elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201709
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: AVL.Airport, NC
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E AVL
ATC / advisory: TRACON AVL
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
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 Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were expecting vectors for the RNAV RWY 17 approach into Asheville. We were cleared to ONZIQ; told to cross at 6000; cleared for the approach; and told to report inbound.  We turned inbound over ONZIQ and began our descent. After descending and flying final for a few miles; Approach called and asked us to climb to 8000; which we did.  After some vectors and clearing us for the full RNAV 17 approach; they asked us to call their phone number after landing. I called; and the supervisor told me that we should have flown the full approach instead of flying it as vectors.  I explained that we didn't recall any phraseology that indicated a full approach; and we were simply told to report inbound. He admitted that they probably should have worded it properly like 'cleared full approach' and 'report procedure turn inbound.' He also admitted that since they rarely do full approaches into Asheville; and that the radar issues they were having had them off guard; so to speak. This was indeed my observation; because there were a lot of non-standard ATC phraseology and procedures used today in Asheville by approach control and tower/ground.




Synopsis: Air taxi pilot reported not flying the full approach into AVL as ATC intended due to a poorly worded clearance.
Date: 201709
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Filed flight plan uploaded. DLC (Data Link Communication) departure different/changed from uploaded flight plan. JeppFD-Pro flight plan also denoted change to filed and uploaded flight plan. Safety compromised by DLC not having the same format as PDC as well as the inability to print the DLC.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported he was concerned that their Data Link departure change message does not have the same format as the predeparture clearance message.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZAB.ARTCC, NM
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZAB
ATC / advisory: Center ZAB
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; 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
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We received a clearance to cross HOGGZ intersection at FL250 while cruising at FL270. I was the PF and entered FL250 in the MCP and verbalized 'FL250.' I looked at the LEGS page and noticed FL250 for the crossing on what I thought was HOGGZ intersection. I monitored the Descent page and several miles prior to descent ATC asked us if we were going to make HOGGZ at FL250. Upon further review we noticed that we had passed HOGGZ while at FL270 missing our crossing restriction. ATC advised us to maintain FL270 and expect a descent after crossing traffic. We complied with the clearance and completed the flight without any further incident.




Synopsis: B737 FO reported failure to comply with a crossing restriction.
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LGA.Airport, NY
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: IMPROPER REFUELING OF AIRCRAFT IN LGAAt the gate in LGA; we got an indication that the nose door had been opened. I directed the First Officer (FO) to go out and see what was going on. FO discovered that the fueler had grounded the fuel truck to the grounding port in the nose gear bay. The FO told the fueler to stop fueling operations and to bond the fuel truck to the aircraft at the appropriate bonding port under the wing. The fueler stated that bonding and grounding were the same thing on his truck and that he didn't have the appropriate bonding adapter anyways. The FO instructed him again to cease fueling operations. The FO and I then discussed the situation to determine our next course of action. I went out to speak to the fueler to find that he had ignored our instructions and had already finished fueling the plane.This is an extremely dangerous situation. The FAA is very clear that 'Grounding during aircraft fueling is not allowed'. (SNFPA 407 Standards for Aircraft Fuel Servicing/Fuel Safety Training).By not equalizing the electric potential between the fuel truck and aircraft fuel components; a risk of static discharge is greatly increased. Equalization of potential cannot be accomplished by attaching a wire at the aircraft grounding port; as it is not connected to the aircraft's fuel components.Properly train and certify personnel conducting aircraft refueling operations.




Synopsis: Regional Jet Captain reported their fueler did not follow proper grounding procedures.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We were at about FL 240; deviating in VMC conditions around some weather; when we felt the aircraft yaw to the left. I was the Pilot Flying and immediately noticed the #2 engine N1 had spiked from 94% to 107% along with the N1 Overspeed light. I began pulling the #2 thrust lever back to attempt to get it back under the N1 limit. There was no EGT exceedance during this event. After attempting to match up the N1's; there was about a four-inch thrust lever split. We accomplished the Engine Limit/Surge/Stall QRH Checklist and determined it was best to return to [the departure airport]. We landed uneventfully about 15 minutes later.


Second narrative: Run-away number 2 engine N1 resulting in returning to departure city. All checklists and procedures were complied with and there were no incidents. Aircraft has a history of same issue.


Synopsis: The pilots of a B737-300 observed an N1 overspeed condition of the #2 engine and elected to return to the departure airport. A successful landing was completed.
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 1201-1800
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: Parked
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Aircraft; Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Hand-propped aircraft was started with throttle fully advanced; and no one in cockpit. Traveled approximately 10-15 FT collided with a parked truck. The right wing also contacted the tip of the vertical stabilizer on a nearby aircraft. Damage: Truck -- Side of body received impact damage; tire punctured by prop tip; flat 'topper' punctured by prop tip. Other aircraft -- broken vertical stab attach bracket; dented tip on vertical stab. Accident aircraft -- bent prop; bent motor mount; dented cowl; 1 bent wing rib.Details: I was being instructed on how to prop this airplane. First attempt resulted in flooded carburetor. Per procedure; magnetos were shut off; throttle advanced to full; and prop turned backwards 8 blades. Then magnetos on; throttle retarded to idle; except that after magnetos on and just about to retard throttle; another vehicle appeared and was insistent that he would drive around the plane. There was insufficient room; so trotted off to turn him around and forgot that the throttle was still advanced. Plane jumped chocks; we were able to pull throttle back; but it was still moving and spinning down to idle when it hit truck.




Synopsis: Luscombe 8A pilot reported the aircraft got away from him during a hand prop exercise with an instructor; striking a truck and another aircraft.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Cessna 337 Super Skymaster
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach; Landing
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; 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: Called landing intentions on CTAF frequency on approach to airport and prior to entering traffic pattern. No other traffic heard. On downwind leg; observed another aircraft nearby flying  approximately same heading but heard nothing on radio. I called my position and intentions on my radio but heard no response. I watched other aircraft continue on course and I landed after flying base and final legs of the pattern and calling my position on the radio. While taxiing on ground after landing; discovered volume of my radio was turned down. Turned volume up and heard the other aircraft calling landing intentions at the airport. They had apparently been flying the pattern too; and extended their downwind while I landed.Factors involved were my inadvertently turning volume down too far; and distraction of passengers (the radio was active with lots of faraway traffic and passenger asked question; so I turned radio volume down to hear better). As a side note; did not see a traffic alert on ADS-B (Automatic Dependent Surveillance - Broadcast); suggesting other aircraft was not ADS-B equipped.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported a NMAC on approach stating they did not hearing hear other aircraft but upon landing realized their volume was turned down.
Date: 202006
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: As aircraft come out of storage; Circuit Breakers and systems have not been reactivated correctly causing numerous rejected takeoffs or return to airfields.I suggest a task card or work assignment on an aircraft coming out of storage as a last item before aircraft release depicting a graphic of that fleet specific circuit breaker panels and an instruction to visually check all CB's to be pushed in except those that are deferred etc. Also a CAT 3 check should be assigned which could capture most system failures due to improper reactivation. Best prevention would include a high power runup.




Synopsis: Maintenance Technician reported that aircraft are coming out of storage with circuit breakers and other systems in the incorrect setting/position.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: CLT.Airport, NC
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground CLT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: Pushed back from gate and told East Ramp we needed 18C. Controller told us they would coordinate. East Ramp then cleared us to taxi forward; hold short then contact South Ramp. South Ramp told us to taxi on the North line and contact ground at Spot 9. We contacted ground at Spot 9 and continued forward into the non-movement area as Ground inquired why we were not going to 18L and what our SID was. Ground told us to stop then told us to taxi forward to E13. E13 is marked on the 10-9 page as being behind spot 9. We clarified the instructions with Ground and continued forward to join the new E13 at Spot 4N.Confusion occurred due to missed coordination for required takeoff runway (18C); new taxiway markings not updated on 10-9 pages; and congested control frequencies.[Suggest] Update 10-9 pages to show standard routes for taxi to/from runways and ramps. Many airports have documented named taxi routes; the best of these include words and diagrams. CLT operations would benefit from having documented instructions.




Synopsis: Air Carrier pilot reported confusion during taxi due to inaccurate airport diagram.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Human-Machine Interface
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On the right downwind we were given a heading of 160 for the base turn to the ILS. On the right base we were given a clearance of maintain 2;600 feet and a heading to intercept the localizer. At this point we were about three miles from the FAP and configured at flaps 20 and doing 180 kias. As the pilot flying (PF) I was in white needles in heading mode with NAV mode armed. The aircraft intercepted the final approach course and leveled at 2;600 feet. At this point I unintentionally delayed switching the NAV source selector to green needles for the approach. I then switched to green needles and realized the aircraft was above glide slope (GS). I attempted to descend in VS mode to capture the GS; but the aircraft was in ALT CAP mode. While this was going on the Pilot Monitoring (PM) was talking to ATC and setting the final aircraft configuration per Standard Operating Procedures (SOP). I realized at this point we were very close to the FAP and became fixated on the GS and neglected the airspeed as a part of my scan. At this point the Pilot Monitoring said 'check speed' I saw the speed was very slow and at that moment I advanced the thrust levers at the same time the stick shaker activated - we recovered and executed a go-around per the SOP and then returned for a normal approach and landing.


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


Synopsis: CRJ-200 flight crew reported becoming slow during an ILS approach activating the stick shaker briefly. A go-around ensued followed by a normal landing.
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DTW.Airport, MI
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class B DTW
ATC / advisory: Tower DTW
Second aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During taxi out in DTW on Runway 22L; we had a readback misinterpretation with DTW Tower. The CA and I were next in line for takeoff for the runway; and I heard a clearance from Tower 'Aircraft X line up and wait.' I repeated the clearance and the Captain and I agreed we were cleared into position. Around the exact same time of us crossing the runway hold line another aircraft on the field reported a coyote running toward the active runway. Once the Tower had completed the coyote call he asked who was holding in position. I stated 'Aircraft X.' The Controller then stated 'I didn't clear Aircraft X.  Aircraft Y verify number one holding short the runway.' Aircraft Y confirmed he was number one. We were then cleared for takeoff and continued with the flight. When we were handed off to Cleveland Departure they gave us the DTW Tower phone number to call. We continued onto ZZZ normally and called when we secured the aircraft at the gate. When we called the DTW Tower phone number; the Controller who was working ground answered our call.  He stated 'I was working ground at the time and I dropped your strip and got the flights out of order.' He additionally added he did not think the Supervisor would pull the tapes and review this as there was (a direct quote) 'No runway incursion.'We could have verified with Tower we were cleared into position. However; we did read the clearance back and received no clarification or corrections. The Controller was also dealing with the coyote and was possibly distracted and when he looked up to the runway expecting to see a [medium large transport] he saw us. With the distractions adding up we could have been more proactive.




Synopsis: Pilot reports of Control Tower advising they were not told to LUAW; when the pilot read it back and heard nothing in return from the Tower.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: During a normal take-off roll going through approximately 85 knots tower gave direction to reject the take-off; 'take-off clearance is cancelled; abort take-off.' At which time the Captain rejected the take-off; uneventfully. As the take-off was rejected at approximately 85-90 knots we cleared the runway; taxied to a gate and maintenance inspected the aircraft. We were cleared by maintenance and resumed operations. During the maintenance inspection as we waited at the gate the Captain contacted the tower and we were informed that their Airport Surface Detection Equipment ground surveillance radar had sounded an alarm in the tower which they were compelled to address by calling for us to reject the take-off. Tower informed us that no visual conflict was noticed but the alarm had to be followed. No other deviation or aircraft issue was noticed therefore we decided to continue operations.


Second narrative: We were cleared for takeoff by lax tower. At about 80 knots tower told us takeoff clearance was cancelled and to reject takeoff. We had reached approximately 90 knots when reject was started. We cleared runway and asked tower the reason for the reject. They told us they had received an false ground radar alert and could see there was no conflict; but it is a requirement to still call the reject. We called maintenance ; returned to gate for a high speed reject inspection. Maintenance cleared us for flight and we continued approximately 45 minutes later.


Synopsis: Air Carrier flight crew reported they rejected a takeoff at LAX when the Tower Controller cancelled takeoff clearance and called abort. The crew reported the ATC ground surveillance radar had sounded a false alarm.