elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
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: Physiological - Other; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: As we were descending onto a downwind at ZZZ airport I started to sweat a little bit and turned my vent on. Turning base to final the autopilot started crisscrossing centerline trying to establish. I took over manually and was having a hard time concentrating on flying the airplane. I felt like I was woken from a REM sleep. I had been awake for over 2 hours. I had a difficult time doing two things at once. I wasn't scanning; just staring. My FO (First Officer) and [Relief Pilot] were offering guidance but sounded like distant voices. Around 700 ft. AGL I managed to force myself to concentrate and made a pretty sweet landing and turnoff. Upon setting brakes after a short 4 minute taxi I ran back to the bathroom and threw up a significant volume. The nausea hit me immediately. I threw up several times in a bag in the crew van and also a few more times at the hotel. I don't know what happened. I think I was developing physical symptoms of illness in the terminal area. Not the nausea which hit after parking the brakes. Maybe my blood pressure dropped or something but I was mentally out of it mostly on the approach. I didn't take any medicines or supplements but I did eat 4 hours before I got sick. It was clear and a million on the approach and though I only have been in the 777 [for several months] I have flown into ZZZ a couple dozen times. I felt OK; about 80%; the following morning and just slept all day. By pickup that evening I was fine. Though my chest was very sore from dry heaving. On the approach I think I exceeded flaps 30 max speed of 170 KIAS as well. The IAS was plus or minus 15-20 knots as it was very gusty from 4000 ft. to touchdown. I also had a glide slope warning at about 1500 ft. AGL I was told but I don't remember it. I think I experienced an initial insidious physiological sensory degradation from food poisoning. As I descended onto downwind. That's all it could be. I was so sick for the rest of the evening and the vomiting started maybe 8 minutes after the awful approach I conducted. I just do not fly an airplane that bad.




Synopsis: B777 Captain reported feeling partially incapacitated during the final phase of flight; possibly due to food poisoning.
Date: 201304
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Manuals
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: The Dispatch release for ORD-ZZZ is flawed. It plans still being at cruise altitude at Shelbyville which requires a crossing at 14;000 feet. We then cross Cegrm at 11;000 feet. I knew it was tight on gas and the Dispatcher didn't give us any add or fuel to play with; so I flew powered back and as fuel conscious as I could. I also knew I could stop in Indianapolis or Dayton if there was any hiccup and we were severe VFR; so the decision was made to go with dispatched fuel. Upon closer inspection my release thought I needed only 1301 for reserve. There is no way the EMB can fly for 45 minutes at low altitudes and burn only 1301 pounds of fuel. Contrast that to our enroute burn which was supposed to be 1764 for 42 minutes. How can enroute burn at FL230 for 42 minutes be 1764 and reserve be 1301? My planned arrival fuel was supposed to have been 2064 and it was just under 1800 even with me climbing steeper; flying slower and using as little as possible with a tailwind. I should also mention we got straight out of ORD with no delays and minimal ground fuel burn so we took off with a few hundred extra than minimum takeoff fuel. All in all; release fuel from ORD to ZZZ should be several hundred pounds more for safe operation.Dispatch should revise this release to include crossing Shelbyville at 14;000 feet plus a realistic amount for required reserve fuel. In addition they should always give an additional 500 pounds at minimum to cover contingencies due to variations in flight.




Synopsis: An ERJ 145 Captain addressed flaws in the manner by which his airline computes required fuel for legs from ORD to ZZZ.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
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: Elevator ControlSystem
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We were getting ready to coast out and crew change for the pilot flying break.  The captain noticed the ALT FLAP CONT circuit breaker was out on the overhead panel.  We looked at EICAS Status page and observed the aircraft right elevator indicator was varying about a chevron width and the left was steady.  We tried to contact Dispatch and [Maintenance] on SATCOM; but were unsuccessful.  We finally contacted them on HF.  We woke the other first officer and had him go to the back of the airplane.  He informed us that there was a noticeable pitching.  The Captain went to investigate and noticed the same pitching.  We discussed the problem within the flight deck; [Maintenance] and Dispatch and determined the safest course of action was to divert.  We started a shallow turn and descent towards [the nearest suitable airport].  We referenced the QRG diversion guide and completed all of the items listed.  We received the landing data from dispatch and through ACARS for Flap 30 and 25.  The Captain executed an uneventful flap 25 landing.  On post flight; the IRO first officer and I noticed aircraft right elevator was at full down deflection and the left elevator looked like it was drooped normally.




Synopsis: B767 First Officer reported noticing an elevator anomaly on an international flight that led the crew to divert to the nearest suitable airport.
Date: 201812
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Aircraft: B747-400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); 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
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Shortly after takeoff; we experienced a compressor stall in Number 3 engine.  We retarded the thrust lever and were able to keep the engine running without any exceeding any parameters.  We then had to dump fuel to be within landing limits.  We then returned to airport of departure with no further issues.




Synopsis: B747-400 Captain reported returning to departure airport after experiencing a compressor stall in the Number 3 engine.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: RNO.Airport, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C RNO
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Check Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: IOE FO (First Officer) was performing a visual approach into RNO Runway 16L; backed up with RNAV X 16L. We were outside BADPE and were visual with the runway; check airman was monitoring FO and said 'You are too low; shallow out your descent rate.' FO proceeded to do so but not aggressively enough of a correction; Check airman was about to correct him again and we got a single EGPWS aural of 'OBSTACLE.' Under guidance of check airman; FO disconnected autopilot; added power; and climbed a few hundred feet. We were then back on profile and still outside final approach fix of BADPE so continued on approach with FO hand flying. The EGPWS Aural occurred at about 6;500 feet altitude about 4 miles outside of the BADPE fix. Check airman believes terrain clearance was safe; we were observing one white light and three red lights on PAPI; but the EGPWS disagreed with me. We were too low on a visual approach. Check airman had asked for a correction but was not insistent or urgent enough to get through to the FO. Busy arrival with many configuration changes; radio calls; etc. And it was a first day of flight with this particular FO; check airman did not realize that this FO was perhaps a bit overloaded and behind the aircraft; may have overestimated his skill level at this time.Check airman (Me) should have been more insistent about tolerances; as in not accepting one little bit low per arrival altitude guidance on RNAV plate.




Synopsis: Check Airman reported receiving a EGPWS Alert on approach.
Date: 201207
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ORD
Second aircraft: MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Airport
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Taxiing from ramp to 22L; we were eastbound on Taxiway B; initially following an MD80. The MD80 made a turn onto parallel Taxiway A; was paralleling our taxiway in the same direction (eastbound); when the MD80 made a right turn onto Taxiway F and began the quick left turn back onto B (creating a conflict between us and the MD80 at the intersection of B and F). My Captain was alert and slammed on the brakes (enough to cause my head to almost hit the instrument panel). Just after we stopped; the MD80 also stopped; but continued after a brief moment; and it was clear the potential of collision was clear (however where they stopped they were directly in our path on Taxiway B). No contact ever occurred; but was imminent and would have occurred within the next 2-5 seconds had action to stop not been taken by my Captain. Both aircraft were taxiing at normal speeds. We were just given an early frequency change to Tower; thus the MD80 was on Ground Control and we were on Tower (different frequencies). As the First Officer my head was down; changing frequencies and verifying departure frequency set in standby. I believe the general lack of oversight and the sometimes-lack-of-exercise-of-control on the ground at ORD by Ground Control are contributing factors. Sometimes aircraft are left to their own devices about which way to taxi (ex Ground Control issues instruction 'taxi to park' with no specific routing). This common lack of control may have given the pilot of the MD80 the idea that they could taxi any way they wanted; or could easily correct their own mistake (as it appeared they made a mistake by exiting B early and then attempting to return to it). Another threat in this case was the early frequency change to Tower given to us by Ground Control; resulting in us and the MD80 being in close proximity; but on different frequencies. Extreme caution must always be used in ORD.




Synopsis: EMB145 First Officer describes a ground conflict that developed during taxi for takeoff with the reporter on ORD Tower frequency and the conflicting MD80 inbound to the gate on Ground Control frequency.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZFW.ARTCC, TX
Light: Dusk
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E ZHU
ATC / advisory: Center ZHU
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: I was working Frisco D Side and then took over the R Side after he was approaching 2 hours on position and forced to take a break.  We had several aircraft from SPS inbound for multiple practice approaches at ADM airport.  The military trainer pilots had a limited grasp of the English language and were not answering radio calls in a timely manner.  In addition to these aircraft we had several other slower aircraft that were wanting practice approaches as well as a departure push from DFW and other regular traffic.  After taking over the R Side I determined that the workload was making the sector unsafe and I denied practice approaches to the 3 other military training aircraft and forced them to go elsewhere so I could get the sector under control.  In my career I do not recall ever having to deny service due to workload.I am new to the facility and recently learned Frisco Low used to be three different sectors but over the years it was recently combined into one sector.  I have been a Certified Professional Controller (CPC) at ZKC; SAT; L30 and ZHU and based on my experience I can tell you that this sector is unsafe and needs to be split immediately.  I would recommend a HI/LOW setup with one sector being SFC to 100 and the other 110-FL230.




Synopsis: ZHU Developmental describes a situation where he had to deny practice approaches to numerous aircraft due to workload.
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: PGV.Airport, NC
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class E PGV
ATC / advisory: UNICOM PGV
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: My aircraft is based at PGV. Just after becoming airborne on Runway 26; approximately mid-field where it intersects with Runway 2; I witnessed another aircraft departing on RWY 2; airborne at about 40-50 feet. It passed over my aircraft with a vertical separation of 20-30 feet. As this was occurring; I throttled back landed on the remaining runway.Prior to my departing; I had been holding short of Runway 26 and monitoring the UNICOM frequency as two aircraft landed and exited this runway (the winds were light and southwesterly). I had been on frequency for 10-15 minutes but heard no calls from any other aircraft [other] than the two aircraft landing on Runway 26. I announced departure on Runway 26; but no radio calls from the aircraft departing on Runway 2 were heard. I subsequently learned that the other aircraft was transient; and on further investigation; was on an IFR flight plan. There is a 'blind spot' at this field where thresholds of runways 26 and 2 are not visible from either end. At no time were there any calls from the other aircraft announcing intention to depart on Runway 2. I am certain of this.




Synopsis: A pilot lifted off CTAF airport PGV Runway 26 VFR and had near miss with an IFR aircraft departing Runway 2 which did not use the AIM suggested CTAF position reports. Runway 2 and 26 thresholds are not visible from each others' ends.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi; Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Weather; Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We had to deice with type 4. The type 4 fluid; which now has to be on the fuselage; ended up on our cockpit windows. Imagine; if you will; trying to look through a piece of opaque glass and trying to taxi an aircraft. We would have returned; but the taxi to the runway was a straight unobstructed route. All we could see was immediately forward; where our windshield wipers were able to clear. The type 4 didn't shed from the side windows until we were at a significant rate of speed. The wipers on high; were just barely able to keep up with the type 4 that was slogging across the windshield. Lesson learned; I'll never go with type 4 anywhere near my cockpit windows. Restricting where the deice crews can spray type 4 fluid would also help. Maybe not allowing them to spray it anywhere forward of the main cabin/service doors?




Synopsis: Following de-icing of the entire aircraft with Type IV fluid the flight crew of a CRJ-200 found there vision obscured during taxi and takeoff by the fluid on their windshields. Wipers helped but barely kept pace until reaching the speed at which the fluid separated and blew off the surfaces.
Date: 201812
Location: EWR.Airport, NJ
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
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: Distraction
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: A portion of the ramp between concourses at EWR was repaved some time ago; but they never repainted the lines on the new pavement. When you are entering this alley from Taxiway RK; there is no painted centerline so you have no idea where the aircraft is supposed to be.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported a portion of the repaved ramp at EWR has not be been repainted.
Date: 202011
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Cockpit Window
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While performing the Before Takeoff checklist the Master Caution sounded and the EICAS message W/S 1 HEAT FAIL appeared. Flight crew completed QRH. Captain contacted company Dispatch and Maintenance and attempted to troubleshoot the issue; but the message remained. Flight returned to gate.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported a return to gate after receiving W/S 1 Heat Fail EICAS message while performing the Before Takeoff Checklist.