elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: Beechjet 400
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Aircraft X was on a vector northbound; issued 100. I informed them of moderate turbulence in the airspace; they acknowledged and confirmed the report. I cleared them direct ZZZZZ and issued descent to 085; which was the MVA in that area. Aircraft X read back correctly. While still in the 085 MVA; I observed Aircraft X descending through 080. I told them to climb and maintain 085 due to higher terrain. They stated they were getting bumped around pretty badly and were attempting to climb. I asked them if they had the terrain in sight and could maintain visual; they replied affirmative. I observed a descent to 078 at which point they were exiting the 085 MVA and in a 074 MVA. I instructed them to cross ZZZZZ at or above 076 cleared for the RNAV Runway XX; ZZZ. Aircraft X landed without further incident.I don't have any recommendations. This seemed to be a weather-related event due to the strong winds; mountain wave activity; and turbulent rides.




Synopsis: TRACON Controller reported an aircraft descended below the MVA as a result of getting bumped around due to turbulence and mountain wave activity.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: PMD.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm; 2
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E E10
ATC / advisory: TRACON E10
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Inflight Event / Encounter VFR In IMC; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We entered the high desert flying from the north to PSP. Conditions in the area were much worse than forecast and it became readily apparent that our plan of flying below the cloud deck was not going to be safe. We worked through the clouds to remain VFR while looking for a hole to climb through as we heard that other VFR aircraft had succeeded with this plan.While climbing in one such area; we inadvertently entered IMC when the climb performance of the aircraft [was unexpectedly] slowed. I activated the GFC700 autopilot to maintain wings level climbing and we exited the IMC into clear air without incident. We likely spent 30-40 seconds in the soup. We continued towards the west entering an area largely clear of any clouds and were able to maintain normal VFR without incident.Contributing positive factors: XM and ADS-B radar data presented on G1000 to assist in understanding extent of storm Use of AP to maintain control and stability of aircraft. Contributing negative factors: Over reliance on forecast and current weather reports for airports in area did not match observed conditions in area. Over reliance on reports from other VFR traffic that conditions were improving.




Synopsis: C182 pilot; on a VFR flight; reports encountering weather conditions enroute that are much worse than forecasted and inadvertently entering IMC. XM and ADS-B weather data was considered useful in returning to VMC in less than a minute.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SAT.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C SAT
ATC / advisory: Tower SAT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Troubleshooting
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
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 Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling; Airport
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: RNAV Y (GPS) 22. Approaching 800 ft AGL got a call from tower about a low altitude alert for our approach. We double checked the lateral and vertical NAV and we were established; according to our instruments; correct on Vertical NAV and correct on the lateral NAV track.  Just after this call we obtained visual with the runway environment. It showed us slightly left of runway centerline and slightly below the PAPI glidepath which at the time was showing 1 white and 3 reds. Decreased descent rate and adjusted back to centerline for uneventful landing. On taxi-in; asked tower about the alert and the reply was they might need to recalibrate their system.


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


Synopsis: Air Carrier flight crew reported that the low altitude alert for the airport may be in error and need re-calibration.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: A319
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: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion
Second reporter function: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At cruise; FL340; our #2 engine lost oil quantity and pressure. This mechanical failure led us to shut down the engine and divert to [an alternate airport].Suspected scavenge pump or bearing seal failure.This was the first cruise level engine shutdown for both pilots on the Airbus. Although the engine oil quantity slowly decreased we didn't suspect oil failure. The aircraft does not produce an ECAM message for 0 quantity. The oil quantity is replaced by amber XXs leading us to initially suspect indicator failure. However we continued to monitor the pressure and it slowly started to decrease. At this point we knew we were looking at engine shutdown; but we're somewhat hesitant to shut it down without ECAM or checklist guidance. We do not receive training for engine shut downs without ECAM or checklist direction. Why not? Do we use master switch or Fire push button? Once the pressure decreased enough to set off the ENGINE OIL LOW PRESSUR ECAM the engine was immediately shut down in accordance with ECAM. We were ready to shut it down as we saw the situation deteriorating; but uncomfortably waited for the automation to catch up.Suggest adding engine failure at altitude to future training.


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


Synopsis: A319 flight crew reported diverting to an alternate after shutting down #2 engine due to low oil quantity and pressure.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: D21.TRACON, MI
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Windshear
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 3 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B DTW
ATC / advisory: TRACON D21
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Weather; Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Other than poor operations; it was normal going to DTW. On approach; due to high winds we got slowed and headings; as did many other aircraft. The winds were now 310/25 gust 39. They were changing the airport around. Many of us asked ATC what runway to expect only to be told; 'We will get back to you.' I asked my First Officer to run performance for all runways with this wind. Finally we were told it would be a west operation. I have never seen DTW in that operation. They seemed slow at making it work. We were told it would be about 15 to 20 minutes before we could go in. I sent a message to Dispatch asking my burn to our alternate. Also; asked my First Officer to get weather for that airport. High winds; about the same as DTW. Dispatch said burn was 1.6. Here we sat with 5.6. If we go now; we get there with MIN fuel. Stated my problem to ATC a couple of times; hoping to move to head of the line. All I got was; 'where you diverting to?' Then told to stand by while we coordinate; and on a heading north. After ATC talked to other flights; they finally came back and put us on a close heading to our alternate; but not direct. Then they came back with a route with a couple of fixes and an arrival. 5.6 minus 1.6 equals 4.0 without all of these fixes and turns. At this point; I did declare MIN fuel. I wanted direct my alternate. I realize we were not yet at MIN fuel; but see above math; which is enough for me. We landed with 4.4; fueled; and went back to DTW.




Synopsis: An unusual west landing operation at DTW resulted in extensive arrival delays; so a Captain requested routing to his alternate which resulted in a near minimum fuel landing.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Cockpit Window
Component problem: Improperly Operated; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Relief Pilot; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Flight was delayed over an hour at the gate due to the inability of Maintenance to produce a logbook. I was out of the cockpit for most of the preflight/before staring engines checklist items while I performed other crew duties (walk-around/maintenance coordination for cabin items) but I did receive a thorough takeoff brief from the Captain who followed all procedures and ensured checklist items were accomplished. We prepared for a departure into low ceilings and embedded thunderstorms with a 380;000LB 767-300ER. On takeoff roll at about 80 KTS a loud wind rush could be heard from the First Officer's window. I was unable to see the window or the handle due to the First Officer's large stature and my position in the jump seat until I leaned right to see around him by the time I could see; it was in the aft position. The Captain called for the First Officer to close the window but the handle seemed to be stuck and would not move forward despite the First Officer's efforts. The Captain initiated an abort at about 130 KTS. The Captain instructed the First Officer to call the abort out to Tower and immediately clicked the auto brakes off. We had no problem stopping in the remaining runway distance; maintaining control of the aircraft and taxied clear of the runway. The Captain asked to proceed to the hot-brakes area where fire-rescue was called to inspect the exterior of the aircraft. We also checked the brake cooling charts and noted that we were in the caution zone and should wait about 30 minutes for the brakes to achieve max temp. Fire-rescue inspected the wheels and reported that some wheel fuse plugs had been popped so we finished the waiting time coordinated with Operations and Maintenance and shut the aircraft down. Passengers deplaned via air stairs into buses.




Synopsis: B767-300 Relief Pilot describes the events leading up to a rejected takeoff at 130 KTS. When the First Officers sliding window comes open at 80 KTS and cannot be cranked closed the Captain rejects the takeoff.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: 4B9.Airport, CT
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 15
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E 4B9
ATC / advisory: CTAF 4B9
Second aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
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; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was on crosswind for landing on runway 21 at Simsbury Airport (4B9) at 1200 ft MSL; my heading approximately 120 degrees. I was monitoring/talking on the airport frequency of 122.7. My position was about overhead of the departure end of runway 21. Just as I was about to turn onto downwind; a 737 suddenly appeared to my right. It was on a heading approximately parallel to my flight path; probably on a left downwind for runway 6 at BDL. I estimate it was 800 ft above me and about 1000 ft to my right. He was in landing configuration; with flaps and gear down. Due to his much greater airspeed; he quickly passed me. I was then suddenly struck by three separate 'hits' of wake turbulence; probably two seconds apart. The first rolled me to the left; well past 90 degrees of roll. Best guess would be 120 degrees. I was headed towards being full inverted; but was able to right the aircraft. I was immediately hit again and rolled about 90 degrees to the right. Again; I righted myself. Then came a hit as if from above: the aircraft was slammed downward; and I hit my head on the canopy even though wearing a shoulder harness; my headset was ripped off; and charts and other materials were blown around the cockpit.I have been based at 4B9 for [decades]. I have never seen an airliner vectored anywhere this close to our traffic pattern. I can only assume that the 737 was being vectored by BDL ATC. If this happens again; an aircraft in the pattern at 4B9 would be helpless to avoid wake turbulence. The approaching airliner would not be visible until the last moment; so evasive action would be virtually impossible. The light aircraft in the 4B9 traffic pattern would be in a highly vulnerable low-and-slow position. This incident could have been avoided if ATC had simply vectored the 737 south of 4B9; or via the BDL ILS 6 approach path; as usual.

Callback: Reporter emphasized the severity of the incident and would like to see changes in procedures to enhance safety.



Synopsis: General aviation pilot in the pattern at 4B9 reported a loss of control after a wake turbulence encounter with a B737 inbound to BDL.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: S46.TRACON, WA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E S46
ATC / advisory: TRACON S46
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: Working sector with VFR; high volume and complexity. Aircraft X on a vector and cleared for the ILS runway 13R approach to BFI. As I cleared Aircraft X; I scanned to see a VFR target NE of the final approach course at 2800 heading towards the final; so I issued the traffic. After a moment; I decided I did not like the situation; particularly the possibility that the VFR might descend into Aircraft X; so I canceled his approach clearance and gave him a vector off the localizer to the South. The VFR did not descend; so I descended Aircraft X to my MVA and advised him to expect a visual approach. Aircraft X reported the field and traffic in sight; so I cleared him for the visual approach. Aircraft X indicated he would have to pass underneath the VFR again on the visual and wanted to verify he was cleared for the visual approach. I confirmed the approach clearance and indicated to the aircraft that if they wanted to descend it was more than understandable. Aircraft X subsequently continued to BFI and landed without further incident.This is another report of a continued problem within our airspace. As with [another report]; there was a lot going on in the airspace at the time and had traffic not been observed and a TCAS-RA resulted; it could have been much worse. The back-to-back timing of this event with my previous is a perfect illustration of how often the potential for these scenarios exist in our airspace. I wish I could get more of my coworkers to report them when they occur. Something needs to change. The VFR aircraft are transiting a very narrow; busy corridor of airspace and are doing so without any communication with ATC. It is simply unsafe. The VFR aircraft in this area at the very least need to be in communication with ATC so that we can assign; as necessary; altitude restrictions ensuring the safety of all the aircraft involved. The solution(s) are not hard and while they are potentially more restrictive to VFR aircraft the bottom line is that what happens day in and day out in that airspace as it exists and operates now will eventually result in a very bad accident.




Synopsis: S46 TRACON Controller reported multiple incidents where VFR aircraft have caused airborne conflicts in the BFI area.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Training / Qualification; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: After being assigned a right seat assignment in the E-145 from the right seat; I contacted crew scheduling and informed them that I had never flown from the right seat on that aircraft and I wasn't sure I felt comfortable and proficient enough to operate from the right seat and that I would do anything they would like but in the left seat. After approximately 30 minutes I receive a phone call from a management pilot and I politely explain the situation to him and where my comfort level was. He understood and said OK. Well apparently that wasn't good enough for the crew scheduling supervisors. About an hour after that I received a text from the CP (Chief Pilot) and was informed that I was completely legal to do this. After explaining how I felt and where my concerns were I was basically told 'I would be doing it'. The next day did the turn and luckily the Captain was very experienced and the flight went fine.There are so many threats in here it's ridiculous. First off; the fact that the FAA is allowing us former CRJ pilots to be put in the right seat of an aircraft we have had three bounces in and no IOE (Initial Operating Experience) is scary and it shows the appearance of the FAA being in the pocket of the airlines. The FAA would not let a FO (First Officer) at [another airline] that shot 3 ILS from the left seat and is fully typed sit in the left seat of a 757 without going through a full upgrade. Second there is an issue with crew scheduling and management putting pressure on the pilots to operate something that has a possible safety issue.Unfortunately the FAA is the shortfall in this problem. The FAA is the checks and balances; and is supposed to be the safety enforcer when it comes to these kinda things. In the future no pilot should not be forced into a seat they aren't comfortable and proficient in; and especially one they've never flown from. This Captains flying as FO's doesn't happen at any major; so why is the FAA willing to allow this at the regionals? If there is a Captain flying FO seat crash and people die this will come back to haunt the FAA. This is a practice that needs to stop.




Synopsis: EMB-145 First Officer reported company pressure to operate with lack of proficiency and comfort from the right seat.