elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201902
Location: ATL.Airport, GA
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi; Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ATL
Second aircraft: Gulfstream Jet Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Tower cleared us to line up and wait Runway 26L. After the Captain lined us up; we were in position approximately 45 seconds and Tower directed us to exit the runway at Taxiway E13. We were placed behind another Company aircraft and another aircraft. After we exited; a Gulfstream if I recall correctly was cleared on and departed; followed shortly by another aircraft. The approximate additional fuel burn for us was 300 pounds. This was fuel we were not planned for and did not need to burn. By the time the Gulfstream departed we could have been three miles down range; this was an unacceptable and ridiculous delay. We have no control over Tower prerogatives; but I have never heard of an aircraft directed to exit the runway so another non priority/non emergency aircraft could depart.




Synopsis: B737 First Officer reported being told to exit the runway they were previously cleared to; to be re-sequenced for departure behind another aircraft; causing delay.
Date: 201709
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: Super King Air 200
Operator: Government
Operating under: Part 125
Flight plan: None
Mission: Tactical
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Second aircraft: Cessna Citation Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: Aircraft X was on mission over [a] fire; approximately 5 NM southwest of ZZZ airport at 11;500 MSL. A TFR was active up to 7000 MSL. While operating within the TFR boundaries laterally; we were outside of the TFR vertically. The crew had established communications via flight following with approach at the time of the incident. Aircraft X was on a westbound heading (own nav) when ATC advised of a citation; at six o'clock; 3-4 miles; westbound; same altitude. I noted the call sign and asked the air attack (sitting right seat) if he was talking to Aircraft Y. The air attack indicated that no communication had been established with Aircraft Y and began attempting to do so. While the air attack was attempting [to] hail Aircraft Y; I monitored the progress of the approaching aircraft on TCAS. By the time the Aircraft Y was 1 mile away; I had reached my comfort limit; and ATC advised me that the approaching aircraft did not have me in sight and to either climb or descend. The air attack was unable to hail Aircraft Y on the tactical frequency. The TCAS indicated that the approaching aircraft was 100 feet below me. I elected to an immediate climbing left turn; away from and to better see the approaching aircraft. I never saw Aircraft Y. ATC advised me when the traffic was no longer a factor; we then resumed our mission over the fire. The rest of the flight was uneventful.The only thing I think I could have done to avoid this conflict was to take evasive action sooner. However; I was allowing time for: the air attack to perform his duty to hail the approaching aircraft; and the approaching aircraft to see me since I was unable to see them. Another reason why I hesitated to act was because I had the right of way according to FAR 91.113.




Synopsis: A BE20 pilot reported that flight following advised him of an approaching aircraft so they took evasive action to avoid a mid-air collision.
Date: 202001
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Regional Jet CL65; Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 125
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Second aircraft: Cessna Aircraft Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was the PIC; and I was in the right seat.  We were taxing for takeoff to Runway XX at ZZZ.  Upon reaching the end of Runway XX; we were cleared for takeoff on Runway XX. As my co-captain took the runway; he used all the runway and made a hard 90 degree turn to line up on the centerline.  As he was about to add takeoff power; I noticed a plane on TCAS not far from the end of the runway at 600 ft. AGL and warned the other pilot.  We looked out of the windshield and got a visual on the other aircraft which appeared to be heading towards the airport.  When the plane quickly turned down the runway opposite direction to us and appeared to be descending rapidly; I keyed the mike and asked on Tower frequency is that plane landing on our runway. I did not get an answer; and the plane was now about to land opposite direction on Runway XA.  I told the other pilot to get off of the runway; he powered up and exited at the next runway exit about 400 ft. down the runway. The plane appeared to be a Cessna 172 and exited the runway around midfield; still nothing was said on the radio.  The Cessna asked if he could taxi to [the FBO] and Tower responded yes for him to taxi to [the FBO].  The emergency vehicles then exited the fire station; and I heard Tower tell the emergency responders that he reported engine trouble; I guess he reported it to departure.  It was not on Tower.  We were eventually cleared to taxi back to the end and cleared to take off with nothing else said to us from the Tower.




Synopsis: Captain reported that another aircraft landed on the opposite direction runway after they were cleared for takeoff.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: JAX.TRACON, FL
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E JAX
ATC / advisory: TRACON JAX
Aircraft component: Aeroplane Flight Control
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Was repositioning Aircraft X to GNV for repairs to be made to the tachometer time. I made the decision to fly IFR to Gainesville on this flight being that the cloud bases were around 2000-2500; I was in and out of the clouds at 4;000 most of the flight to GNV. About halfway to GNV I noticed a stiffness in the aileron control that was not there when I took off. I notified ATC immediately of the situation and that at the initial sign of the problem [and] that I would monitor the situation and let them know if it deteriorated. About 10 minutes later I noticed that I had very little roll control to the left; full yoke movement to the left only produced about 5 degrees of bank to the left and it felt as if the controls were binding up. At that Point I immediately notified ATC the situation had deteriorated. At that point GNV was the closest airport and made the most sense to continue to GNV. I continued the last 15 miles into GNV VFR and landed without incident. Upon landing ARF vehicles met me at the runway and followed me to the ramp. On the ground the controls moved normally but still had a stiffness to them.




Synopsis: A Cessna 172 pilot reported the aileron control being stiff while flying.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: DAY.Airport, OH
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZID
ATC / advisory: Center ZID
Aircraft component: Fire/Overheat Warning
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Distraction; Troubleshooting
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Shortly after level off at FL340 the ECAM indicated an engine fire on the number one engine. We followed the ECAM which lead us to secure the number one engine and discharge Fire extinguishing agent one. After discharging agent one all indications of a fire were out. We determined that KDAY was the nearest suitable airport. We notified ATC. Landed uneventfully in KDAY. Fire and Rescue personnel saw no signs of fire. Once clear we taxied to the ramp.


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


Synopsis: A300 flight crew reported an engine fire warning upon reaching cruise altitude. They accomplished all relevant checklists; and successfully diverted to a suitable airport.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZMA.ARTCC, FL
Weather elements / visibility: 30
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZMA
ATC / advisory: Center ZMA
Second aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Engineer
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Departed PBI to east northeast. During enroute climb in low FL200's encountered strong wake turbulence from Aircraft Y in front of us and also climbing. ATC was advised. Passenger was injured from hot coffee burn.




Synopsis: A320 Captain reported a passenger suffered a burn from spilled coffee during a wake turbulence encounter departing PBI in trail of a Widebody Transport.
Date: 202010
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: DSTG is reflecting 426 lbs of freight which was to be loaded as Item 3; Pit 3.  When the flight arrived in ZZZ1; the freight was not onboard the aircraft.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Ground Personnel reported Hazmat listed on departure cargo manifest was not on aircraft at destination.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Sail Plane
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was waiting to depart ZZZ. I was monitoring inbound traffic visually; via ADS-B; and over the radio to determine an appropriate opportunity to depart. One aircraft had just landed. Two aircraft on downwind were discussing the spacing between them. One of them decided to do a 360 for spacing. One other plane was 8 miles out on a straight-in. After the plane that had just landed exited the runway; I continued tracking the two aircraft on downwind; listening to their reports on the radio and via ADS-B data on a moving map. I could see no one on final or base.Just as an aircraft reported turning on left base; I radioed that I was departing XX with a left downwind departure while taxiing onto the runway; and started an immediate takeoff roll. Immediately after my transmission ended; the same aircraft that had just reported turning base reported 'turning final' followed by 'coming over the top; watch out;' while another aircraft transmitted 'aircraft taking off; there's a glider landing on top of you.' During that exchange; I aborted takeoff to clear the runway as soon as possible. I also transmitted that I would vacate the runway as soon as possible. The glider flew high above me and touched down on the second half of the 7;000 foot runway.




Synopsis: C172 pilot reported a ground conflict after beginning the takeoff roll at a non-towered airport.
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: TEB.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: 5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: HS 125 Series
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B EWR
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Departed Runway 24 on the RUUDY 4 Departure and was climbing per the SID. Crossed WENTZ Intersection at 1;500 FT then continued climb to cross TASCA at 2;000 FT. ATC advised that we climbed to 2;000 FT too early to cross TASCA. We remained at 2;000 FT and were given radar vectors to continue climb and intercept course on the departure.




Synopsis: An HS125 crew departed on the TEB RUUDY 4 RNAV departure and climbed too early for the TASCA 2;000 FT constraint.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Amateur/Home Built/Experimental
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Descent
Aircraft component: Reciprocating Engine Assembly
Component problem: Failed; Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft was being flown under Part 91 on a special airworthiness certificate for Experimental (amateur-built) aircraft.  The purpose of the flight was to conduct flight testing Phase I flight limitations issued for this aircraft.  Two miles short of the intended landing field (the airfield specified as home base in the aircraft's Phase I operating limitations) the engine stopped due to fuel starvation.  I landed uneventfully in a field.  There was no damage to the aircraft or to property on the ground.  I refueled and; with the permission of the farmer who owns the field; took off to return to base.  At the time of the flight; the aircraft had flown fewer than five of the Phase I flight hours.  As the aircraft had experienced cylinder-head cooling issues; most flight time to date had focused on getting the CHT's within limits.  This flight was meant to test a new; enlarged cooling baffle that had been installed for that purpose.  Because of the need to address the cooling issues; I had not yet had time to perform the planned test flights to verify expected fuel flow; nor to cross-check expected fuel-quantity indications (as shown on the ground with the aircraft in flight attitude) with the actual indications airborne.  As a result; actual fuel quantity was less than expected.  When I realized that; about twenty miles from base; I immediately began my return to home field; the fuel supply ran out just outside of glide range.  Per my test plan; developed with the assistance of AC 90-89A; test flights to determine actual fuel flow and to crosscheck airborne fuel-quantity indications are planned.  The data derived  will provide planning data that will prevent a recurrence of this incident.




Synopsis: Experimental aircraft pilot experiences fuel exhaustion while attempting to return to base during a Phase 1 test flight.  An emergency landing in a farmers field ensues without damage to the aircraft.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZAU.ARTCC, IL
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Due to the ongoing problem with the FMS in some aircraft; we have had to reroute every aircraft going into ORD. Today we are also a one stream operation as opposed to a two stream operation.We were at 7 in trail and the operation was smooth. Our CIC took a call from our TMU (Traffic Management Unit) saying that we suddenly had to go to 25-30 miles in trail. We were allowed to offload some aircraft to SBN APCH at 15 miles in trail. This resulted in a significant amount of work very quickly. We went from an orderly operation to a mess as multiple sectors trying to get triple to quadruple our standard amount of space prior the C90 boundary.After we turned all of the aircraft away from the airport; our CIC talked to C90 and discovered that they had no idea what we were doing. They did not need all of that space. It took quite a while to recover from someone's (at our TMU) decision to tell us to get that much space. Furthermore; I do not think that they slowed ZID or ZOB or required more space from them during this event.The high altitude controller (FWA); that was feeding me; was called by ZOB asking about holding. They had been contacted by our TMU warning of an impending hold. At this point; we had not even been informed yet about the additional space requirement by our TMU so the FWA controller had no idea what ZOB was talking about.This was a shocking lack of coordination between ZAU's TMU; C90's TMU and the controllers. One should not increase the workload dramatically at multiple sectors and slow and vector multiple planes without a solid reason. This cost the airlines money and time. It also resulted in training being stopped in my area to get the needed manual controllers in place. Not to mention the added stress on an already busy sector.After this incident was over; we were told by our TMU that we were supposed to be 7 in trail to C90 the whole time. The 25-30 mile restriction was for any aircraft we routed through SBN approach. We do not route aircraft through SBN on a regular basis. It is only done when directed by TMU and usually due to weather. I would not have had any reason to do that without being told to; in this case. This entire incident was due to the order from TMU and greatly impacted operations into ORD.




Synopsis: ZAU Controller reported a lack of communication which led to flow control concerns affecting a couple facilities.
Date: 201504
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Windshear
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737 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
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Gusty winds landing in DEN; on approach received a GPWS 'sink rate'; First Officer corrected; normal landing.




Synopsis: During gusty conditions at DEN a B737 EGPWS alerted 'Sink Rate' during landing so the First Officer corrected the rate of descent and landed.