elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Service/Access Door
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Fuel dump due [to a] pressurization issue [since the] aircraft would not pressurize. Flight leveled off at FL100 to work [on] the issue. 94;000 lbs [of] fuel dumped for a return to ZZZ. An access door under nose [was] not secure [and] aircraft would not pressurize [as a result].




Synopsis: Dispatcher reported a B777 failed to pressurize resulting in a return to departure airport.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: FOK.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class D FOK
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Exited Penetrated Airspace
Contributing factors: Weather; Human Factors; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was flying VFR at night under radar services with the NY TRACON; ISP sector. I flew eastbound along the south shore of Long Island at 3;000 feet after performing several instrument maneuvers with my student. We listened to the ATIS and told approach that we would like to return back to ISP for stop and go's. The Controller then advised us to make a left turn heading ~290 for vectors to the airport; Runway 24. I told my student to descend to 2;000 ft.; not knowing that we extended far enough east to laterally be in the FOK Class D. We leveled out at 2;000 feet where approach advised us that to be careful that we were in technically in the FOK airspace and that it would not be an overall issue. I apologized; went to ISP; and had no issues or significant events occur. We did not cause any conflicts in traffic; we were the only aircraft in the general vicinity. We stayed with approach control until we went to ISP Tower on 119.300. I do believe that FAA Order 7110.65 makes the controller responsible for coordination with the tower as we had two-way communications; however; I take full responsibility for what had occurred. I thought I was south of HWV; and due to the restricted visibility on a moonless night and no GPS; I lost situational awareness of our overall position. I was also distracted getting the ATIS with my student that we strayed too far east for our comfort. To correct this in the future; I will make sure to be more aware of my current position through use of pilotage/dead reckoning; especially at night when it can be challenging to identify visual landmarks.




Synopsis: C172 instructor reported that distraction and loss of situational awareness resulted in unauthorized entry into Class D airspace.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Challenger 350
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Flight Dynamics Navigation and Safety
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: This has been a subject that's received more and more comment on the flight deck as this year has gone by. The Challenger 350's voice annunciations on the ground are so loud that crewmembers can't hear each other or ATC while they're in progress. This frequently forces crewmembers to delay the callouts required by the AOM [Aircraft Operating Manual] until the voice annunciation has run its course. Particularly the 'cleared left; cleared to cross...cleared right' call taxiing across runways; and runway alignment calls when preparing for takeoff. These two types of situation can lead to delays in crossing an active runway; and delays in setting takeoff power after being cleared for takeoff. However; things came to a head yesterday when we were rolling out on Runway XX at ZZZ. It's a shorter runway; and the PF [Pilot Flying] elected to roll to the end before turning off. We were doing less than 20 knots; but the airplane was screaming so loudly that we had 200 feet remaining and 100 feet remaining that we could not hear Tower's taxi instructions twice. Twice we had to ask Tower to repeat himself; finally hearing him on the third attempt. This is not just annoying. Nor is it just a nuisance. This is an outright safety problem. I fully understand why the system is set up to prevent pilots from setting the volume on the annunciations. And the first thing the reader is going to suggest is that pilots turn up the volume on their ATC radios and interphone. Turning those up loud enough to override the aircraft annunciations would be downright painful. The annunciations are loud enough to wake the dead. And certainly far louder than necessary to be heard by a living human who has passed an FAA First Class physical examination. Surely; the annunciation volume can be adjusted through maintenance action. I suggest the company take advantage of this ability to set the volume at a more sensible level - loud enough to capture the crew's attention; but not loud enough to drown out all other communication.




Synopsis: CL350 First Officer reported the aircraft's voice annunciations on the ground are so loud that crewmembers have difficulty communicating.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: Hercules (C-130)/L100/382
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: An IFR C130 had a fire warning light in No. 2 Engine. Engine was shut down. I received a hand off and information from Center. Center advised the C130 was assigned a block altitude of 2;500-5;000 MSL. The C130 was cleared direct to the airport and I instructed them to advise if they wanted to land at a closer airport. The route of flight would take the C130 through a 3;500 MVA. I asked the C130 if they could turn to avoid the area or climb. They advised 'they were an emergency and were going direct to the airport'. I issued visual reports of the known obstacles in the area and the C130 advised they had the antenna in sight. To further complicate the issue; I transferred communication to another Sector; whose airspace the airport is located. The C130 could not talk to that Sector because the radios do no function correctly in that area. I believe this has been documented. Fix the radio.




Synopsis: TRACON Controller described a military aircraft emergency event when MVA requirements were compromised and radio communications with the emergency aircraft proved problematic.
Date: 201406
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Airbus Industrie Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B DEN
ATC / advisory: Tower DEN
Aircraft component: Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS)
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Maneuvering for landing for visual approach at DEN just outside of the FAP got a pop up TCAS Climb command. Threat aircraft showed 100 feet below us basically superimposed on our position. There were no previous traffic alerts. We went from maneuvering for a normal approach and landing to a 'Climb Climb' command. The green fly to arc was very small and at the top of the VVI and was commanding 3;200 feet per min. We executed the escape maneuver and went around. We informed the Tower that we were executing a TCAS climb. ATC said they were unaware of any aircraft in our vicinity however the Purser informed us after landing that he saw an aircraft out the window. Subsequent vectors for the next approach were uneventful.

Callback: The reporter stated that although ATC did not report traffic; a Flight Attendant confirmed it. Because the commanded maneuver was so extreme the crew was distracted about the aircraft's control and neither pilot remembered hearing clear of conflict. The 3;200 feet climb command was the most the reporter has ever seen and questioned the accuracy.



Synopsis: An air carrier Captain reported a pop up TCAS RA on a 5 NM final to DEN Runway 16 at about 2;000 feet and executed the escape maneuver and go-around. ATC reported no traffic at that location.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Cloudy; 6
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-31 Navajo/Chieftan/Mojave/T1040
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: AC Generator/Alternator
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Airport fueler was putting jet fuel in the PA31-350. I stopped him after he put 6 gallons in the right main tank. I had him top off with 100LL; wrongfully thinking a small amount would not be a problem. I flew the trip to ZZZ and back with no incident. When being parked I saw a red ALT and ALT INOP light come on the right engine; the one with the jet fuel in it. I do not remember any other negative engine indications. Being at the gate; I shut the engine down. I reported to the Director of Operations and the Director of Maintenance that I had flown the plane with 6 gallons of Jet A in A 56 gallon tank. The next day I found oil on the ground below the right engine.




Synopsis: PA31 pilot reported the ALT INOP light and oil leak occurred after flying with six gallons of Jet A fuel mistakenly mixed with the 100LL fuel in the right main tank.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZLA.ARTCC, CA
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZLA
ATC / advisory: Center ZLA
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Physiological - Other
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: There is a solar farm south of Las Vegas which is in Sector 6 and Sector 37's airspace.  Daily; during the late morning and early afternoon hours we get complaints from pilots of aircraft flying from the northeast to the southwest about the brightness of this solar farm. They usually ask us what it is because they don't know. On this particular morning; an air carrier complained about the brightness and reiterated that it was 'nearly blinding.'  I reported this to Management and was told that they were going to do nothing about it. They then suggested that I tell the pilot to report it through the safety reporting system that they have and to report it myself. I have no idea what can be done about this situation; but being a passenger on an aircraft that flew through this airspace and saw it for myself; I would say that something needs to be done. It is extremely bright and distracting.




Synopsis: ZLA Controller relayed concerns expressed by flight crews overflying a solar farm south of LAS. Flight crews have noted the facility causes nearly blinding reflection.
Date: 201412
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: TEB.Airport, NJ
Light: Night
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower TEB
Second aircraft: Light Transport
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Ground; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight; Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We were training on Ground control. We had Aircraft X on taxiway G holding short of runway 6. Aircraft Z was on taxiway G holding short of taxiway L. Aircraft Y was flaring out to land Rwy 6. The trainee told Aircraft X to follow a Gulfstream and continue via L. However this instruction was meant for Aircraft Z. Aircraft X never moved then stated he was told to cross the runway with an aircraft flaring out. The 'cross' instruction was never issued. No runway incursion took place but an accidental; ambiguous instruction was given to the aircraft which could be misinterpreted as a runway crossing.We believe this mistake took place because the trainee was using a confusing strip posting technique. We reviewed better ways to make strip postings less confusing and more efficient.




Synopsis: TEB Instructor reports of a situation where an aircraft thought they had clearance to cross a runway but did not due to an aircraft flaring out on the runway. No incursion occurred and the pilot did not move the taxiing aircraft until later.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Air/Ground Communication
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Before departing; a local A&P cleaned off the alternator which resolved an electrical generating problem. The alternator was generating power; but instead of continuing on to our original destination; I decided to return to [home airport]; so the plane's normal A&P can take off the alternator and decide if further maintenance was required. During the flight; the generator failed again; or there was a different issue with the radios. I tried calling the Tower using both the hand-held radio and the plane's own radio; neither worked. I squawked 7600; entered the airspace; flew over the field and entered a left downwind for landing.




Synopsis: A C172 pilot reported losing contact with the Tower; either because of radio or electrical system malfunctions. He squawked 7600 and landed.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZSE.ARTCC, WA
Aircraft: Citationjet (C525/C526) - CJ I / II / III / IV
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E ZSE
ATC / advisory: Center ZSE
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification
Second reporter function: Enroute
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; 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; Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The Citation jet was pointed out with Approach and cleared for the RNAV approach direct [fix] at 4000 feet. I told the Radar Controller at least 2 times that the MIA (Minimum IFR Altitude) was 4200 feet prior to the aircraft reaching the fix. The Radar Controller didn't amend the clearance and it appeared the aircraft was at 4000 feet prior to [fix] and below the MIA of 4200 feet. The scale of the map at quick glance could have appeared to the Radar Controller that [fix] was in a 4000 foot MIA and that's why they took no action.


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


Synopsis: A Controller working the Radar Assist position and their trainee reported the Radar Controller allowed an aircraft to descend below the Minimum IFR Altitude even though they advised him of the MIA.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: PIT.Tower, PA
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B PIT
ATC / advisory: Tower PIT
Aircraft component: Radio Altimeter
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Human-Machine Interface
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: Environment - Non Weather Related; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: After departing Runway 28R from PIT; at about 200 ft.; App 2 not avail msg and LDG ATT msg in FO (First Officer) HUD and RA (Radar Altimeter) on FO side displayed erroneous readout. FO RA displayed -5 ft. climbing thru 28;000 ft. No issues descending into ZZZ. Maintenance was advised and they deferred FO RA. I was told it would be replaced on the overnight.




Synopsis: Captain reported a series of erroneous equipment indications when departing out of PIT.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: PCT.TRACON, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 1
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B PCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON PCT
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While descending via vectors for RMN; a descent clearance was issued to descend to 2000. The initial part of the transmission was blocked; but my First Officer believed that it was for us. He read back the clearance and inserted that our N# was now cleared to 2000. I questioned him about the clearance and he insisted that he read back our call sign when responding to our clearance. At about 2300' the controlled asked what altitude were we descending to and the first officer responded that we were descending to 2000' as cleared. The controller said that clearance was for another aircraft. We asked what altitude he wanted us at and he said to just maintain 2000'. No other comments were made and shortly after that we were handed off to Quantico Approach.Standard procedure in the cockpit for any clearance for a change in altitude is that the PIC confirms hearing the same clearance as the first officer before changing altitude. We deviated from that policy and should not have. Strict adherence to our altitude change procedure should be adhered to in the future.




Synopsis: Corporate Jet Captain reported a descent on vectors that was meant for another aircraft.