elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While climbing out of ZZZ; initially we were assigned to climb and level at 4;000 feet which changed to 7;000 feet. I engaged the autopilot at 5;000 feet and maintained 250 kts per the SID. Approximately 6;800 feet ATC assigned to climb and maintain 19;000. The power setting and speed I had was maintaining 250 kts. The aircraft Alts Capped and the speed shot up to approximately 285 kts since the power was reduced but not enough. I disengaged the autopilot; reduced the power; corrected the airspeed deviation and continued to climb as assigned. Cause of this event was due to me being behind the aircraft in climb and getting too behind the automation. Another contributing factor was due to me not flying approximately 80 days leading to a lack of proficiency.[I] suggest pilots who have not flown recently to slow down and make sure they stay ahead of the aircraft to minimize errors and deviations.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported experiencing a speed deviation during departure and stated lack of flying contributed to the event.
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: C90.TRACON, IL
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 135 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ORD
ATC / advisory: TRACON C90
Second aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
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: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While working hand off; I heard one of the monitors ask one of the RADAR controllers to 'try him again' since they needed to make an airspeed adjustment and he wasn't on frequency. By the time the monitor had informed him; both aircraft were right next to each other at the same altitude. The monitor is required to make sure their aircraft is on the respective local frequency prior to losing standard separation. I believe this happens on a routine basis at C90. Management doesn't take the requirement seriously; so a large number of the controllers do not take it seriously either.




Synopsis: C90 Controller voiced concern regarding the failure of some controllers to insure required and timely frequency transfers to the monitor positions.
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Helicopter
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While I was on a repair station maintenance test flight for avionics verification I experienced an Engine Two Chip warning 3 minutes after departure. No secondaries. I attempted three times; unsuccessfully; to burn the chip; then turned back to the airport and adjusted flight controls to establish OEI [One Engine Inoperative] flight conditions; retarded Number 2 power lever to idle; trimmed NR [Rotor RPM] to 100% and was cleared by Tower to land Runway 28; thence direct to the ramp. I did not declare an emergency. Established OEI landing profile to Runway 28 and shut down the Number 2 Engine when over the runway. Performed run-on landing to the grass between Taxiway A and Runway 28. No injuries to crew and passengers or damage to aircraft. Repair station personnel moved aircraft back to hangar for required follow-on maintenance. No chips or fuzz found on the chip detector plugs.




Synopsis: A BK117 pilot on a maintenance assessment flight encountered a chip warning in the Number Two Engine. He performed appropriate preparatory procedures; shut down the engine and performed a run-on landing on the grass between the runway and parallel taxiway at the departure airport.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Falcon 2000
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Altitude Hold/Capture
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Enroute to ZZZ. Was level at 16000 ft and direct to ZZZZZ when event started. ATC cleared us to descend via ZZZZZ1 arrival. I identified [the] lowest altitude 9000 ft at ZZZZZ2. Dialed in 9000 ft and engaged VNAV.The descent cue came down shortly and autopilot captured VNAV and started its descent. Everything looked normal to me. Crossing altitude at ZZZZZ is 15000 ft. And we had the pink 15000 displayed on PFD (Primary Flight Display) as a restriction. However we crossed below 15000 ft prior to ZZZZZ without me noticing. The PIC called out STOP. By the time I realized what was happening we were 700-800 feet low. I disconnected the autopilot and corrected back to 15000 ft. ATC told us to check our altitude the Minimum Vector Altitude he said was 14400 ft. Rest of flight was uneventful.I have flown the Falcon for years. I feel totally comfortable with using the VNAV function. I have never seen the autopilot do this before. During our debrief of the event we agreed everything was set up correctly and we had the right indications. However I know my faith in the automation caused me to let my guard down. I should have caught the descent below 15000 ft immediately. This was completely my mistake. The PIC was off getting the latest ATIS as I set it up.


Second narrative: We were on ZZZZZ1 arrival. We were at 17000 feet and were asked to descend to 16000 feet overhead traffic. While we were descending we were cleared to descend via arrival. I went off #1 radio to pick up ATIS on #2. I advised PF (pilot flying) of such and it was acknowledged. Once I came back on radio #1 I saw altitude lower than crossing restriction over ZZZZZ intersection. VNAV was active but didn't stop descent below restriction. As we corrected; ATC called low altitude alert. We corrected and nothing else was said.


Synopsis: Falcon 2000 flight crew reported that during descent the autopilot failed to capture the preselected altitude.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Flight planned through HF required airspace on a non-HF equipped aircraft.This flight was rerouted to avoid ZZZ1 [Center] airspace due ATC 0 for COVID cleaning. XA20z - XE01z. I looked at routing through the gulf and over Country Y but no overfly permit available for this flight number. Contacted Airnav / Overfly to confirm no overfly permit. They said we no longer apply for the ZZZ-ZZZ1 or ZZZ-ZZZ2 [airport] flights. So I planned the flight to go east of ZZZ1 [Center]. This route took the flight through ZZZ [Center] Oceanic airspace. I failed to recall that that section of ZZZ [Center] Oceanic airspace is HF comm only; no CPDLC or VHF comm. The aircraft assigned to the flight did not have HF voice. The flight was able to continue by relaying position reports though our Aircraft Y on Guard frequency flying the same route/airspace.With the frequent airspace closures due to COVID cleaning we need more routing options to and from the US - Country Z. We need to start applying for Country Y overfly permits for these southbound flights again so that is an option for us. In addition to usable Country Y routes; a canned route that takes us east of ZZZ1 [Center] and ZZZ2 [Center] needs to be added with route remarks stating that dual HF voice is required for that route. It has been some time since we operated in that portion of ZZZ [Center] airspace and I failed to recall the requirement for HF. I assume the majority of dispatchers would make the same mistake who work this sector less frequently.




Synopsis: Dispatcher reported planning a flight through HF required airspace on a non-HF equipped aircraft.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach; Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Leading Edge Slat
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Workload; Troubleshooting; Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Procedure; Manuals; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related; Aircraft; Chart Or Publication; Company Policy
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We had a great flight today except the last 3;000 FT. The First Officer was the pilot flying and called for flaps 1. Then we received a Master Caution 'LE Asymmetry' EICAS. I Started the 'QRH;' it took a little time to find the procedure. The procedure at about step 3 or so; said 'Land with flaps 20;' at this point we told ATC we needed to divert to a larger nearby airport. While en route; I continued with the 'QRH' which has multiple scenarios. During this process I ended up confused and ended up screwing up the procedure. We landed in our filed airport with flaps and slats in the alternate mode; 'Flaps 30' not what the procedure called for. I did not realize this until we were at the gate and had time to review. I attribute this mistake do to the lack of training on the new procedures and format of the 'QRH.' I have had this scenario with our pre-merger airline and the old checklist many times before and did not have a problem. The new format threw me off; because of the lack of quality training. The end result was that we landed without incident. However; I feel most pilots are still uncomfortable with all the changes because there is no training; only some computer packet and this training did not prepare me for today's problem.




Synopsis: Following a B757 EICAS 'LE ASYMMETRY' alert; the Captain became confused by the new QRH Checklist format and the lack of training on it. He declared an emergency then landed with flaps 30 instead of flaps 20.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X for Day X was delayed into [the next day; Day X+1]. [Another flight; Aircraft Y; using the same call sign was] operating on time [on Day X+1]. Both flights were in the air at the same time and would both be in ZZZ Center at the same time. (Actually both flights would have been line of sight with each other just north of ZZZZZ VORTAC.) Dispatcher noted this just after takeoff for Aircraft X. ATC Coordinator was notified who in turn contacted ZZZ Center. A temporary call sign was assigned to the eastbound flight for crossing ZZZ airspace. Dispatch notified both flights of the situation and remedial action; and of the similarity between [the two] calls signs.Long delay of twenty hours caused overlap in date change flights. Do not delay flights into the next day without setting up as extra section or by stubbing immediately upon determining the length of the delay.




Synopsis: Dispatcher reported a long delay caused two flights with identical call signs to be in the air at the same time.
Date: 201808
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
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: Oxygen System/Crew
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Preflight of mask and oxygen indicated normal system. I addressed the supply at 750 PSI to First Officer; but said it was good to go. About 2.5 hours into flight I noticed oxygen level was 200 PSI. At that point I contacted Dispatch and got [Maintenance Control] phone patch. The oxygen level continued to drop even though we were not using masks. As oxygen was approaching zero; [advised ATC] and requested divert to [an alternate airport]. I could still hear Dispatch on [Commercial Radio] frequency saying not to divert to [a nearby airport] because of thunderstorms hitting field. We also received an ACARS message saying not to use [the nearby airport]. At lower altitude I could no longer speak with Dispatch on [Commercial Radio] Frequency. Divert to [the alternate airport] accomplished without incident. Contract maintenance checked cockpit oxygen and verified zero remaining. We elected to descend; divert and [advise ATC] because of no oxygen for use in decompression or smoke/fire in cockpit.




Synopsis: B737NG Captain reported problems with crew oxygen quantity.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
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: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Requested and received [longest] runway for takeoff due to heavy weight. Used full length well before runway threshold for takeoff roll. At about 80 knots; started to hear wind noise from my window while acting as PF. I attempted to close the window by using the window crank; FO said he had the aircraft. Unable to stop the noise as noise got much louder approaching 100 knots. I took back control of the aircraft; saw that we had a lot of runway left to stop in; while considering continuing the takeoff; but noise was getting so loud; I was doubting the safety of taking the aircraft into the air with as much runway that we had remaining. We were just after the 3 bars in the touchdown zone approaching the two bars. Closed throttles to idle at 115 knots; aircraft pulsed twice into RTO braking; I advanced the throttles slightly to turn off auto braking. Time in RTO was only 1-2 seconds. Rolled out during remaining runway while applying light braking in several short intervals along the runway. Taxied back to gate for maintenance inspection and one hour delay for brake cooling. Turns out that the lower rear cam on Captain's window was not completely perpendicular; in proper position for full closure of the window; but still able to lock the window with the push-button latching mechanism.Verify that lower rear cam is completely perpendicular to indicate full closure of window before locking with latch mechanism.


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


Synopsis: B757-200 flight crew reported rejecting the takeoff at 115 kts because the Captain's side window was improperly closed.
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZLC.ARTCC, UT
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 4 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZLC
ATC / advisory: Center ZLC
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: I was working R40 when Clover Control called to point out a couple of fighter jets that were southwest bound. They were requesting a higher altitude to stay out of the weather/clouds to the west of Salt Lake. I had an aircraft that I was working VFR eastbound that I referenced. After releasing the call with Clover I noticed that the ranges were still showing 160 feet and below for the north and the south range. I quickly called them back and asked if they were showing the airspace active. They respond they were showing it FL580 and below for the north and the south range. I pointed out Aircraft X who was already in the north range at FL370. I then called flow control and asked if the Utah Testing and Training Range was active? He informed me he had released it at the top of the hour both ranges FL580 below. The flow controller then realized that he had not put it in the EDST or changed the weather message. I alerted the supervisor to take care of other issues that might arise from flow having released airspace 20 minutes prior. For flow to do their job and follow through when releasing airspace.




Synopsis: ZLC Controller reports of a restricted area not being displayed HOT on his EDST; while having an aircraft in the restricted area that is not authorized to be there.
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZJX.ARTCC, FL
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Military
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Refueling
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZJX
ATC / advisory: Center ZJX
Second aircraft: Military
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; 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 Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Military air refueling on AR207; FL260-FL280; with an ALTRV (Altitude Reservation) of military air refueling; same altitude.  The ALTRV had to be taken to FL240-FL250 to avoid operational error.  Refueling should be done in the Warning Areas off the coast.  The skies have gotten too busy in the R66 and R50 airspace.  Block altitudes should never be scheduled in the same airspace at the same time! Someone should know better than this!




Synopsis: ZJX Center Controller reported two ALTRVs (Altitude Reservations) were in the same area and altitude.
Date: 201209
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZAU.ARTCC, IL
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZAU
ATC / advisory: Center ZAU
Second aircraft: Beechcraft Twin Turboprop or Jet Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: There was moderate turbulence in the descent going into ORD. I descended a B777 to 12;000 to try and get them into smoother air. The VFR jump aircraft was climbing up to their altitude; I believe he said 15;000. I gave multiple traffic calls to each pilot and the jump aircraft [pilot] reported the heavy in sight but never turned. The B777 didn't see the jump plane until the RA went off and they climbed back up to 13;000. The jump plane descended and turned to get out of the way. Move parachute jumping away from arrivals to busy airports; or limit times and use.




Synopsis: ZAU Controller described a TCAS RA event between a ORD Air Carrier arrival and a parachute jump aircraft that had the airliner in sight; the reporter suggesting moving the parachute activity area.