elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZLA.ARTCC, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZLA
ATC / advisory: Center ZLA
Aircraft component: Data Transmission and Automatic Calling
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Honeywell GDC service is used for generating computerized flight plans under contract with annual fee. This service is usually accurate and reliable. In this case the quick compute flight plan (as well as all other available suggested and other) flight plan routings were the same. ATC advised that our clearance took us right through Restricted Airspace over Yucca Mountain. All the routes they offer are going through this area. ATC - ZLA - gave us vectors to remain outside of R airspace and there was no occurrence incident. This report is to advise that the computerized flight plan service; Honeywell GDC Go Direct does not have an accurate airspace model for avoiding Restricted Airspace in this area and needs to always be supervised and checked.




Synopsis: Captain reported that the Honeywell GDC computer-generated flight plan built a route through restricted airspace.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: DCA.Airport, DC
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower DCA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Bird / Animal
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We had a bird strike at rotation taking off Runway 19 at DCA. The bird hit the radome and the Captain's windshield. On climb out there was a loud squeal and we suspected a window seal leak. We [advised ATC of the situation] and with Captain's authority; landed overweight. We followed the appropriate QRH procedures. The landing was normal; touchdown was less than 50 feet per minute and we weighed 147;000 pounds. A bird strike form has been submitted. The Aircraft Maintenance Log (AML) was filled out appropriately and addressed by maintenance; no damage was found.


Second narrative: Takeoff from DCA Runway 19; just after rotation we had a single thump on the airframe and noticed a large bug splat on the Captain's forward windscreen close to the center line. We concluded it was a bird strike; no other indications noticed. The Captain continued the climb and clean up with no problems until reaching roughly 4;000 feet where a very loud squeal was heard. We assumed a window seal had been compromised and under Captain's Authority decided to [advise ATC of the situation] and divert. Speed never exceeded 250 and altitude no higher than 5;000. Aircraft maintained pressurization throughout. We did notice the squeal decreased and ceased at less than 1.4 differential PSI (3;500 feet). Appropriate QRH checklists were accomplished. We landed overweight at 147;000 with less than 60 feet/minute [on the] Vertical Speed Indicator (VSI) on touchdown; 30 flaps; brakes 1 and rolled long to prevent overheating brakes. Crash and rescue met us on just off the runway for inspection of airframe and brakes. No issues. Bird strike form submitted.


Synopsis: B737-800 crew reported a bird strike on departure from DCA which resulted in a loud squeal and a diversion.
Date: 201306
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ORD
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Joining the localizer at ORD we encountered wake turbulence from a B747 ahead of us. The turbulence was surprising because it put our aircraft into a bank one direction; we recovered; then the other (probably the other wake trail.) Very little altitude was gained or lost. We felt this was probably pretty surprising to the passengers as it had been a very smooth ride up to that point. The Captain decided to make an announcement explaining this to the passengers. The heavy was more than 5 miles ahead of us but we didn't have it in sight. Must have been some strange wind patterns or the heavy was high joining or something for us to encounter this because we were pretty much on the localizer and glideslope joining. The rest of the approach we came in a half dot high and didn't encounter anymore of the wake.




Synopsis: B737 First Officer reported encountering wake vortex in trail of a B747 on approach at ORD that caused uncommanded roll.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Weather Radar
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
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 Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Aircraft radar failed shortly after takeoff. Declared an emergency complied with all appropriate checklists and returned for landing; at 155;000 LBS all was uneventful.




Synopsis: B737-800 First Officer experiences the failure of the weather radar shortly after takeoff. An emergency is declared and the flight returns to the departure airport.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SEA.Airport, WA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B SEA
ATC / advisory: TRACON S46
Second aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On a visual approach to 16R; we were about 4 miles in trail of a 737 with autopilot and autothrottles engaged. I was PM [pilot monitoring] and noted that the 737 was on higher path to the runway; and we would probably clip their wake. Outside of FINKA; we encountered the wake turbulence and experienced approximately 30 deg left roll in response. The AP and AT disconnected and the Captain resumed hand flying the airplane. The following caution messages posted on EICAS: WINDSHEAR FAIL; AT FAIL; STALL PROT FAIL; and AOA LIMIT FAIL. I grabbed the QRH and started looking for the messages while configuring landing flaps. I didn't want to be heads down in the book instead of monitoring flight path and speed; so I set aside the QRH to resume monitoring the Captain's manual approach. We considered a go-around; however; the aircraft was configured and stable; so we continued to landing. I noted that we lost green dot; amber and red band indications on the speed tape. After landing; the caution messages cleared and were replaced by ADS PROBE 2; 3; & 4 FAIL messages. I looked at the QRH while we taxied in. We ran the [checklist] and handed the airplane over to maintenance. After reviewing the STALL PROT FAIL QRH; I saw it calls for Vref Full + 15 knots; which was about 5 knots faster than our bugged Vapp. If I had to do it over again; I would more strongly consider going around to complete all the QRH procedures; especially in cases of high winds or low weather.




Synopsis: ERJ-175 First Officer reported encountering wake turbulence on arrival into SEA that resulted in multiple EICAS messages.
Date: 202110
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
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; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While descending into ZZZ; we experienced a dirty sock/musty smell starting around FL180.  The smell dissipated as we descended; and was completely gone during approach and landing.  The #1 Flight Attendant (F/A) called at 4;000 feet; and reported that they were experiencing the smell throughout the airplane.  I spoke to the FA after landing and the FA did not report that any customers had complained.  To date; neither myself nor First Officer have experienced any physical problems.  No further input.




Synopsis: A320 Captain reported a fumes event during descent starting at FL180. Fumes dissipated gradually and completely dissipated during approach and landing.
Date: 201901
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZZ
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: While executing the RNAV Approach in to ZZZZ. We were told by ATC to execute a missed approach due to drone activity over or near the airport. We executed the missed approach; entered holding and were vectored back for a second RNAV approach; this time uneventful. On the first approach we also came within 1/2 a mile of a paraglider at our altitude in the vicinity of the ZZZZZ intersection.




Synopsis: 777 First Officer reported an ATC initiated missed approach due to drone activity.
Date: 201808
Location: N47.Airport, PA
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E ; Class G 
ATC / advisory: TRACON 
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: The TFR in place at Bedminster; New Jersey places airport 47N within the 30NM ring. This; of course; requires pilots to be on an IFR flight plan or have a VFR flight plan on file; and have a transponder code and communication with ATC. For those of us who operate at this airport; we have been told by ATC that we are unable to depart IFR; unless able to climb in VMC to the Minimum Vectoring Altitude (MVA) of 2000 feet. We have been told that the reason for this is that SBJ VOR is the only IFR departure fix that has been flight tested for this airport and SBJ is within the 10NM 'no fly' ring of the TFR. 1. This restriction is causing undue burden on the pilots wishing or needing to depart in IFR conditions from 47N. 2. This restriction is effectively denying access to the flying public from using their own tax-payer-funded public ATC system. 3. With the vagaries of weather reporting; this restriction is potentially encouraging unsafe practices by encouraging pilots to depart in marginal conditions in order to pick up and continue on their IFR flight plan. Anecdotally; I understand that there are other nearby non-towered airports where this same problem exists. The solution to this is to flight test one or more additional departure fixes that lie outside the 10NM TFR ring.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported instrument departure procedures ATC imposed upon an airport with a nearby TFR in effect are unsafe.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZLA.ARTCC, CA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E ZLA
ATC / advisory: Center ZLA
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While working Sector 21 during a busy departure/arrival push; Aircraft X reported that on the previous sector he had an RA and had to descend for the traffic.  The traffic was in my airspace; but SoCal Tracon was working the aircraft climbing into my airspace as LOA dictates.  This is problematic because often enough they do not issue or look for VFR traffic in our sky even though they are climbing into it.  This is what happened with Aircraft X.  We don't really know when they climb or turn aircraft and is often too late to call them with traffic.  I did see the traffic at 15;500 feet and did issue it to some of my aircraft; but was too busy to tell if it would have been a factor for Aircraft X who was talking to SoCal and apparently did not see the traffic (or did and didn't do anything to avoid it).Either give SoCal TRACON more airspace to climb aircraft in their own sky or change the LOA to only climb to the top of their airspace (13;000 feet).  This had been a problem for as long as I have been assigned to ZLA.




Synopsis: ZLA Controller reports of pilot telling him about a RA that he had while talking to the underlying Approach Control.  Controller alluded to this happening all the time.
Date: 201704
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Super King Air 350
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While climbing through approximately FL230 at our best climb speed; ATC requested us to increase climb rate as it would help them out tremendously and also gave us a frequency change. I told the FO to reply that we could not increase our rate of climb as we were already doing the best we could. The FO (who is also a company Captain) told the Controller that we would give him the best we could and acknowledged our frequency change. Before the FO contacted the new Controller I reiterated that we needed to let them know that we could not increase our rate of climb. The FO then stated to me 'I'm not going to tell them that. I will tell them that we will give them what we can and let them figure it out.' I was taken aback by his statement and attitude. The FO then contacted the new Controller and told them that we were climbing as fast as we could. At this point; having told the new Controller we were climbing as well as we could; I let the issue drop for the sake of not creating a hostile environment on the flight deck. The Controller did not make any further mention of our climb rate.  I was so taken aback by this Captain's attitude that I did not respond as I would have with a new FO and gotten on the radio myself and made clear that we could not comply with the ATC request to increase climb rate. In the future I will not attempt such diplomacy as I tried on this Captain acting as an FO; but will act as I would normally and make sure there is no confusion between ATC and my aircraft. One very important human factors lesson I have taken away from this issue is the effect that having two Captains on a flight deck can make. Our company routinely uses two Captains and in such cases in the past the other Captains have always deferred to the individual that is designated as the trip Captain. I have also done this when I have been assigned as an FO. I have learned to be vigilant in the future for other's who may not remember that I am the Captain. I will include this reminder of crew roles in all future crew briefings.




Synopsis: BE-350 Captain reported having CRM issues with a Captain-qualified First Officer.
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 30
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Decathlon 8KCAB
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Talon (T38)
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was instructing a private pilot in a Super Decathlon; he was trying to earn his tailwheel endorsement. We were doing touch and goes and according to ATC the primary radar was nonfunctional. We were in the right downwind leg near the approach end; when we were instructed to do a left 360 turn. We read back the instruction and completed the left 360 turn. We were then told 'extend [your] upwind; I'll call your downwind' by the controller. Before we could clarify the instructions; the controller then told us 'correction extend downwind I'll call the base' and we read it back before continuing our downwind past the approach end of the runway. The controller then told us to make another left 360 turn and we read that back and begin and begin the left 360 turn. At this point we were at least a mile past the runway and unable to see it. We came out of the 360 turn and continued back on our extended downwind. I then noticed that we were getting close to the extended centerline of the runway; so I told the private pilot that he need to move to the left. As he began turning away from the extended centerline we saw a T38 pass below us uncomfortably close.




Synopsis: Decathlon instructor pilot reports being issued two 360 degree turns on the downwind for spacing for an inbound T38. During the maneuvers the student allows his aircraft to drift into the final approach course and a NMAC results.