elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Skydiving
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel System
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Workload; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: [This was a] skydiving flight; fuel exhaustion on final approach to land. Pattern and approaches are always done very high; so some of the flaps were retracted; and a gliding landing was easily made. Fueling was done for these 3 skydiving flights after flying the airplane from the home airport to the airport where the skydiving took place. Fuel was checked in both tanks before leaving the home airport; and I mentally noted that one tank contained more fuel than the other; and that I had plenty of fuel to fly to the skydiving airport; and would get fuel there even if I did not fly skydivers. I think the reason this happened is that I forgot which of the tanks had the greater amount of fuel when checking fuel at the home airport. I therefore filled the tank that was already the most full; and did not have the reserve in the other tank as expected; because I did not specifically check it after filling the other tank. This also might have never been noticed if I had not used a steep bank from base to final. There is a large amount of unusable fuel in early model C182's; especially if steep banks are performed at lower fuel levels.




Synopsis: A C182 engine quit on final approach from fuel starvation after the pilot flew three skydiving flight and forgot that the selected tank did not have sufficient reserve fuel after using the other wing's full tank.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZSPD.TRACON, FO
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B787 Dreamliner Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: Center ZSHA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Relief Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: I was the [relief pilot] on this flight. Just before the landing; the crew returned from break we updated weather and everything looked normal for arrival and landing into ZSPD. Once the landing crew got in their seats; ZSPD approach started to give us a speed reduction and then eventually a delay turn to the north. Approach was very vague on the reason other than traffic. We flew north for some time and queried why. Eventually they turned us back towards arrival and we were told number 2 for landing and the reason was weather. Our weather radar wasn't painting anything that caused us concern. Our fuel by this time was getting close to bingo however we were assured that they will get us right in as we told approach fuel was critical. Once on the arrival the controller said 35 minute delay. This was not going to work for us so we told controller we will fly direct to our alternate of ZZZZ. He gave us a vector that was not direct and held us at a lower altitude. We then [advised ATC] and flew direct ZZZZ and continued our climb. This was caused by a communication problem with the controller. It was late into the arrival before we realized it was a weather delay. The controller did not understand our fuel situation and continued to lead us on. Even after we [advised them of the severity of the situation] he tried to vector us and keep us down low. Unacceptable considering our fuel state. Controllers in Shanghai need to understand how to communicate with English carriers. They need to be very clear on the reasons for delays and real time expected delays. Dispatchers can help by being more proactive with information on flow into Shanghai and expected delays. As we pass the South Korean Peninsula it would be nice to know how things are looking on the arrival. It's easier to stop in Incheon for fuel than ZZZZ.




Synopsis: B787 First Officer reported the controllers at ZSPD did not convey the actual delays to be expected during arrival; and did not expedite a clearance to the alternate after being advised of the low fuel state.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: ZZZ
Location: ASN.Airport, AL
Aircraft: Citation II S2/Bravo (C550)
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E BHM
ATC / advisory: TRACON BHM
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working radar with all positions combined. There was weather throughout the airspace and all airports were using instrument approaches. I took the hand off on Aircraft X from north of ASN airport. I descended the aircraft to 090 due to the restricted area being active. Once the aircraft was past R2102; I descended him to 070 due to a primary only IFR aircraft crossing TDG VOR at 060. Aircraft X requested lower so once he was separated from my non-radar target I descended him to 040 on the downwind for an ILS 04 approach to ASN.When I cleared the aircraft for the approach; I glanced up at the approach chart in an attempt to give him the lower altitude I was able in order to make his descent since I had to keep him so high. I looked at the altitude for the FAF (2300) instead of the IF (3100) but I did not go back and re-issue 3100 it because I thought his rate of descent would not fall below the required altitudes. I confirmed that the aircraft was established on the approach when the low altitude alert went off and I switched the aircraft to advisory frequency. I normally do not issue altitudes lower than the MVA in that area due to poor radar coverage but I was concerned with providing poor service by keeping the aircraft too high. The aircraft with no transponder and the weather distracted me from monitoring the situation more diligently.I should have requested assistance while working the session due to the weather and complexity. Apparently; there was an individual who witnessed the event occurring and failed to bring it to my attention. I should have been more conservative when issuing the altitude and when I realized the descent I gave could posed a problem. I should have addressed it. I will be much more cognizant of my actions and consider aircraft performance more carefully in the future.




Synopsis: BHM Approach Controller reported issuing a clearance altitude below the Minimum Vectoring Altitude.
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZOA.ARTCC, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Widebody Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZOA
ATC / advisory: Center ZOA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Time Pressure; Confusion; Workload
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airport; Chart Or Publication; Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Note: SFO recently changed some departure and arrival routings and names.ATC clearance was GNNRR1 departure. Tower cleared us to hold short RW 28L (we were anticipating takeoff on 28L - FMC was loaded for that runway). Tower switched runways on us at last second and gave us 28R. The FMC was changed to reflect 28R while Takeoff Data was pulled up and reviewed. All new data was loaded and we were cleared for takeoff 28R. LNAV/VNAV was engaged and we were flying the assigned SID (GNNRR1). Passing approximately FL200; ATC asked if we were flying to STINS (the GNNRR1 routing consists of GNNRR-STINS-AMAKR etc.). Shortly after ATC's call they gave us direct REDWD; which we complied with. After we reviewed the SID and discussed ATC questioning us; we realized that we may have unintentionally left STINS out of our clearance when Tower gave us the new runway. Apparently when the runway was changed from 28L to 28R in the FMC; it created a discontinuity. Due to being rushed with the last second runway change; the discontinuity was closed (the correct procedure); but inadvertently deleted STINS. There was limited time to cross check FMC work prior to takeoff. We think the FMC had us flying GNNRR-AMAKR instead of GNNRR-STINS-AMAKR.Recommended actions to avert the problem - SFO recently changed some departure/arrival plates. They are new to all crews and are not as familiar to us as the old plates. Tower changed the runway on us at the last second. We needed to slow down and carefully check/cross check data input to the FMC. This would have delayed our departure and possibly created spacing issues for ATC; but would have been the prudent thing to do.


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


Synopsis: Just prior to departure; SFO changed the departure Runway to 28R so the crew reloaded the new FMS data and GNNRR 1 RNAV routing except for STINS. During climb; ZOA detected the error.
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon climb out we had a pressurization problem. At approximately four to five thousand feet we noticed the cabin climbing at the same rate as the aircraft. About the same time we got an AUTO FAIL light. We asked ATC to level off at 8;000 FT. The Outflow Valve indicator was at full closed. We ran the QRH and manually DC toggled the outflow valve to full closed but there was no change. Contacted Maintenance Control and after talking to them we were over half way to our destination so they elected to have us continue. When we were 10 miles from the outer marker we received a SELCAL message saying the company wanted a phone patch but we had no time. Upon landing Tower informed us the company wanted us to go to a different airport.




Synopsis: When the B737-400 flight crew was unable to pressurize the aircraft during climbout they elected to continue their flight to destination at 8;000 MSL as they attempted; unsuccessfully; to trouble shoot the problem.
Date: 201704
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZOB.ARTCC, OH
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZOB
ATC / advisory: Center ZOB
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: While at cruise [a] Flight Attendant was hurt when the aircraft [encountered] wake turbulence at FL340. It only lasted a second but it went from smooth calm air to moderate turbulence back to calm in seconds. [The Flight Attendant] said she was fine afterwards but the next day she decided to file a report.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported a Flight Attendant was injured during a wake turbulence encounter at FL340.
Date: 202008
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Staffing
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Flight was dispatched with an illegal alternate. ZZZ airport was used; but ZZZ VOR was [out of service] at the time it was needed; therefore I should not have used it.On this day; all of the desks were heavy on flights. I made mention to our management along with another coworker we needed to add more people on [X day of the week]  as there were too many flights and not enough dispatchers to handle the workload. Management is looking at the schedule and adding manning. This desk had several added flights as well [due to] Center shutdown for a COVID cleaning and I had flights in the air that had to be coordinated with the closing. This type of flight was not usually on this desk; and it was right in the middle of everything else I was doing. I totally overlooked the VOR being OTS.Suggestions - More people on shift with reduced flight workload. In the last 7 days when I have been working; I have had more flights than I can remember and it's been different sectors. Coupled with bad weather; trying to flight follow; which is nearly impossible. The company is setting us up to fail. Any hiccup on the desk with a maintenance issue; or delay that requires attention and you are sunk on trying to get anything done on time.




Synopsis: Dispatcher reported using an illegal airport as an alternate. The Dispatcher reported another operations center was closed for COVID-19 sanitizing. This had increased the workload for the Dispatcher and contributed to the event.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: De Havilland Canada Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Dispatcher; Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After takeoff I noticed that there seemed to be a lot of noise in the cockpit; I checked the pressure seals and everything seemed fine. On turning toward the airport for the approach the canopy locking pin sheared and the canopy separated from the aircraft. I called the Tower and reported losing the canopy and that I would return to [departure airport]! I did not [request priority handling] as the aircraft was safe to fly. I landed the aircraft and replaced the canopy.




Synopsis: A deHavilland pilot reported losing the canopy in flight and returning to departure airport for a precautionary landing.
Date: 201504
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach; Descent
Airspace: Class E ZOA
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: Oakland Center cleared us on the SERFR 1 RNAV Arrival; East Transition to SFO. We incorrectly assumed the plan view of the arrival was a depiction of the 'East' Arrival; which would take us on the east side of SFO to land on 19L as per the ATIS. Soon after passing WWAVS waypoint; NORCAL Approach realized our error and issued a vector to the west side of the airport. We did not see the narrative on the proper routing on the Arrival plate.Though there is potential for confusion with the usage of 'east' and 'west' on the SERFR Arrival; careful review of the Arrival plate would alleviate any issues.




Synopsis: Large Transport Twin Turbojet flight crew on the SERFR1 RNAV Arrival to SFO; was given the 'East Transition' by ATC and mistakenly flew the 'West Transition' because it is on the east side of the airport.
Date: 201812
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 33
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Power
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After [takeoff] ZZZ tower notified me on negative transponder signal. I acknowledged and attempted to reset. The tower then gave me a frequency change to [TRACON]. Right after contacting [TRACON] I noticed my back up radio went black. ATC cleared me to climb to 6500 feet and verified my location. Within 30 seconds of conversation with ATC my Aspen primary flight instrument went black. I immediately requested to return back to ZZZ and checked and cycled fuses and avionics power after verifying proper volts on the JPI engine monitor. [TRACON] handed me off to ZZZ tower who asked if everything was Ok and I responded with instrument failure. They immediately cleared me to enter left pattern for XXL cleared to land number 2. Within seconds of that call my Garmin 650 primary radio went black and 30 seconds later I lost my JPI engine monitor. I landed safely on XXL at ZZZ but was unable to transmit 7600 or communicate with tower or ground.




Synopsis: Bonanza pilot reported a series of equipment malfunctions and returned to departure airport.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Incident occurred near end of flight as we were descending. At 11;000 FT on the arrival; the Captain and I were looking at cloud formations ahead that we thought could be rough. Radar was on but showed no returns. He made a call to the flight attendants and told them to be seated. We entered the clouds about 2 minutes later and encountered moderate turbulence. The two flight attendants in the back were hurt. One male banged his knee and required a band aid for a bloody knee. The female fell and twisted her ankle. Paramedics checked her out and she was taken to a hospital via ambulance for x-rays. The x-rays showed a small chip fracture of one of the metatarsal bones.




Synopsis: Two minutes after the flight crew seated the flight attendants; an A319 encountered moderate turbulence at 11;000 FT but the two aft flight attendants were injured; the most serious an ankle bone chip.