elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Gear Pins
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight; Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part

Narrative: On my preflight walk around; I found a bolt in the left gear; gear pin slot. Bolt was approximately 1' long; and no aircraft markings noticeable. I re-checked the other gear pin areas to ensure that I hadn't missed another one. Upon returning to the cockpit I informed the Captain who in turn passed my disbelief and findings to Chief Pilot on call.




Synopsis: B737-700 First Officer reported that a bolt was installed in a gear pin slot for the main landing gear.
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: FAI.TRACON, AK
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D FAI
ATC / advisory: TRACON FAI
Second aircraft: Single Engine Turboprop Undifferentiated
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; 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 New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I took the radar position from the previous controller. Right before I accepted the position; he cleared Aircraft Y for the Visual Approach. As Aircraft Y got closer to the field I realized the aircraft he had already instructed to contact tower; Aircraft X; was on an instrument approach (being afforded IFR separation). By that time Aircraft Y was 5-6 miles in trail of Aircraft X doing three times the speed.I cancelled his Visual Approach clearance and told him to maintain 3000 ft and fly heading 110 to square him off to final. Their mode C indicated they were at 3500 ft and descending in a 2900 ft MVA (Minimum Vectoring Altitude). He asked for clarification on the altitude then read it back. I addressed other traffic and when I went back to him I saw he had descended to 2000 ft. I asked him to verify he was maintaining 3000 ft. He said he was already through 3000 ft when it was issued so he was climbing back up. I subsequently cleared him for the Visual Approach without losing IFR separation between him and the preceding Aircraft X. Deconfliction of traffic before passing the position to the next controller or a more thorough briefing.




Synopsis: A Controller reported an aircraft descending below their assigned altitude and the Minimum Vectoring Altitude; while the Controller was trying to de-conflict traffic already on approach.
Date: 202001
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Beechjet 400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On a passenger flight departing from ZZZ to ZZZ1; with a VERY inexperienced FO we neglected to put the sufficient amount of fuel on the aircraft for the trip.  The plan required about 4;000 lbs to land with about 1;000 lbs of reserve fuel.  When we were about 200 nm from the destination we got a low fuel light.  We advised ATC that we were low on fuel and required priority handling.  We were over water at the time.  So diverting was not an option.  Scary!!! We should have landed with about 1;000 lbs of reserve fuel.  Instead we landed with about 500 lbs of fuel!  Very embarrassing and humbling experience.I don't mean to reject responsibility.  But I distinctly remember asking the inexperienced FO prior to departing if everything was ready to go.  His answer was 'I don't know'...that should have been a sign of trouble.  In the future I will always ask the other pilot specifically he/she agrees we have enough fuel for the trip.




Synopsis: BE400 Captain reported that the aircraft departed with less fuel than was needed for the trip and got a low fuel light during cruise. The flight landed with less than the required amount of reserve fuel.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SJC.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground SJC
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Manuals
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Got a taxi clearance from [FBO at] San Jose (SJC) to Runway 30L for IFR departure; Victor; Delta; Charley; and Bravo to 30L. Started out on Victor but passed Delta due to it was the start of a +4000 foot abandoned runway. Believed he meant us to pass delta to charley the way we always used to go. Did not want to cross 29 runway that is still shown on my airport diagram with Jepps Charts. As we were passing Charley to Bravo; ground control called and asked why we did not follow his directions; turning on Delta and hold up at Charley for an intersection departure. I guess we screwed up but did hear a clearance to Bravo which would have brought us to the end of 30L. Never thought to cross runway 29 at Delta on our way to runway 30L. I wish Jepps would delete the 29/11 runway from its airport diagrams. We did not conflict with any traffic on our way to 30L but did cause the ground controller to waste his time to ask us what we were doing.




Synopsis: A pilot did not comply with taxi instructions at SJC. He interpreted 'Victor; Delta; Charley; and Bravo to 30L'; as meaning 'pass delta to charley the way we always used to go.' Ground control called and asked why he did not follow his directions.
Date: 201705
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: OAK.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C OAK
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Second reporter function: Approach
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was instructed by ATC to maintain 3400 ft on vectors to final ILS 28R OAK. I then intercepted localizer and was cleared for the approach. I continued my intercept; as localizer CDI was active but not yet fully intercepted. I turned to an estimated heading of 240. Upon noticing that I had an excess altitude of nearly 500 ft; I needed to increase my descent. I notified ATC of my intention to perform a left hand 360-degree turn and re-intercept localizer. I was in VMC; and had simply needed a reminder that upon receiving my IFR clearance; the responsibility of terrain and traffic avoidance became shared by ATC and myself. Approximately 90 degrees into the turn and after a response from ATC; I corrected the action and turned back on the proper heading by which time a possible pilot deviation had been noted. Cause for the excess altitude was a pilot lack of situational awareness. I expected to intercept localizer at GROVE; but instead was approaching URZAF. Factors affecting the quality of my performance under IFR was a direct result of unclear distinction as to when I fell under IFR regulations. In practice approaches in VFR conditions; when ATC was not responsible for aircraft separation; there was more flexibility in procedures. I called Norcal Approach when I completed my flight; and have been actively cooperating with any and all requests thereafter.


Second narrative: VFR day with low ceilings requiring IFR to land. Cessna 172 was VFR; I put him on a VFR vector for the downwind. I issued the IFR clearance; based the Cessna and cleared for the approach. For reasons unknown the aircraft did not descend after established on the localizer. At about a 6 mile final when I was switching him to the Tower the Cessna said he was making a left 360 to lose altitude. He was above the glide slope and below the MVA. I told him that he was IFR unable to make a left 360; to which he replied that he was established on the localizer and tracking it inbound. As the controller I should have canceled the approach clearance and climbed him and brought him back around for another approach.


Synopsis: C172 pilot and TRACON Controller reported confusion on the part of the pilot about following ATC instructions under an IFR clearance.
Date: 201501
Location: SRQ.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Landing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Going into SRQ landing data did not seem to calculate available landing distance correctly:Jeppesen Runway 32 10-9 runway length 9500 feet. Jeppesen 10-9A runway length from Threshold 7510 feet (with a bullet note 7 specifying that of the 7510 feet the last 840 feet is unavailable for landing distance calculations) and from Glide Slope 6460 feet. The ACARS LANDING DATA RWY 32 Shows the available landing distance for 32 as 7460 feet. The ACARS LANDING DATA AND JEPPESEN LANDING DATA DO NOT SEEM TO MATCH WITH THE BULLET 7 RESTRICTION.




Synopsis: B737 First Officer does not believe the Runway 32 landing length available is correctly calculated on the JEPP 10-9 A chart and does not agree with ACARS data sent by the company.
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Carburetor
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We are approaching runway for full stop landing. Everything looks like it is planned. Once we descent to our minimum descent altitude for the approach; I ask my student to remove his foggles to do a landing. Once visual contact with the runway and we are preparing for landing. The student set up for a full flaps and 65 knots approach. The airplane descend as close as possible to the runway; and we begin our roundout and simultaneously reducing the power to idle. Once we put the throttle to idle and flaring the airplane the engine sounds stops and the propeller stops spinning.During ground roll upon landing; I communicate with the tower that the engine stops working and we are ground rolling using the potential energy created by the descent. Luckily we are able to exit the runway to taxiway foxtrot.First we troubleshoot make sure everything is in order and on ON position (mixture; throttle; magneto). We try to restart the engine three times. The first two time we started our engine using the normal procedure; standard Operating Procedure that is specified by the FOM but it did not start. The last attempt I try to lean the mixture; thinking that the cylinder might be flooded with fuel but still no luck. I ask the tower if it's possible to pull the airplane to a FBO ramp so we don't need to block the taxiway. Once in the ramp; I tried to troubleshoot again the airplane by visually scanning the engine for possible abnormal FOD or missing screw but I cannot found anything suspicious. I called the head of the maintenance to be able to help me troubleshoot the problem and he gave me procedure to look and try to restart the engine. The engine was able to restart by using primer but cannot hold low RPM. We decided to stay in ZZZ for the night and wait for the maintenance to fix it the next day.The reason why the engine quit is there is screw that [fell off] during flight. Maintenance was able to repair it the next day. The missing screw is position on which it's really hard place to see and maintenance needed to remove the cowling of the airplane to fix it.

Callback: The reporter indicated that it was the carburetor mixture screw that had backed out and was lost during flight.



Synopsis: A flight instructor described an engine problem on landing. The engine was unable to run with the throttle pulled back to idle due to the loss of the carburetor mixture screw.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SDL.Airport, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-46 Malibu/Malibu Mirage/Malibu Matrix
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class D SDL
ATC / advisory: TRACON P50
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Rotorcraft; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Glider; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was in communication with Phoenix Approach and proceeded eastbound after a departure from DVT Airport. I was under the impression that communication with Phoenix Approach implied coordination with SDL Tower. Phoenix asked that I contact SDL Tower frequency upon landing; and said there was 'a possible airspace deviation'. I called SDL Tower upon landing and had a good and friendly conversation with the Air Traffic Controller.




Synopsis: VFR aircraft in communication with Phoenix TRACON was questioned with regard to transitioning SDL Class D without contacting SDL.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: 5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Airliner 99
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Cleared for the ILS. After crossing the OM inbound; pilot detected indications of a right engine fire. The right fire T-handle illuminated. Pilot followed 'engine fire in-flight' flow and checklist. T-handle did not extinguish after 20 seconds so pilot transitioned to 'engine fire/failure in-flight' flow and checklist. Pilot at this time [let] Tower [know of their situation.] Pilot visually identified the airport and requested a side step to [a more suitable runway]. Pilot discharged the right fire extinguisher bottle as per procedures. Right engine was feathered and secured at 200 feet AGL. Single engine landing was uneventful and pilot was able to taxi clear of the runway and was met by emergency personnel. Pilot executed shut down checklist and Maintenance towed the plane to the hangar.




Synopsis: C99 pilot reported a right engine fire on approach that led to an inflight shutdown.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
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)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other During Takeoff Roll
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We attempted a rolling takeoff. After selecting autothrottles the Captain (pilot flying) noticed the throttles wouldn't advance above mid-range using either the autothrottles or by pushing on them manually. We performed a low speed abort at 60 KTS without incident. Back at the gate; the Mechanic informed us that some pins that restrict throttle movement were not removed after some recent Fuel Control maintenance. This was a classic attention to detail mistake. The plane was late coming from the hangar where the Fuel Control Units had been worked on. I don't know it for a fact; but I feel the mechanics might have been rushed to return the aircraft to service.


Second narrative: On takeoff roll; with autothrottles armed and engaged; the throttles would not advance to takeoff power. I attempted to manually advance the throttles; but they still would not move any further. I discontinued the takeoff at approximately 60 KTS. The abort and subsequent return to gate was uneventful. Maintenance was called; and they found a problem with the Power Stops for both engines. Apparently; they had been positioned for maintenance action and had not been unseated when the procedure was completed. After unseating the Power Stops; the throttles functioned normally. The maintenance was signed-off and we continued; with the same aircraft; to destination without incident. We need to ensure complete adherence to procedures by all parties involved with the preparation; repair; movement and operation of our aircraft.


Synopsis: Two pilots and a Mechanic report about Part Power Stops (PPS) that had not been removed from both engines on a B757-200 aircraft after a Fuel Flow Governor (FFG) had been replaced. The Part Power Stops prevented full takeoff power; requiring a Rejected Takeoff (RTO).
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Time Pressure
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Upon arrival for ZZZ; my FO (First Officer) and I had prepared for a landing to the south based on current winds and the recent ATIS report calling for landings on XXR; XXC; and XXL. We were on the ZZZZZ arrival. Prior to ZZZZZ; we were instructed to contact Approach while descending to ZZZZZ where we planned to cross at the RNAV assigned altitude of between 16;000 and 14;000. This was a normal descent for an arrival to the south. However; when checking in with Approach; the Controller MISTAKENLY instructed us to plan for a 'landing to the north.' This required us to rush re-loading the FMS for only one more fix ahead of us at ZZZZZ1 which also required a crossing at 10;000 ft.; and a mere 6-7 miles ahead of us; along with an abrupt slow down to 230 kts.After abruptly reloading the arrival and the new runway; we were instructed to contact a new Approach Controller where we were promptly instructed to expect a landing to the south! At this point; I alerted the new Controller that we would not have time to re-load the FMS in time to avoid passing through the new fixes and altitudes that belonged to the original arrival and promptly asked for a vector for time to work it out. He instructed me to descend to an altitude of 8;000; and provided me a vector for downwind to XXR where we concluded the arrival and approach with vectors and assigned altitudes without further incident.It is clear that the Controller we originally spoke with was in error to tell us to expect a landing to the north. On this particular arrival; the difference in altitudes and airspeeds are significant in a compressed amount of space and time. A small error in instruction to the north versus the south arrival; and at the last minute before arriving at one fix versus the other could have led a less experienced crew to violate altitudes; airspeeds and specific waypoints on one arrival versus the other. My suggestion is to please help this Approach Personnel understand the significant difficulty and unreasonable time compression to the aircrew that a small misspeak can cause.




Synopsis: EMB-175 Captain reported reprogramming the FMS several times after being issued ATC instructions to expect a landing runway different from what ATIS reported; then being issued opposite runway instructions by the next Controller.