elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Improperly Operated; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During climb through FL200 we noticed the aircraft started to deviate off course to the right. We are unaware of why; but the FMS had entered a hold. The Captain had been changing some of the INIT Data because ATC had changed our final cruising altitude. However; we are both unaware of how that could have resulted in a hold being entered; since it is fairly difficult to enter a hold without knowing it. We were approximately 45 degrees off our course when I switched to heading mode and start to turn back toward our course. The Captain advised ATC of an issue with our autopilot and we were given a heading of 180. After getting the FMS out of the hold; we asked for direct and were given heading 190; direct when able. No further incidents occurred during the flight.Threats were a change in final cruising altitude that resulted in a change in the INIT data. There were no errors that we were aware of. The undesired aircraft state was the course deviation of 45 degrees. I should have been more carefully monitoring the captain entering data in the FMS; we are unaware if that was actually the cause of the deviation; however the FMS is where something was improperly entered and while I am usually paying close attention; it's always possible to miss something.


Second narrative: Not sure why it turned but communication between pilot to pilot regarding the programming of the FMS is key.


Synopsis: An EMB-145 entered holding autonomously while climbing to the revised cruise altitude after the Captain entered INIT Data to reflect the new revised altitude assignment.
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: NRB.Tower, FL
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: Cruise
Airspace: Class D NRB
ATC / advisory: TRACON JAX
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I embarked on a long cross country trip.  At the beginning of the third leg; I entered Class Delta unannounced while on frequency with the local Class C Controller.  It was upon departure from Fernandina Beach; my second fuel stop.  I climbed; southbound; to my cruise altitude of 1;500 FT and called Jacksonville Approach for flight following which they provided.  I was handed off and the next Controller asked me if knew I was traversing the Mayport Class D airspace.  I replied that by virtue of talking to Jacksonville Approach I thought it was OK.  He said that's not the way it works!  He directed me; and I immediately climbed to 2;500 FT to vacate the Class Delta.   I was puzzled though because that is exactly the way it worked earlier in the day just south of Columbia; SC; the North AF AUX Class D.  I continued to my destination at 2;500 FT all the while receiving flight following.  I feel terrible about being scolded by the Controller in Jacksonville and have therefore made a commitment to further instruction and review in VFR airspace as well as cross country procedures.  Adding airspace brief to my pre-departure checklist and asking the controller when unsure; will prevent a recurrence of this situation.




Synopsis: Reporter receiving flight following Class Charlie Controller is questioned about violating Class Delta airspace.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 150
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
Aircraft component: Throttle/Power Lever
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Student
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was flying back to ZZZ on a cross country when I hit turbulence. I pulled the throttle back to lose some airspeed; but when I pushed it back in; it stayed at idle. I checked fuel; mags; mixture; etc.; with no response so I found a suitable field and landed with no damage to the aircraft.




Synopsis: C-150 student pilot made an off-airport landing due to an unresponsive throttle.
Date: 201508
Location: ORL.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B MCO; Class D ORL
ATC / advisory: Tower ORL
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After making a precautionary landing at ORL due to a clogged fuel injector; I filed an instrument flight plan departing ORL. I was cleared to 1;500 feet; and cleared for takeoff. At the same time; 2 banner tow aircraft were also departing. Tower warned me of those aircraft. Upon climbout; I experienced engine roughness; alerted tower; and requested return to the airport. Tower told me to standby; and left me on runway heading; where I was no longer able to maintain contact with the two banner tows. Tower twice asked if I wanted to cancel IFR; and I said I needed to return 'now'. I was cleared for a right downwind but did not have the banner tow to my right in sight. I had to climb slightly above 1;500 feet in order to safely make a crosswind turn and gain sight of the banner tow; and may have pierced the Class B floor in the process. With a misfiring engine and a potential traffic conflict; climbing above 1;500 feet seemed at the time to be the lesser evil than an off airport landing in a city; or a midair.




Synopsis: After takeoff; a rough engine caused the pilot to return to ORL.
Date: 201411
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Aircraft component: Autothrottle/Speed Control
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During takeoff the auto throttles would not engage. The PM set the proper thrust setting and the crew elected to continue the takeoff versus rejecting near the high speed regime. Once established at cruise and determining the proper power settings we looked at the MEL that was for an inoperative Left Autopilot and found that MX had pulled the incorrect circuit breakers; thus disabling the TMC servo instead of the autopilot. Therefore we departed with an improperly applied MEL. To complicate matters; while trying to determine our best course of action by contacting Maintenance Control; Dispatch was not responsive to a phone patch request and instead was trying to make the crew communicate by typing our issue and situation into ACARS. When we asked Dispatch for a frequency to contact them on they only responded with 'Contact them through Commercial Radio.' We did not receive ONE STOP SHOPPING from dispatch and felt that they were completely useless. If this had been a true emergency situation; where workload is really high; our training practice of having Dispatch there for the crew would have hindered decision making versus helped. We eventually contacted Maintenance Control and continued the flight to our planned destination.




Synopsis: B757 First Officer discovers during takeoff that auto thrust is inoperative during the takeoff. The takeoff is continued and in cruise it is discovered that maintenance pulled the wrong circuit breaker while attempting to comply with an MEL procedure for the left autopilot.
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; 2.5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Object; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I went flying with the intention of getting practice approaches completed and getting my instrument currency back.  My flying partner was current; and I was not current.  Visibility was reported at 2.5 miles; so [my safety pilot] filed an IFR plan.  I flew the 6 approaches with a view limiting device; with a safety pilot. The six approaches were completed; but I had trouble maintaining course on the last approach. The updated ATIS was reflecting a 10 knot crosswind. I should have requested [another runway]; but I didn't. While in the flare; we floated a bit and I added some power with the intention of softening the landing. I initially was tracking centerline; however; when we touched down; I added too much right aileron and the left wing lifted up. As soon as the wing came down; we ran off the right side of the runway into the grass and hit a taxiway light.  We taxied back up onto the runway and back to the ramp. I clearly relaxed too much after touching down and was lazy with the rudder. Earlier; thinking that I was current; however; after review of my logbook; it was clear that the six approaches [logged earlier] were not adequate for currency. Since I did not have 6 approaches; I should have had an IPC done by an instructor. I had been trying to get those 6 approaches completed but kept getting delayed.  With the delays taking me [later in the year]; I overlooked the fact that the 12 months had expired and should have had the IPC. The mistakes made were not asking for a different runway with more favorable wind conditions; relaxing after touching down instead of maintaining concentration and control of the rudder; I should have double-checked my log book when I was delayed.




Synopsis: A C182 Pilot reported a runway excursion upon landing during a strong crosswind following an IFR currency flight.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Amateur/Home Built/Experimental
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Second aircraft: Champion Citabria 7ECA
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The weather was clear; unlimited visibility with light winds from the east. During a short briefing earlier Runway XX was declared the active runway unless winds change. Many aircraft had arrived since; and all of them used Runway XX. I taxied north on the taxiway to the end of Runway XX and after finishing my runup I made a radio call: '[Callsign] taking Runway XX for takeoff...'; but as I turned right to enter Runway XX and line up I noticed to my surprise a yellow Citabria taxiing south on the runway towards its south end; without making a call. It then turned right which looked from my perspective as it was leaving the runway into the grass parking on the west side of the runway; and disappeared from my view behind the peak of the slightly crested runway. The ends of the runway are not visible from either takeoff position in a small airplane. After believing the other plane had cleared the runway and no radio call came from it; I finished lining up and made another call: '[Callsign] takeoff Runway XX for south departure'. I accelerated and as soon as the tail came up I saw to my horror the Citabria accelerating towards me. There was a row of airplanes parked to the right and I remembered the grass to the left was used as a runway; so I veered left between 2 taxi lights and at the same time brought the plane into ground effect; now heading for a line of trees. Fortunately I just had enough speed to climb without stalling and made (according to witness accounts) a rather spectacular steep and turning takeoff. The rest of the flight went as planned and upon return the other pilot approached me with a sheepish grin to shake my hand. Although still upset I took it and asked him to please use his radio and stay on the same page with everybody else; using the preferred runway. His only comment was that it turned out all right anyway. Unrelated to the incident the runway was later changed to Runway Y; because the wind turned to north east. Fortunately no damage occurred and nobody was hurt.




Synopsis: Experimental pilot reports discovering on the takeoff roll that a Citabria that he thought had left the runway is taking off in the opposite direction. Evasive action is taken by the reporter; steering off the left side of the runway and becoming airborne shortly thereafter.
Date: 201705
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CZYZ.ARTCC, ON
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: BAe 125 Series 800
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A CZYZ
ATC / advisory: Center CZYZ
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Upon arrival into CYYZ airport we were issued a descent clearance. At the time we were cruising at FL260. The clearance issued was as follows. 'Descend 240; Descend Via Arrival (Nuber2)' So we began our descent to FL240 then continued our descent VIA the Arrival as instructed. Passing FL230 controller came on and asked where we were going we were instructed to descend to FL240. My reply was correct; then we were given descend via the arrival so we were planning our first cross which was at ROKTO between 14000 and 12000. The controller responded with an explanation how they are changing phraseology in Canada and that my clearance to descend via didn't actually mean I could descend via. It meant that I was only cleared to the altitude given but was required to meet STAR restrictions in the process. The way the clearance was given and the meaning of the clearance was very confusing. We discussed for a few minutes; I voiced my concern that the way the clearance was given was very confusing. The controllers did not appear to be bothered; almost as this was not the first encounter with the confusing instructions. He simply gave me a new attitude and we proceeded in as normal. Be more specific when you issue and clearance with the DESCEND VIA phraseology. This gives the impression that the pilots are expected to descend via the instructions on the given chart. A better way to say what this controller wanted was perhaps to say; 'Descend FL240 and COMPLY with STAR'. This says right away that I am only cleared to FL240. Descend to FL240; Descend VIA the arrival - to me this means start your descent to FL240 now and then descend VIA the arrival. The difference being the first is a hard altitude and clear do not go below; the second says start down and meet restrictions per the chart.




Synopsis: Hawker 800 Captain reported misunderstanding a Canadian Controller's instruction to descend to FL240 and descend via NUBER2 arrival. The descent was continued after reaching FL240 without clearance to make the ROKTO crossing restriction.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: OOMM.ARTCC, FO
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center OOMM
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: GPS jamming in vicinity of Iran and Oman at position about 20 miles west of waypoint SETSI (Airway P307) indicated by ADS-B FAIL and GNS 1; 2 FAIL. All systems returned to normal about 15 minutes later. Cause - External GPS jamming.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported possible GPS jamming near SETSI waypoint in Oman airspace.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Tower, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Left base visual XXL ZZZ cleared visual approach. First Officer turned inside marker as we were cleared visual. Descending to 1;000 ft. This triggered ATC low altitude advisory with info that minimum vectoring altitude had been exceeded. At no time was the aircraft in an unwanted configuration [or] in an undesired state with regard to terrain. In the future I will state that the final will be flown over the marker at or above the outer marker crossing altitude.In retrospect I should have advised the first officer of my desire to fly over the marker at published altitudes; to avoid any such occurrence with ATC equipment.All visuals will be flown over the outer marker at NLT marker altitude.


Second narrative: This statement is based to the best of my recollection as they occurred. During VMC at night and after cleared for the visual Runway XXL; while fully configured; as I started turning left to final; ATC called to tell us that they received a low level alert. I immediately corrected by stopping the descent and maintained altitude in order to capture the glide slope. We were stable at 1;000 ft. and landed successfully.  I believe that the root cause was that I became distracted while looking to line up with the airport and failed to stop the rate of descent during the turn. From now on; I will maintain last assigned altitude until established on the final approach course.


Synopsis: A321 flight crew reported that ATC gave them a low altitude advisory on a visual approach to PBI.