elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZME.ARTCC, TN
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZME
ATC / advisory: Center ZME
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: At cruise we were cleared to ALICE waypoint direct VUZ. We were deviating left of course for buildups and navigating around the weather using the radar. We were IMC; while deviating; and we exited the IMC conditions and discovered a rapidly building cell was directly in front of us. We turned immediately to the right to avoid this new weather threat and we were caught in a very significant downdraft and heavy rain. Since we were in the turn; the downdraft caused us to exceed 30 degrees of bank; we got to approximately 45 degrees and we lost about 400 feet-500 feet from our assigned altitude of FL350. We quickly recovered the aircraft to level flight and exited the area of weather build ups. With the severity of the downdraft; I did not disconnect the automation for fear of exacerbating the condition we found ourselves in. We did not experience any turbulence during this event.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported a 45 degree bank angle and 400-500 feet loss of altitude resulted when he encountered a thunderstorm cell at FL350.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZAB.ARTCC, NM
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
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; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
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: I accepted the hand off for a B737 from Sector 50 outside of the Jackal MOA/ATTCA. I had just recently taken the sector. ERAM was showing Jackal hot but there was no displayed altitude. I also had just received two hand offs from Sector 50 who were both landing ELP. The trailing aircraft; a GLF5; was 55 KTS faster than the B737 which I had to sequence for ELP. I started my sequencing and then realized I still did not have any altitudes displayed in Jackal. I went back to my tools and displayed them to realize that it was active to FL390. At this point the B737 was about 1.5 to 2 minutes from clearing the airspace. The aircraft in Jackal limited Data Block showed they were at around FL340. The other controllers URET should have been alerting them prior to hand off. I would suggest that an altitude post automatically when airspace goes hot in your stratum. If you don't want it to display than you can suppress it; but the default should be on. It should also show hot only when it is actually in your stratum; currently it will show active even it does not penetrate your airspace.




Synopsis: ZAB Controller described an airspace incursion event inidicating the ERAM system did not contain needed airspace information.
Date: 201904
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: None
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Vehicle Driver; Ramp
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Near miss of a tug which was put in neutral and emergency brake. The tug went toward an engine of a B777 by itself. I noticed this from another gate and ran to stop the tug inches away from the engine.




Synopsis: A Ramp Agent reported noticing a tug rolling towards a parked aircraft and ran over and stopped it.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Snow
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower DEN
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: Aircraft was issued departure clearance Runway 34L. Weather was IFR; and I was unable to visually see Air Carrier X or the runway out the window. When Air Carrier X was approximately halfway down the runway; I noticed a primary target on the runway at the very end. AMASS did not alarm even though the 'bars' were up and there was very clearly a primary target on the runway. I issued an advisory to Air Carrier X; but did not cancel his take off clearance. Air Carrier X appeared to climb out normally and reported he hadn't seen anything on the runway when queried. An OPS vehicle was dispatched and reported a snow berm or bank. OPS reported they took action and the primary target disappeared; and did not return. Last night was one of the most complex sessions I've had in the Tower. I feel I was working traffic at 100% of my capabilities and felt very near to my limit; even at the slowed pace I chose to work at due to the many external factors (working multiple positions combined; volume; complexity; and most of all; weather.) With uncertainty that overtime would be approved; we were expecting a reduction in the arrival rate. That did not appear to happen and; in my opinion; safety was compromised for volume. The three CPCs in the Tower were already fully saturated with the amount of traffic they were running. If overtime wouldn't have been approved; there would have been no way that the CPCs left would have been able to handle that volume. I was unable to provide Air Carrier X with my best service. Safety was compromised when we were assured that safety would have priority over volume without question.




Synopsis: DEN Controller described an AMASS alert on the departure runway as an Air Carrier was taking off; elected to issue only an advisory; the anomaly was later determined to most likely have been a snow bank.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZOB.ARTCC, OH
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZOB
ATC / advisory: Center ZOB
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We departed and were given an initial heading of 090. After being handed off to Cleveland Center; we were cleared direct to FNT on course. The FO selected FNT and placed it at the top of PROG page one executed. Then I thought he selected LNAV; but failed to verify it. Our heading of 090 was very closely aligned with the course to FNT so we didn't notice that we were not proceeding direct to FNT. Once we passed over FNT; we continued on our 090 heading instead of proceeding on course to our next waypoint. Approximately 50 miles past FNT; Cleveland called and asked what our clearance was and we noticed we were off course. We notified them we were off course and requested on course. We were cleared direct to our next waypoint and continued our flight without further incident.The FO and I should pay better attention and verify that what automation mode we select is actually executed properly.


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


Synopsis: B737-700 flight crew reported a track deviation resulted from their failure to verify auto flight mode.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Second aircraft: Small Transport
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Aircraft Y was observed below 3;000 FT on ILS approach into the airport. Aircraft X was also inbound to the airport and advised he was #2 behind aircraft already on approach and to expect approach clearance upon receipt of the first aircraft cancelling IFR. I issued a descent to 4;000 FT and holding instructions to Aircraft X at the intersection to hold southwest on the localizer course. Aircraft X advised 'minimum fuel.' He then advised that the aircraft ahead of him was on the ground; trying to cancel on the UNICOM frequency. I asked Aircraft X to tell Aircraft Y to come to my frequency and cancel and Aircraft X said; 'I'm too busy.' That's when I noticed he was descending through 3;400 FT and had not entered holding. Aircraft Y cancelled IFR on my frequency and I then tried to clear Aircraft X for approach; but he did not respond and was level at 3;000 FT flying towards the airport. He then requested vectors to the localizer and started climbing on his own back to 4;000 FT. I issued vectors and he joined the localizer; flew the approach and landed.




Synopsis: Enroute Controller described a loss of separation event when traffic was issued holding instructions awaiting a 'landing assured report'; experienced a fuel issue; and descended below assigned altitude.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Challenger 300
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: When aircraft was powered up; we noted a message on the Flight Management System (FMS) CDU's stating 'GNSS [Global Navigation Satellite System] NOT AVAILABLE'. We checked the status page for faults; and noted that neither GPS was acquiring satellite signals. We initially attributed it to the fact that we were surrounded by metal buildings; and that the GNSS system would eventually acquire the constellation. In addition to GNSS navigation; our aircraft is configured with an IRU with DME/DME updating to the FMS. As such we met all required navigation performance for our flight(s).After leg 1; we discovered that there was a nationwide anomaly with GNSS systems of a particular make and model; which affected many aircraft; other than ours. We operate using the Bombardier Master Minimum Equipment List (MMEL). The MMEL states that one GNSS system must be operable for dispatch. However; as the anomaly was not based within our on board system; we agreed that the continued operation was allowable. During our last leg; we received a message from our company that this anomaly did indeed fall under the control of the MMEL; and as such all company aircraft with the affected GNSS system were not suitable for flight.As stated above; with IRU-DME/DME updating to the FMS; we met all RNP requirements for the operations conduction. As such; there was no degradation of safety during any portion of our day's flights.

Callback: Reporter said this was not an aircraft problem; but a nationwide problem.  GPS manufactured by Rockwell Collins; did not get an update from the system and this sent the aircraft's system into an endless loop. A time adjustment had been made to a satellite and Rockwell Collins did not get the update into the system.



Synopsis: Challenger 300 First Officer reported navigational problems relating to FMS and GPS issues.
Date: 202011
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SR20
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Powerplant Lubrication System
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While conducting a IFR training flight with a student; we were on an IFR flight plan and on initial climb vectors from ATC when we noticed the Oil Pressure indication slowly; but consistently; dropping.  It triggered a CAS caution message for Low Oil Pressure; then the pressure reading slowly recovered.  As we discussed the potential causes of this indication change; the Oil Pressure reading decreased again causing another CAS message.  At this point we both decided to return to the departure airport ZZZ.  The student informed ATC of the issue and asked to return to the airport.  We were given vectors back to ZZZ and confirmed with ATC that we [would like priority handling] We ran the appropriate checklists as a crew. We were then cleared for a visual approach and landed uneventfully at ZZZ.  This event was a great learning experience for the student and myself.  Always leaning towards caution and returning to the airport was the right move.  It would have been easy to convince ourselves that the oil pressure indication was a sensor error and continue to our destination; but this would have been very poor ADM.


Second narrative: While on an IFR flight plan and on initial climb vectors from ATC; we noticed the oil pressure indication slowly; but consistently dropping. It triggered a CAS message for low oil pressure; then the pressure reading slowly recovered. As we discussed potential causes of this indication change; the oil pressure reading decreased again causing another CAS message. At this point we both decided to return to the departure airport ZZZ. I informed ATC of the issue and asked to return to the airport. We were given vectors back to ZZZ and confirmed with ATC that I would [request priority handling]. We ran the appropriate checklists. This likely could have been a sensor issue; but I always prefer to be more safe than sorry.


Synopsis: Flight Instructor and student reported during climbout the engine oil pressure was slowly dropping and a oil pressure warning occurred. The crew made a precautionary air return.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ABQ.Airport, NM
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ABQ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airport; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: We were given clearance out to Runway 3 via Taxiway F. It was dark outside. We pulled up to F6 and held short of Runway 3. Something did not seem right. We did not seem to be at the end of the runway. We discussed the situation and reviewed our charts. My position on the map was intermittent but then showed we were indeed not at the end of the runway. We discussed with Ground Control. They confirmed that we needed to taxi further down F to the end of the Runway 3 at F7. None of this was marked on the 10-9 chart. They did not seem to have any concerns. We were cleared to taxi back down Runway 3 to intersection F3 where we exited and taxied to the full length of Runway 3 for departure. I got confused as Taxiway F6 came up quickly on our left though it seemed we needed to taxi down further to the end of Runway 3. We did not see the NOTAM indicating that 'ABQ TWY F6 LOCATION SIGN NOT STD.' I did not want to taxi past this intersection and risk going too far or into an area that was beyond the end of the runway. Once we pulled up and the GPS data came back up it indicated we were at an intersection not marked on the 10-9. The NOTAM is not clear even after reviewing it after the event. The airport has added a Taxiway and changed the ordering. F6 is the new intersection at Runway 3. F7 is now at the end of Runway 3. None of this is indicated on the current charts. Night time operations contributed to this event. I think it would have been obvious that we were not at the end of the runway if it was daylight. Neither of us had been to ABQ in 2 years or more. Write a clearer NOTAM. Update the charts. Put a note on the ATIS.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported misidentified taxiway; not marked on Jepp 10-9 ABQ airport diagram; nor clear on the NOTAM.
Date: 202202
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PHL.TRACON, PA
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B PHL
ATC / advisory: TRACON PHL
Aircraft component: Radio Altimeter
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: While on a visual approach to Runway 09R; backed up with the ILS 09R-Z approach; we got a 'NAV RA 1 FAULT' message 2 nm west of KELEE intersection. Both radio altimeters appeared to be operating normally and displaying accurate information. The approach was continued to a manual landing without incident. Turn off 5G cell service near airports.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Pilot reported a malfunction with the radio altimeter while on initial approach to PHL.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-34-220T Turbo Seneca III
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Landing Gear
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Ground Event / Encounter Gear Up Landing
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was giving instruction to student for Commercial Multi add on. After 1 hour of flight; we returned to practice touch and goes and short field landings and takeoffs.Student landed airplane; then retracted the flaps and accelerated for take off and student suddenly retracted the landing gear. I took the controls to save the airplane but nose went down; I put the landing gear down but it was too late and propellers hit the ground. I aborted the take off; retarded throttles and secured the engines and fuel system was shut off. After notifying Tower electrical system was shut down as well.To avoid this as a Flight Instructor [I will] put my hand on the landing gear lever to avoid student handling it.




Synopsis: PA-34 Instructor Pilot reported his student retracted the landing gear before takeoff on a touch and go; resulting in a prop strike and gear up landing.