elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Attitude Indicator(Gyro/Horizon/ADI)
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On an IFR flight plan in the clouds we lost our artificial horizon (I was flying the aircraft and my son was working the radios). He first noticed that we were off course (30) and high (200); we leveled the aircraft and noticed that the artificial horizon was drifting at that point we discussed what we should do and asked for a turn to the South and lower when able to get below the clouds (ceiling was 3700 MSL). The artificial horizon was intermittent remainder of flight; returned to departure airport in VFR conditions.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information]


Synopsis: Two C182 pilots experience failure of the artificial horizon on an IFR flight plan in IMC. The pilot not flying is first to detect altitude and heading deviations and alert the pilot flying. Flight descends into VMC and returns to the departure airport.
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: IAH.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 4 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B IAH
ATC / advisory: TRACON I90
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We were cleared for the ZEEKK1 arrival expecting the ILS 26R approach into IAH.  This arrival has strict airspeed and altitude constraints at different waypoints along the procedure.  Because of the dissimilar aircraft on the arrival ([heavy] and smaller aircraft) ATC had us and the other aircraft fly airspeeds different than those published; everyone had a different speed. This created a lot of extra communications on a very crowded frequency.  Then ATC switched runways for us to 26L and tells us to resume published speeds as per the procedure.  It's very busy now as we set up for the different runway; manage the speeds and get a frequency change.  Once checked in; this controller says to expect 26R!  We told him the previous controller said 26L. He states 'I don't know why he said that but I need you on the right'. So again we switched everything back to 26R.  Very quickly he clears us to ZAPPO (the IAF for 26R) maintain 6;000 and intercept the LOC.  The read back did not include 'maintain 6;000' ATC didn't catch it; nor did I.  We were task saturated at this point as we switched RWY's again; trying honor the arrival constraints and follow ATC instructions. ZAPPO is 5000A so I put 5;000 in the MCP window and then started the descent. Just prior to the fix; the controller stated' I didn't clear you to 5;000; told you to maintain 6;000; It's OK there's no conflict; cleared the approach contact tower.'  The approach and landing were uneventful; no further communications from ATC about this.




Synopsis: A pilot reported about runway changes and confusion flying into IAH. Various runway changes lead to confusion and an altitude deviation. The pilot was told to maintain 6;000 feet on the approach but descended to 5;000 feet for a crossing restriction. The rest of the approach and landing were uneventful.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZNY.ARTCC, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Learjet 45
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZNY
ATC / advisory: Center ZNY
Aircraft component: AHRS/ND
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Distraction; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On climb out of FL310 'Heading 1 Fail' appeared on the pilot's Primary Flight Display and Heading 2 Fail on the copilot's Primary Flight Display. We had no heading information on pilot and copilot side and lost all navigation display from the FMS and VOR. We were not able to bring up VOR NAV display on the RMU. The autopilot remained engaged in ROLL mode. We pulled and reset the AHRS 1 and 2 circuit breakers and within a few minutes regained heading and navigation display on both sides. With failure of both heading sources; we also lost all navigation display on the PFD's and MFD as well as the RMU's. Glad we were not climbing out of the mountains in IMC when this happened.




Synopsis: Both of a LR45's AHRS failed climbing out of FL310 but were recovered after the AHRS 1 and 2 AHRS circuit breakers were reset.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LAS.Airport, NV
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Other / Unknown; Workload
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: Airport; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Departing gate; we used the yellow line to exit the ramp; the clearance from Ramp Control was taxi to Spot X and contact Ground. Approaching Spot X; we contacted Ground and the clearance given was taxing to [Runway] 26R Via C. Instead of taking the second left onto [Taxiway] C we took the first left onto [Taxiway] Q from the yellow line. Once on [Taxiway] Q; ATC queried us about being on the incorrect taxiway and cleared us from [Taxiway] Q to join [Taxiway] C for [Runway] 26R.In the debrief we noted neither myself or the Captain saw a sign for [Taxiway] Q and only saw signs for [Taxiway] C and [Taxiway] B. Since the first sign we saw was [Taxiway] C it led us to believe the first Taxiway was C. Recommendation would be to make the sign for [Taxiway] Q more visible.




Synopsis: Air Carrier First Officer reported a taxi deviation due to poor marking and signage on this taxiway in LAS airport.
Date: 201401
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
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: Autopilot
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: All three autopilots failed enroute.

Callback: Reporter stated they continued on to [their destination] after all three autopilots would not hook-up during climb. The weather was good at destination for the one hour and fifteen minute flight. Reporter advised they had to fly at lower altitudes due to RVSM limits. No further information about cause of the autopilot issue. Reporter also advised that if they had been at the gate; he would have shut aircraft power down and suspects the autopilots would have been fine after powering back up.



Synopsis: Captain reports all three autopilots failed during climb on a B757 aircraft.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Duchess 76
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Test Flight / Demonstration
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Reciprocating Engine Assembly
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While performing an operational check flight in order to check right engine during single engine operations; at eight miles southeast of the airport; 5;500 ft. MSL; right engine was intentionally shut down and secured; two minutes after; starting with unfeathering accumulator was attempted without success; all the procedures were followed in accordance with the BE-76 POH; 1000 ft. were lost trying to get the propeller to windmill. At 4;500 ft. MSL; starting without unfeathering accumulator was attempted twice without success following the POH's checklist as well; as the left engine was already getting hotter and in order to protect the electrical system; restarting attempt was stopped; left engine was secured in accordance with the POH's checklist. Tower was notified about the situation; came back single engine; landed and vacated Runway XX and taxiway; without further problems.




Synopsis: BE-76 pilot reported being unable to restart right engine after an in-flight shutdown.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: EINN.Airport, FO
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
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: Descent below required altitude while shooting the ILS approach.We were given a heading to intercept the localizer. The heading was at an angle that we would have crossed DERAG on the intercept. We were IMC at times. I recommended to the Captain (CA) to select green needles since we were in heading mode instead of having his FMS needle visible so he could arm LNAV to arm the LOC; but this did not happen right away. As we got closer; our clearance was on heading (can't remember) to maintain 3;000 until established; cleared for the ILS approach; report once established inbound. We were outside of DERAG; when the Pilot Flying (PF) started turning the heading bug to intercept the course inside of DERAG. Once established; the PF started descending to an unknown altitude as the altitude select was still set to 3;000 when the PF selected VS 600 fpm. As I was attempting to query the PF on why he was descending; Shannon Approach asked us about our altitude (now 2400 ft and still descending) and we were asked if we were already descending on the glideslope. I was directed to let Shannon know that we were; and I also advised them that we were established inbound. However; this was not the case; because we should have been at 3;000 feet; and allowed the GS to intercept accordingly. Spoke to the PF once at cruise on next leg about this issue. We looked at the approach together. I brought up the fact that since I have been flying with this pilot; he always descends on an ILS on stepdown by using VS instead of allowing the GS to intercept even when there is NOT a mandatory crossing restriction.  The PF had no response. The PF understood he should have been at 3;000 feet and acknowledged he made a mistake. In addition; I brought up the CRM issues that I have only most recently been experiencing with this particular pilot whereby this pilot either will not acknowledge me and/or not respond to my questions; suggestions; etc.




Synopsis: G-IV First Officer reported poor CRM practices of the Captain she was flying with which resulted in descent below assigned altitude during approach and a possible track deviation during departure.
Date: 202103
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZLC.ARTCC, UT
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; 100
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZLC
ATC / advisory: Center ZLC
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: We encountered clear air turbulence at FL320. Turbulence at the time was moderate. We encountered a 1;000 feet climb followed by a rapid downward descent of 4;000 feet plus. I disengaged the autopilot and tried to regain control. By the time we were level; we were at FL230. In the descent we did advise ATC that we were unable to maintain altitude and had experienced severe turbulence. We did not declare any emergency and there were no injuries on board or damage to aircraft. ATC did advise us that there could be a light mountain wave and turbulence before this occurred. The turbulence was not too bad up until that point. I have never encountered that in my life. The best way I can describe it was a rogue wave of air and we hit it just right. The weather was clearing up to almost clear skies when this occurred. Lesson learned is don't judge a book by its cover.




Synopsis: Captain reported encountering clear air turbulence during cruise and as a result were momentarily unable to maintain altitude.
Date: 202104
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Observer; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While my student was doing a solo he veered off the runway during takeoff - no injuries. I debriefed the student; he said it went left and he lost control. I briefed him on rudder usage. Instructor action will be that he will work on takeoffs with the student and have another instructor fly with him before re-solo.


Second narrative: After landing on centerline I put flaps up and accelerated to full throttle. The plane continued pulling to the left despite pressing on right rudder. As I veered to the left; headed towards the grass; I reduced power and ultimately going off the runway and stopping on Taxiway XX. I think [I] should have powered back sooner to prevent going off the runway.


Synopsis: C172 student pilot on a solo flight and the observing flight instructor reported a loss of aircraft control on takeoff and excursion from the runway.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SRQ.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-34-220T Turbo Seneca III
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class C TPA
ATC / advisory: TRACON TPA
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: Training flight in preparation for multi-engine checkride. Engine shutdown procedure review with unsuccessful air-start attempt. Landed safely in SRQ. On the ground the engine restarted following normal procedures. No damages to persons or equipment were made.




Synopsis: PA32 pilot reported not being able to restart engine after an unsuccessful air-start attempt.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Cessna Stationair/Turbo Stationair 6
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine
Second reporter function: Inspector
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance
Detector: Person Maintenance; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On climb the engine of my C206 made a loud pop and I experienced an immediate partial loss of engine power; so I returned to my departure airport. The engine was still developing power; and I had more than enough altitude to return to the airport safely; so I made the decision not to declare an emergency. The approach and landing were uneventful.Upon landing I pulled off the runway and pulled the mixture to stop the engine hoping to avoid any further damage. I contacted the company via phone to let them know that I had a problem and that they would have to reschedule my passengers. Upon return to my office I investigated the Company Operations Manual; Ops Specs; the FARs and AIM and determined that I was not required to report the occurrence to either the FAA or the NTSB; and I; therefore; did not report to either of the aforementioned entities.


Second narrative: Upon inspection I found a large hole in the crankcase at the oil filler port above number 4 cylinder and immediately grounded the aircraft.I subsequently filed a service difficulty report with the FAA 11 days after the event occurred. FAR 135.415(d) states I have 96 hours to file this report.


Synopsis: The pilot of a C206 returned to his departure airport after a partial loss of engine power shortly after takeoff. The extent of damage to the engine was not determined in a timely fashion for submission of a 'service difficulty report' to the FAA because the aircraft had to be airlifted to maintenance inspection personnel from its remote location.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Powerplant Lubrication System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Going through Release #1 in weather room noticed that engine 2 had been replaced and had not flown prior to our flight. Saw no indication of an ETOPS Verification flight requirement in flight plan. Captain called dispatch and inquired if the aircraft had flown and whether or not any action was required. Dispatch consulted maintenance and amended the release to #2 requiring an ETOPS verification flight.Printed flight plan #2 and proceeded to aircraft.Engines both started all indications normal; taxied out to runway; International Relief Officer (IRO) noted the oil quantities at 24 and 23 qts at takeoff. Busy departure; noticed nothing abnormal. While recording times at ZZZZZ intersection noted oil quantity #2 engine at 15 qts. As flight continued oil qty continued to decrease at approximately 1 quart/hr. We sent multiple messages and satellite calls to Dispatch and maintenance about low quantity.At 30 minutes prior to ETOPS entry point oil was at 13 quarts with 10 hours to go in flight which would give us a projected 3 quarts left at landing. We elected not to send an ETOPS verification message and instead return.Turned back; dumped fuel to arrive below max landing weight.(Details sent to dispatch.)Landed with 9 qts indicated after 6:45 [hours] airborne. After engine shutdown qty bounced back up to 15 qts.


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


Synopsis: B777 flight crew reported excessive oil consumption from a newly replaced engine. Crew returned to departure airport.