 NoPT (2200 feet) and ILS CAT II Runway 12 NoPT (2700 feet) altitudes.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZID.ARTCC, IN
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZID
ATC / advisory: Center ZID
Second aircraft: A300
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; 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
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: While on descent at approximately 12;000 FT at 300 KTS (as assigned by ATC) we encountered turbulence resulting in a right and left roll of the aircraft. After slowing to 250 KTS and at approximately 10;000 FT we encountered a violent roll to the right followed by a violent roll to the left; with nose and up and down variations. The autopilot was disengaged and the aircraft was recovered to normal flight. We informed ATC of the incident. The First Officer noticed an aircraft at our 12 position descending along our path. I queried ATC of the aircraft type and was informed it was a heavy A300. We concluded that we had encountered wake turbulence. The First Officer noted bank angles in excess of 45 degrees. Although shaken; the passengers all indicated that they were ok and not in need of medical attention. The First Officer and I both indicated soreness in our necks but did not seek medical attention.




Synopsis: CRJ Captain reported wake vortex encounter in trail of an A300 on approach to SDF that caused violent roll left and right.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Human factors: Physiological - Other; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Passenger
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I am the C FA (Flight Attendant). I was walking towards the aft of the aircraft doing a compliance check after the demo. As I was putting the demo kit away; that's when I smelled the fuel smell. I immediately went forward to let the other FAs know and ask if one of them could come back so I could have another opinion since I'm a newer FA and still learning my airplane noises and smells. The A; came back to smell and she said that it was definitely not normal and called the Captain right away. Multiple passengers were asking about the smell as well. I started to develop a headache and the [A] started to get nauseated. They made an announcement that we were going back to the gate to de-plane while Maintenance figured out what was wrong.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information.]


Synopsis: Flight attendants reported odor/fumes in the cabin; after which they notified the Captain; subsequently; they returned to the gate.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: PVW.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E LBB
ATC / advisory: TRACON LBB
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: KLBB TRACON cleared me for RNAV (GPS) RWY 22; IAF UCEPE. I was told 'report when crossing UCEPE inbound.' Radio communications were good at 5;200 MSL; marginal at 5;100; but communications were lost upon descending to 5;000 ft MSL. Approach and landing were uneventful. Recommend revising this IAP so that the minimum altitude for the approach segment (UCEPE through CUBKY) is 5;200 ft MSL.




Synopsis: Small aircraft Pilot reported marginal radio communications deteriorated from IAF [Initial Approach Fix] altitude to an uneventful landing.
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: PA-32 Cherokee Six/Lance/Saratoga/6X
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Staffing; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working the radar East sector and radar South sector combined. We had been holding aircraft for several hours because of traffic out to the east. There was turbulence; sometimes severe; in the area. Local started releasing aircraft and extra spacing was needed eastbound. Aircraft X was inbound from the east. I cleared the aircraft direct to the fix on the ZZZ arrival. I pointed them out to Radar West and attempted to flash the handoff to ZZZ1; the handoff failed. I was distracted by numerous other aircraft and answered them and took care of other separation. I then went back to Aircraft X and attempted another flash to ZZZ1; again it failed. Aircraft X was still approximately 15 miles west of the boundary and I intended to go back and manually hand the aircraft off but got very busy with other aircraft on frequency and did not get back to Aircraft X in time. I then accomplished a manual handoff to ZZZ1 Approach.At ZZZ Tower we have very old and antiquated equipment. We have been asking for STARS or anything better for over a decade. I have had several instances in the past where the ARTS system just seemed as if it could not keep up; i.e. dropped tags; any auto handoffs; spotty radar coverage; etc. I feel better equipment would greatly facilitate a smoother operation and allow more time to handle more traffic and unusual traffic situations. Also our staffing is running at bare minimums and most times there are no bodies to help out during busy times. I feel an extra set of eyes during a very busy period would have prevented this occurrence.




Synopsis: Approach Controller reported airspace incursion with adjacent Approach Control when automated handoff failed; citing old equipment and staffing as contributory.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Aircraft component: RPM/N1/N2/Etc Indication
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During takeoff roll; after 80 kt.s; Master Caution illuminated briefly. FO (First Officer) didn't say anything at first. Then he said 'over temp'. I looked at the speed and it was 125 kts. I looked down at the engine instruments and the #2 engine N1 numerical presentation was displayed in red with a red box around it. I looked back at the speed and it was 131 kts. V1 was 134 kts. I immediately applied the Phase One and rejected. FO did not call tower to advise our reject. After taxiing clear; I noticed a Level One ENG 2 EXCEEDANCE . Ran appropriate checklists and taxied back to the gate. This was the second time in the same day that this aircraft rejected for the same thing. Maintenance ended up replacing the engine fan speed sensor.Poor analysis; troubleshooting and resolution of the same issue earlier that morning.The maintenance sign off of the morning's reject before I got the airplane was a joke. Both rejects in this aircraft that day are extremely serious in nature and the first of the two wasn't treated as such. That kind of maintenance practice is gonna get someone killed. It's an understatement to say rejecting 3 knots before V1 is highly dangerous. Further; I would have rejected at a much lower speed had my FO been doing his job correctly. I don't think he was looking at the engine instruments during the takeoff roll as he should have been. When the Master Caution came on; I doubt he wasn't looking where he should have been to notice the alert. And when he finally did notice the alert; he said the wrong problem. He said 'over temp'. There was no over temp it was pretty clearly spelled out in amber 'ENG 2 EXCEEDANCE' Is this the result of him not bringing his A Game to work that day? Is this the result of poor training? Is this the result of hiring low hour [type aircraft] pilots directly to the right seat of a heavy? Whatever the case; I was on my own during this one.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported a rejected takeoff complicated by First Officer being slow to recognize an engine issue close to refusal speed.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Aircraft component: Oil Pressure Indication
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During take off roll; approximately 80 knots; I noticed an amber light associated with the #1 engine. I immediately took control of aircraft and rejected take off. As soon as I retarded the throttles; the Amber light extinguished. It all happened so quickly; I didn't get a good look at exactly which light illuminated. It was either the engine oil clog light or the oil high pressure light. I relayed this information to mx. We preformed all associated procedures prior to contacting ramp mx. After contact with ramp maintenance; it was determined that the issue was transient in nature and we proceeded to destination without further incident. We feel this was an anomaly and not a continuous issue.


Second narrative: As the pilot flying; while on the takeoff roll; around 80 knots; the Captain noted an amber annunciator light associated with the left; engine. He immediately announced 'reject' took control of the aircraft; and safely brought the aircraft to a complete stop. Outstanding job on behalf of recognition by the captain and safe smooth RTO. The reject was between 80-85knots. We coordinated with ATC; exited the runway; performed all ECAM; and QRH procedures. We then coordinated with maintenance; determined the trouble as a transient issue; and departed for destination with no further issues.


Synopsis: Air Carrier flight crew reports rejecting a takeoff at 80 knots for an amber engine warning light. The light extinguishes before the reject is completed and maintenance can find no faults. The next takeoff is uneventful.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Aircraft experienced an engine rollback with extremely high EGT (approximately 891 degrees C); leading to an automatic engine shutdown and engine fire indication. All Memory Items were accomplished and the Engine Fire checklist was accomplished as well (engine fire indication extinguished after the Fuel Control switch was placed to CUTOFF). An Off-Track divert was performed with a 15 NM offset to the left. After the offset was established; a descent below FL280 was executed to FL205 initially. Contact with ATC was made through [ARINC] and a clearance was received to maintain FL200 and cleared to divert. Upon arrival; the [flight] crew executed the ILS; landed safely overweight; and stopped on the runway for inspection from ARFF. Flight was towed to a remote parking site to deplane crew and passengers.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information.]


Synopsis: Boeing 777-200 flight crew reported that during cruise they had an engine rollback and fire indication and proceeded to divert uneventfully to an appropriate alternate.
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZAB.ARTCC, NM
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class A ZAB
ATC / advisory: Center ZAB
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working Sector 90 and Outlaw and Jackal MOA/ATCAA's had gone active about 5-10 minutes previous before the incident. Sector 46; the sector that works departures off of PHX; to the southeast; yelled across the room and said watch that guy when the sent a PVD of a B737 to my scope. PHX Approach had given the aircraft a vector out the departure gate; when they were supposed to have give the aircraft a full route clearance via TFD VOR because the gate was close due to the MOA/ATCAA's being active. I immediately got on Guard and called the aircraft that were working in OUTLAW and told them to maintain the altitudes of FL220B290 in OUTLAW; and to acknowledge with an IDENT. The aircraft working in the military airspace never IDENTED but instead came up on my frequency and asked why and I told them the reason and to maintain the assigned altitudes. By this time the B737 had already deviated the MOA/ATCAA airspace before being turned out by the Sector 46 Controller. I am not sure the procedures within PHX Approach airspace that notifies controllers that the departure gate is closed; but maybe something that makes the controllers more aware that the military airspace that is in their airspace is active would be more helpful.




Synopsis: ZAB Controller described a restricted area incursion by a PHX Air Carrier departure indicating that the vector issued by the PHX Departure Controller most likely caused the infraction.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MRI.Tower, AK
Aircraft: Cessna 170
Operator: Personal
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZAN
ATC / advisory: TRACON A11
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working Local Control position. Aircraft X departed enroute. I entered a Center flight plan for the aircraft to receive continued flight following beyond TRACON airspace to his final destination. When nearing the boundary of TRACON airspace; the TRACON controller terminated Radar services instead of handing the aircraft off to Center. This creates a potentially dangerous situation in which an aircraft which had requested flight following is not being provided with those services.As a matter of standard practice; TRACON terminates Radar services to VFR aircraft when they near the boundary instead of handing the aircraft off to TRACON. This occurs even when Tower has done the extra work of entering a Center flight plan; alleviating that work from TRACON.Unless an aircraft requests termination of flight following; hand-offs should be performed for all aircraft so they are not denied the VFR flight following services they request. Services should be provided in accordance with F.A.A JO 7110.65 7-6-1.




Synopsis: An MRI Tower Controller observed the TRACON Controller terminate VFR services to an aircraft instead of handing off the aircraft to the Center.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Second aircraft: Fighter
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was on an IFR flight plan; southbound at 9;000 FT approximately headed toward my destination. Center informed me that I had fast-moving traffic at my approximate 2 o'clock position; 9;500 FT; moving eastward. The Controller stated that the traffic was military and flying VFR based on his squawk code. This traffic was not talking to Center. The Controller called me back a few seconds later and told me the traffic was now descending. I looked to my 2-3 o'clock position to see a military jet coming directly toward me; but descending. Before I could disengage my autopilot; the jet passed directly under me; 100 FT below. I informed the Controller of the near-miss and requested that the jet be tracked and paperwork filed on the incident. I feel that this potential accident was caused by the reckless conduct of the military pilot(s); who were flying a high-performance aircraft at relatively low civilian general aviation traffic altitudes and not communicating with ATC while doing so. There was sufficient cloud cover in the area to warrant being on an IFR flight plan; especially if they were descending for approach to any of the local airports. However; conditions at 9;000 FT were VMC. I also wonder if ATC could not have warned me sooner of the impending traffic conflict.




Synopsis: A single engine aircraft pilot reported a near miss with a VFR military aircraft descending through 9;000 FT and not talking with ATC.