elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; 2
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Weather; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We rolled out to the end of Runway XXC and exited. We arrived at night in moderate rain conditions. Taxi instructions [were] from Ground. ZZZ ramp is uncontrolled and no further contact with ATC is necessary to access our gate. As we made the left turn around the concourse that put us on the straightaway between [two gates]; I noticed a provisioning truck out of my periphery to the right. I did not perceive the truck as a threat as it appeared we had more than adequate clearance as the truck was on an access road. Additionally; the First Officer did not alert me to a proximity concern so I continued my taxi course and speed. We felt no impact or sound passing the provisioning truck. It was only after we were parked at the gate did I subsequently learn about our winglet grazing the back end of the provisioning truck. I also learned that the provisioning truck had departed the access road paved surface and was stuck in the grass. This was not evident to us as we approached the vehicle.As the PIC; I take full responsibility for the event that occurred. Night; rain; and the close proximity of the inbound taxi lane at ZZZ to the vehicle access road all were contributing factors along with the fact we had no warning of a disabled vehicle that could potentially cause an impedance to our taxi in. That being said; had I simply altered my taxi course; in which I had space to do so; queried the First Officer more proactively; or stopped the aircraft to positively ensure clearance; this ASAP would not have been written.   In addition to the above mentioned crew actions; it is incumbent on both pilots to speak up; as forcefully as necessary to prevent this type of event from occurring. Both of us are to assess the risks to the aircraft at all times. We can never just be along for the ride; become complacent; or assume the other guy always knows what he is doing. We have two pilots because it is required; and it also requires both pilots to be present and engaged.


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


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported after parking; ground crew notified the crew the aircraft winglet made contact with a truck on the access road.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Workload; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On my flight activity with [student]; we had an actual engine failure in Aircraft X. At approximately 2;200 ft. I simulated an engine failure for my student to recover from. As always; I turned the carb heat on and pulled the power back with the throttle. I told my student to recover at approximately 1;200 ft. To our surprise; when the throttle was pushed in; we did not get any power. I immediately said 'My flight controls' and ran through the engine restart procedure by memory. I had my student verify that it was all complete by referencing his checklist. After that; I immediately squawked 7700 and [advised ATC] all while lining the aircraft up with the grass in between the highway for an off-airport landing. I continued with the memory items of the forced landing checklist which consisted of unlatching the doors and confirming that the seat belts and shoulder harnesses were secured. After continuously trying to restart the engine and purposely not securing it; with the intent to restart the engine; our engine restarted at approximately 50 ft. AGL. I immediately climbed to a high altitude and remained close to the highway in case of another engine failure. I coordinated with Tower and proceeded inbound to land at ZZZ. For background information; our carb heat was working during the run-up and during other maneuvers that required carb heat.

Callback: Pilot reported carburetor ice was the best suspect. After maintenance review; no other issues were found with this aircraft.



Synopsis: C172 Flight Instructor reported a temporary loss of engine power; resulting in a precautionary landing.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: TUS.Airport, AZ
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E TUS
ATC / advisory: TRACON TUS
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Flew ZONNA1 arrival to TUS. I was PF (Pilot Flying) and did the arrival briefing prior to descent which included terrain hazards and the MSA. Both pilots had terrain selected. Approach control gave us a clearance to turn right to 270 and descend to 10;000' for sequencing. Soon after this clearance we entered IMC. Passing north and abeam Mt Lemmon at about 10;300'; we got an EGPWS TERRAIN PULL UP warning. I executed the EGPWS Recovery Action. Almost immediately we went VMC. After passing the MSA of 10;700 and visually verifying terrain clearance; I resumed normal flight; leveled at 11;000' and informed ATC that we had responded to a GPWS terrain warning. They acknowledged and gave us a descent to 9000'. Remainder of flight was uneventful.Either the Terrain system gave us a false alert or we were given a clearance to descend below the radar minimum altitude. We never got any indication on the Terrain display. STAR page showed us north of Mt Lemmon and the terrain depicted around it. While we had good terrain awareness; I should have queried Approach about an IMC descent below the Sector MSA.I recommend a Radar Minimum Altitudes chart be included in the Jeppesen pages for TUS.




Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported receiving a EGPWS warning while being vectored for approach to TUS airport.
Date: 201407
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: FUL.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Banner Tow
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: TFR VIP
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT; Tower FUL
Reporter organization: Other Aerial Advertising
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: Upon takeoff from Corona Airport; I climbed to 1;700 feet; and began my normal route to LA metro. Upon reaching the water treatment plant I was informed of a Presidential TFR. Fullerton Tower asked me if I was aware of the TFR; and stated that I was at the boundary. I quickly made a 180 degree turn back to Corona. I then called up SoCal Approach and asked if there was a way around the TFR so that I could continue my work. ATC informed me there was not and asked me to copy down a number for the TFR deviation.From now on I always check for current TFR's and I receive a briefing and check the FAA website. Doing so will prevent you from encountering TFR's and being violated. Being a safe pilot is most important to me and one should always check and double check. The TFR was on the Santa Monica VOR DME 044 degree radial at 6.1 nautical miles from the surface up to but not including 18;000 feet and was a 35 NM radius TFR.




Synopsis: Pilot was flying out of an airport and as approaching the destination was questioned if he knew about the VIP TFR. The pilot responded he did and made a 180 turn. He then contacted Approach Control and asked if there was a way around the TFR to his destination. There was not and pilot was given a number to call for pilot deviation.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Beechcraft Twin Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel Quantity-Pressure Indication
Component problem: Design; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Departed with fuel 100-125 gallons (I thought). I added 60 gallons and aircraft fuel gauges indicated 50 at [my departure airport]. Flight time for IFR filing estimated to be 1:43 which included a 15 KT headwind. Departure uneventful leveled at 14;000 - reduced fuel flow and encountered a mixture control that would only reduce fuel flow to 23.5 GPH. Normal fuel burn 19.5/20.5 GPH. Approximately 20 minutes from planned landing fuel totalizer showed 20 gallons needed to complete flight. Aircraft gauges showed 20/25 left/right remaining. Right engine failed first attempted to cross feed and within a few minutes left engine started losing power and then both shut down. Lessons:First; never trust aircraft fuel gauges until it is determined the exact readings.Secondly; adjust flight profile when normal limits are exceeded. Lastly; if any doubt -land as soon as possible and take corrective action. Flying for 50 years and never thought I would run out of fuel but I was advised by a retired FAA employee to file this report. Even though it said it is not intended for accidents. Reports have been made to FAA and NTSB.

Callback: The Reporter stated that both tanks were just below the yellow quantity caution when the engines quit at which time he assumed meant he had 40 gallons total on board. He was talking with his destination airport Tower Controller when the second engine fail so he attempted to land at a nearby CTAF airport; but landed just short of that airport's closest runway. He decided at the approach to stall shudder he had better get the aircraft on the ground. He was not injured even though the aircraft was damaged.



Synopsis: A B60 pilot reported an off airport landing after both engines shutdown in flight because of fuel starvation even though his fuel quantity system indicated fuel on board.
Date: 201512
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: CLT.Airport, NC
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Airbus 318/319/320/321 Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B CLT
ATC / advisory: Tower CLT
Second aircraft: Airbus 318/319/320/321 Undifferentiated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Go around from low altitude initiated by the crew due to Wake Turbulence by preceding landing Airbus 321. Wind was virtually light and variable allowing wake from preceding aircraft to linger over the approach end requiring greater than normal sidestick inputs to stay aligned with the runway.




Synopsis: A321 Captain reported executing a go-around at CLT when wake turbulence was encountered on short final.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was the First Officer and Pilot Monitoring for Flight #XXXX; ZZZ1-ZZZ. The flight had been uneventful all the way through the approach. We were cleared for the visual approach to Runway XX at ZZZ; and after contacting Tower; we were given our landing clearance. Aircraft were landing and departing on Runway XX as well as departing on Runway XYR. I did not specifically hear a takeoff clearance for an aircraft for Runway XX while we were on final. At 400 ft. AGL; an aircraft entered Runway XX. The Captain said out loud that this didn't look right and I commented that the aircraft may be crossing the runway where an FBO is on the other side but it seemed closer than what the Tower usually allowed. The aircraft then made the ninety degree turn to lineup on the runway and immediately started taking off. At that instant the Captain already said he was going around; and before I could say anything [to] the Tower; the Controller directed us to go-around. We were then given a right turn and altitude to climb. The Captain performed a smooth and normal go-around and we were handed off to Departure. Approach re-vectored us for the visual back to Runway XX; where we landed without further incident and taxied to the gate.Go-around when an aircraft entered red landing runway while on short final.


Second narrative: Landing configuration; Runway XX (ZZZ). We were cleared to land. Aircraft entered the landing runway at approximately 500 ft. AGL. We initiated a go-around; and circled back to land with no further incident. Go-around due to aircraft on landing runway. Radio congestion; increase awareness of surroundings at a busy facility.


Synopsis: B737-700 flight crew reported a ground conflict during short final resulting in a go-around.
Date: 202003
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: 30
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Other / Unknown; Distraction; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: My flight review expired at the end of month.  I had been in State X for most of next month and then spent two weeks in place Y for yet the next month.  When I returned the COVID-19 pandemic was starting to take over everyone's life.  I had no time for flying in that period; until I was asked to fill in for an instructor who was leaving.  For whatever reason; I never looked at my Flight Review date and missed it.  I flew on that date and four subsequent dates before something made me look.  I was out!  Inattention to details has never been a problem till Coronavirus came along.  Purely human error - mine.  Sorry.




Synopsis: Pilot reported being outside of flight currency requirements and cited distraction from the COVID-19 pandemic as a contributing factor.
Date: 202012
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Operator: Air Carrier
Mission: Other unknown
Flight phase: Other N/A
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Other / Unknown; Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other unknown
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Many of our fellow pilots have said to me that many pilots and others have been affected by COVID in one way or another; either necessitating quarantine or even hospitalization. Further; and in particularly our fleet; there is a disruption to the training schedules due to a lack of instructors; hence little; if any continuity. Have the Union and the Company considered shutting down for another month as the surge upon surge rages? There's no need to rush training if pilots will go non-current without the additional flying. Plus an additional month might get us to the beginning of a vaccination.I don't know if I have missed communications or not from the Union or the Company; but what is the plan for vaccinating pilots or other front line employees? Is there a timetable? Where do we stand in the national 'Phase 1' rollout? Has an update to the memorandum on pay during COVID sick leave been considered? Specifically; what happens to the pilot who receives round 1 or 2 of the vaccination and has to call in sick due to side effects. What happens to a pilot who has adverse side effects which lead to LTD? Could this pilot apply for the new LTD benefits and not wait until month X? Is a pilot required to take the vaccination? If yes; what happens if he declines? Where will pilots get the vaccination? Does a pilot have to wait until the Company procures the vaccine? What has FAA medical said about any of this?




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported concerns regarding company COVID-19 related plans pertaining to sick leave; vaccinations; training schedules; etc.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: CEC.Airport, CA
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G CEC
ATC / advisory: CTAF CEC
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Inflight Event / Encounter VFR In IMC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: This morning I checked AWOS for weather at CEC for a flight from ZZZ1. The report was VFR. In addition; a fellow pilot was at CEC and also advised via telephone that the airport was VFR. I departed ZZZ1 for the short flight to CEC. Immediately upon climbout; I could see that the sky was entirely clear. I made an initial report 5 miles out. When I advised a 1 mile final for 30; another pilot asked me to repeat; and I did so. As I was touching down; the other pilot advised that 'the AWOS showed IFR.' There were no aircraft in the pattern. I taxied off the runway and immediately pulled up the AWOS information for CEC; which showed the airport at VFR conditions. Because I was concerned with the unknown pilot's pronouncement; I took a screen shot of this information. I have subsequently learned that the AWOS service at CEC has recently been criticized by local pilots for showing IFR conditions when in fact completely clear and VFR. I do not know if this has been formally raised with the airport manager. While I do not believe that I was in violation of airspace rules; in an excess of caution I determined to file this report. In 25 years of aviating; I have never filed a report nor had any violations of any kind.

Callback: Reporter stated the AWOS is located on the beach and may be indicating false readings based on mist from high wave action or other phenomena associated with location.  He stated other pilots report that it may well report inaccurate during actual IFR causing serious issues.



Synopsis: Small aircraft pilot reported frequent erroneous weather AWOS reports at CEC airport.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The RADAR was released to airway facilities. Both of the supervisors on duty refused to release the RADAR due to traffic volume and approaching weather. The first few aircraft that I worked deviated 20-25 miles north and south to avoid thunderstorm activity. I was unable to provide any assistance because of the RADAR outage. This was one of the most potentially disastrous situations I've encountered in 20 years and was completely avoidable. It is my understanding that because we had people here on per diem to work on the RADAR; the facility manager released the RADAR to airway facilities. When the supervisor on duty evaluates the current conditions; the release determinations should be binding.




Synopsis: TRACON Controller voiced concern regarding the facility managers decision to release the RADAR equipment to maintenance during weather deviation operations contrary to the denial of the floor supervisors.