elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202012
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Icing
Light: Night
Aircraft: Queen Air 65/70 (Seminole)
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Other unknown
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Encountered severe ice and could not exit the conditions before losing ability to maintain altitude. Continued on with the approach to landing starting the approach 400 feet low.




Synopsis: BE-65 pilot reported difficulty maintaining altitude on approach after encountering severe icing conditions.
Date: 202202
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DFW.Tower, TX
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Landing; Final Approach
Airspace: Class B DFW
ATC / advisory: Tower DFW
Aircraft component: Radio Altimeter
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Confusion; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: At approximately 200 ft. AGL on an autopilot off approach to DFW; we received multiple alerts most of which were too brief to decipher. One that we did catch was 'use manual spoilers'. Since auto spoilers rely on the radio altimeters we suspected 5G interference. The alerts were brief and all systems appeared to work normally during the landing. We were not able to analyze this until after the flight; therefore; Tower was not notified.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Pilot reported receiving multiple alert messages on final approach at DFW and suspected possible 5G interference.
Date: 202103
Location: GRR.Airport, MI
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp GRR
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown; No Specific Anomaly Occurred Unwanted Situation
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: The information for GRR discusses the clearance from light poles east of Gates B7 and B8; as well as north of the B Concourse.  To have the stated clearance from the light poles; you need to be on the yellow taxi line.  The problem is that the yellow taxi line has been removed from the ramp.  The line needs to be repainted so we can navigate to Gate 2; in all lighting/weather conditions; without the threat of hitting light poles. Repaint the taxi line to ensure taxi safety around the B Concourse. No taxi lines on ramp.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported taxi lines need repainting on this ramp for safe operation during all lighting conditions.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB-505 / Phenom 300
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Fatigue; Distraction; Confusion
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Arriving into ZZZ. We we're given a set of instructions that I can't recall the numbers of. I was Captain; and Non Flying Pilot in the right seat. ATC assigned a heading; altitude; and speed. I replied and I remember pointing to the selected altitude to verify. I was momentarily concentrating on a approach chart and map screens and when I looked up and saw our heading and descent were pointing us at terrain. At the same time the flying pilot said it didn't look right. As I reached to hit the mike to verify; ATC issued us a right turn and climb back to 8000 and a speed. Startled; the FP (Flying Pilot) followed the new instructions and got fast in the process. ATC called again about the speed and it was corrected. I had told the FP to slow too. He was slowing when ATC called. I assume the FP got the heading and speed assignment mixed up and I didn't catch the error but I am not sure. Perhaps we got incorrect ATC instruction?Fatigue may have been a factor. We worked late a couple nights before; and we stayed two nights in a loud hotel with uncomfortable beds. Once on the ground; and reflecting on this confusion with ATC; I called work and used our no-fault fatigue policy to stop flying for the day and get rested. Eventually; my copilot did the same. In hindsight; there were many things I could have done differently. We both should have been quicker to realize something wasn't right with our new course. I could have took the controls instead of calling out the corrections to be made. Though that did work and we got back on speed; heading; altitude. With complex instructions; I'll be more vigilant in verifying everything is correct going forward.


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


Synopsis: EMB-505 flight crew reported confusion with ATC instructions.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SNA.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B LAX
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Approaching DSNEE intersection; we encountered two significant wake events. Descending to the crossing altitude of 8000; with autopilot engaged; the aircraft banked sharply to the right. The autopilot went to CWS (Control Wheel Steering); and lateral guidance was lost. Regained control/composure with autopilot engaged; LNAV/VNAV level at 8000 when another wake encounter banked aircraft left greater than 35 degrees with significant buffeting.  Turned autopilot off and lost about 400 ft in the process of recovery.


Second narrative: On descent to 8000 on the arrival procedure; passing approximately 9500 MSL we experienced a semi-violent right roll due to wake turbulence from aircraft in front of us. The captain maintained aircraft control; but LNAV dropped off and the autopilot reverted to CWS (Control Wheel Steering). At approximately 8500 MSL we experienced another rapid roll to the left and a steep descent. The Captain disengaged the autopilot and corrected the bank (which was approaching 35-40 degrees) and began leveling off. I announced 'Altitude' as we passed 7800 MSL. He corrected the descent and began to climb back to 8000 MSL. The minimum altitude observed was 7650 MSL. I notified ATC of the wake turbulence and altitude deviation and requested a vector to exit the turbulence. The Controller immediately gave us a vector away from the preceding aircraft and a descent to 6300 MSL.


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported encountering wake turbulence from the preceding aircraft on the DSNEE1 Arrival into SNA that resulted in rolls to the left and right as well as a loss of 400 ft in altitude.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E SCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Manuals; Procedure; Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I took the position and in the briefing the controller mentioned that the departure may conflict with a VFR aircraft at 5500 feet. I do not recall him stating that he had stopped the departure at 5000 feet. I also do not recall what the pilot said reference his altitude on check in. When I noticed him level at 5000 feet I asked him if he was climbing and he stated he was given 5000 feet. I climbed him immediately but he entered a 6000 minimum vectoring altitude before reaching that altitude. The emergency obstruction altitude in the area is 3200 feet.I need to listen better to the assigned altitude on aircraft checking in.




Synopsis: A Controller assigned a departing aircraft 5000 feet which was below the Minimum Vectoring Altitude.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZHN.ARTCC, HI
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZHN
ATC / advisory: Center ZHN
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Company Policy; Manuals
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: I relieved a Controller from a Hawaii Center En-route position and during the position relief briefing was advised that an aircraft had been cleared direct to a fix which is a fix along the Hawaii Center and ZOA [Oakland Center] boundary entering non-radar oceanic airspace. The controller I was relieving also informed me that QKK radar was out of service and that the aircraft would soon no longer be radar identified and had already been terminated. Soon after the aircraft did indeed drop off of radar approximately 50 miles from the Hawaii Center/ZOA boundary. As discussed in previous reports Hawaii Center as a facility does not believe that aircraft must be established on an RNAV point to point route of flight prior to losing and terminating radar contact. This is contrary to the FAAH 7110.65 which states that aircraft can only be issued an 'impromptu route' when transitioning from one point to point route to another and must be provided RADAR separation until established on the new RNAV route of flight. The prevailing consensus at Hawaii Center is that since there is no traffic; RNAV aircraft can be cleared via direct to a fix into non-radar airspace. This issue must be addressed at Hawaii Center .The procedure at Hawaii Center should be to have RNAV aircraft established on a point to point route of flight prior to terminating or losing radar contact on aircraft IAW the 7110.65. This ensures aircraft navigation and also allows for the required oceanic non-radar to be ensured prior to the Hawaii/ZOA boundary as per the Hawaii SOP.




Synopsis: Hawaii Enroute Oceanic Controller reported their facility policy is misinterpreting the rules regarding aircraft handling when transitioning from a radar to a non radar environment.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: CAK.Airport, OH
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class C CAK
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Communication Breakdown; Physiological - Other; Distraction
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During climb out from Runway 28R I climbed through 10;000 feet and without thinking and forgetting that we are speed restricted at 250 kts until given normal speed in ZZZ I accelerated to 290 kts. A few minutes later ATC came on and gave us a vector of 20 degrees right for spacing after which we scanned the instruments and FO (First Officer) pointed out that he didn't think we were given normal speed and I promptly bugged 250 kts and slowed the aircraft back down. ATC never mentioned our speed. Later in the flight during our arrival into CAK I also passed through 10;000 feet and had forgotten to slow down until we were around 6;000 feet which I caught and proceeded to slow to 250 kts. Both times were due to my distraction from an earlier event in which I experienced a personnel issue with an FO that took a couple hours to resolve and I realized during the flight that I was mentally distracted and had FO fly the leg back and I performed pilot monitoring duties.


Second narrative: While on the arrival into CAK I noticed we were flying at 280 kts at 6;000 feet. I alerted the Captain who corrected the airspeed to 250 kts. We continued the arrival and landed at CAK. I need to be more vigilant with my cross checking responsibilities. After stating we were descending through 10;000 feet. I should have looked at the airspeed before chiming the Flight Attendant and starting the APU. From now on I will make sure that is the first thing I look at in my flow.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported experiencing speed deviation on departure and then during approach.  Captain stated distraction caused from a personal incident contributed to the event.
Date: 202108
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ; Class C ZZZ1
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Air Data Computer
Component problem: Malfunctioning
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: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After takeoff from ZZZ climbing through approximately FL220 in night IMC; we got an ALT DISAGREE EICAS message; followed shortly afterwards with a IAS DISAGREE EICAS message. During the climb the Captain's and FO's altimeters disagreed by several hundred feet; and the airspeed indicators by up to 15 knots. We leveled off at FL310 to evaluate the situation. At FL310; the airspeed disagree EICAS went away; but the alt disagree EICAS remained. At FL310; we recorded Capt/FO/Standby altitude as 31000/31350/31900 and IAS as 280/285/295 knots. We completed the appropriate non normal checklists. After conferring with dispatch via SATCOM; we determined that the safest course of action was to divert to ZZZ1. We coordinated the diversion with ATC; and landed uneventfully at ZZZ1. We felt it was unnecessary to declare an emergency; as the IAS disagree EICAS had gone away. The flight attendants were briefed for a normal landing.




Synopsis: Captain reported receiving altimeter and airspeed malfunction messages during climb and elected to do a precautionary diversion.
Date: 201605
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Fog; .75
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 402/402C/B379 Businessliner/Utiliner
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic Syst Reservoir Tank
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Time Pressure; Training / Qualification; Workload; Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Incident Aircraft (IA) departed under IFR control; weather 200 ft AGL ceilings and 3/4 SM visibility. IA lifted off the runway normally. At 100 ft AGL Incident Pilot (IP) selected the landing gear switch to the up position. Immediately upon initiation of the retraction cycle the IA began to oscillate in pitch and roll becoming increasingly violent. The IP; unsure of nature of the emergency and entering IMC; attempted to maintain sight of runway 33 for an immediate landing. Unable to do so because of poor visibility; IP [advised] tower and continued to climb heading 130. The IP selects the landing gear into the down position upon recognition of erratic landing gear position lights. Landing gear successfully extends into the down and locked position and IP elects to keep the gear in this position for the remainder of flight. Tower switches IP to Approach Control. IP checks in with Approach Control and coordinates maneuvering airspace block altitude 1500 MSL-2500 MSL heading 090 to troubleshoot. IP requests normal vectors for ILS 24. IP lands IA with normal gear down and locked indications and no abnormal events.There is currently no procedure for pilot preflight of the hydraulic reservoir plug due to its location and the required removal of panels to access that component. Because of this; it is impractical to recommend additional aircrew preflight items. Recommend a review of the execution of policies and procedures required to render an aircraft as 'safe for flight' following a maintenance action.




Synopsis: A C402 departed IMC for a ferry flight; but upon raising the landing gear the aircraft developed violent pitch and roll oscillations. After lowering the landing gear; aircraft control returned so the pilot returned to the departure airport where a hydraulic reservoir anomaly was discovered.
Date: 201410
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LFT.Airport, LA
Weather elements / visibility: Fog; 1
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-46 Malibu/Malibu Mirage/Malibu Matrix
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D LFT
ATC / advisory: Tower LFT
Aircraft component: Approach Coupler
Component problem: Improperly Operated; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was vectored for the ILS. The aircraft did not capture so I turned the heading back on and held the course manually. The Pathway info showed me above the glideslope so I manually used the VVI to intercept my altitude. As I descended I drifted right of course and corrected slowly back to center. I went into the fog at 700 feet. While I was correcting back; I inadvertently allowed my altitude to go below the glidepath. About 3/4 mile out (300 agl as best I remember) ATC called to notify me of a 'low altitude warning'. I leveled and held that altitude until about 1/4 from the runway when I descended to minimums and landed.I did something wrong programming the G1000. I had the approach loaded and the map/flight plan screen split. I selected 'approach' when cleared for the approach but the aircraft was still in 'heading mode' and never made the turn. I thought it stayed in heading until captured then the heading light goes out and the aircraft goes into approach mode.The aircraft is Synthetic Vision equipped and capable of coupled approaches. Normally it tracks perfectly. I don't know why today was different. This scared me. Had it not been for Synthetic Vision I would not have completed the approach. I'm going to call a CFII when I get home and schedule a flight review even though I'm not due. The reason this bothers me so bad is because I've done it right so many other times...I'm not certain what I did wrong today.




Synopsis: When the autopilot of his Garmin G1000; Synthetic Vision equipped PA-46 pilot failed to capture the localizer and GS on an IMC ILS approach he attempted to manually manipulate the pitch and roll commands to follow ILS cues.  Ultimately too low; Tower provided a low altitude alert and he utilized the Synthetic Vision to avoid ground contact and completed the approach to visual conditions and a landing.