elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Second aircraft: Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Aircraft component: Main Gear Wheel
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Taxiout; heard/felt loud bump. Stopped the aircraft. Noticed wheel assembly; rim/hubcap passing the aircraft on the right and hit the Wheel Well/Landing Gear Assembly of a CRJ-900 aircraft waiting on taxiway. Maintenance and/or mechanical failure. Gate return. Flight delay.

Callback: Reporter stated the airport they were departing from has a history of nasty holes in some of the taxi ramps to the runways.  However; no potholes existed where they were taxiing; so he was surprised to hear and feel the loud bump. That's when his First Officer commented about seeing a tire roll past him; they both then watched their right-hand Main Landing Gear (MLG) Outboard (O/B) tire roll into the forward side of the left MLG on the waiting CRJ-900 aircraft.Reporter stated the aircraft was not in a turn; but 'dead straight' on the taxiway at Max Gross limits of approximately 130;000 to 140;000lbs (pounds). Maintenance arrived but refused to move the B737 aircraft until all the passengers were deplaned. Maintenance would not put another tire on the same O/B axle due to concerns that the axle may have fractured. Customer Service wanted to de-board the passengers and have them take all their carry-on luggage; handbags; including five wheelchair bound passengers and have them walk across the taxi ramp to the Terminal.  He refused to order the de-planing for safety concerns until buses were brought to the aircraft. Maintenance showed him where the Wheel Tie-bolts holding the two wheel halves together had sheared; allowing the air in the tire to blow-out; separating the O/B wheel half from the wheel assembly and axle; while also blowing and rolling the tire off the remaining wheel half that was still on the axle; due to the aircraft had not yet stopped; eventually rolling into the CRJ-900 aircraft. At that time; the O/B Main tire; O/B wheel half had not been located. The tire was serviceable; not worn. Questions about possible corroded wheel Tie-bolts or cracks in the wheel halves have not been answered.  No damage occurred to the CRJ-900 aircraft.



Synopsis: A Captain reports that during taxi-out; he felt and heard a loud bump and noticed a Main Landing Gear (MLG) tire passing his B737-400 aircraft and striking the Main Landing Gear of a waiting CRJ-900 aircraft.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ABE.Airport, PA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Night
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ABE
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Landing Without Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was on a night VFR flight [to] KXLL with good visibility; using iPad for navigation. Tuned into Queen City AWOS reporting calm winds. Tuned to CTAF 122.7; made a position report. With no other traffic reported on the frequency; I set up for a left base entry to Runway 33. While thinking I was approaching Queen City; I thought I had the airport in sight and closed the iPad. (Note: on this heading; ABE is located 5NM; almost directly behind KXLL. The runway layout is similar at both airports). Having landed here previously twice at night with the runway lights on; I had the invalid expectation of the lights being on. I did not notice the PCL symbol on the chart. With the lights off at KXLL; I [overflew] the airport and continued to what I did not realize was ABE.Landing on what I thought was Runway 33; I noticed the numbers '31' crossing the threshold and figured something was not right and started looking for the tower frequency at ABE. Rolling out on the runway; I heard a controller come up on 122.7 and advise me to switch to the tower frequency 120.5. The controller was accommodating and had already figured that my intention was to land at Queen City. He offered instructions to taxi to Runway 6 for departure and asked for N number and name; and he gave me a telephone number to call after landing. The flight to Queen City ended uneventfully and the phone call yielded a very friendly supervisor who took down my information.Contributing factors in the error were my expectations of the runway being lit based on previous landings here; the fact that ABE lies in a direct line from KXLL when approaching from the south; and perhaps my choice of doing a left base entry on 33 which simultaneously lined me up on a left base to Runway 31 at ABE.




Synopsis: A general aviation pilot became confused during a night approach and landed at the wrong airport; without a clearance to land from ATC. The airport of intended landing was non-towered.
Date: 201311
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SRQ.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class C SRQ
ATC / advisory: Tower SRQ
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Local
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While returning to my home base airport (SRQ) with a student; I was instructed by Tampa Approach to maintain 2;100 feet and contact Sarasota Tower on 120.1. I contacted Sarasota Tower approximately 6 miles east of airport. I was instructed to enter a downwind for Runway 14. At that point I began my descent from 2;100 feet. At approximately 1;400-1;600 feet Sarasota Tower told me that I wasn't suppose to descend. I immediately climbed back to 2;100 feet.


Second narrative: The first aircraft departed Runway 14 assigned a 090 heading and VFR at or below 1;600 [feet]. He climbed to 1;600 [feet]. The other aircraft was inbound to the left mid-field downwind and began an early descent and came in conflict with the departing aircraft. Separation was 100 feet.Pilot briefings on the importance of departure and arrival procedures. The inbound aircraft is a locally based training aircraft. The instructors should know better than to descend without absolute assurance that they are authorized to do so.


Synopsis: An instructor and student inbound to SRQ had a near miss with a departing aircraft after beginning an early descent to pattern altitude without clearance.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: PCT.TRACON, VA
Aircraft: Learjet 45
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: TRACON PCT
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: A LJ-45 departed IAD on an IFR flight plan. The aircraft had filed IAD PALEO V44 DONIL to exit PCT airspace. The preferred departure route indicated that the LJ-45 should have been cleared IAD WOOLY AGARD V44 DONIL to exit PCT airspace. After the aircraft passed the WOOLY intersection; the LJ-45 joined V44; which was incorrect. It was unclear whether the pilot flew the wrong route or the aircraft was cleared incorrectly as the aircraft had already been switched to ZDC by the time I realized the plane was flying the incorrect route. This marks several occurrences in the past few weeks of aircraft departing IAD and flying the incorrect route; indicating that pilots may be getting cleared 'as filed' instead of being read the entire PDR. IAD Tower is not responsible for ensuring that the routes they clear aircraft on are correct. They are only required to issue pilots the preferred departure routes; or plus routing. As a result; PCT is constantly getting aircraft that need to be rerouted while airborne; which adds a great deal of complexity to a session. IAD should have to ensure that routes are correct on all aircraft before they are allowed to depart.




Synopsis: PCT Controller voiced concern that IAD Tower is remiss in insuring that departure clearances issued are in fact the correct routing.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Final Approach
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Leading Edge Slat
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Slat disagree alert on turn to final; executed a [missed approach]. Requested a heading on missed approach multiple times with ATC due to flight control malfunction. Due to communication problems with ATC; I think they did not understand what or why we were requesting a heading. We elected to keep the turns to a minimum until we could clean up the aircraft; due to the airspeed tape foot and top fluctuating severely. Complied with the [missed approach] procedure to the best we could and finally ATC gave us a heading and altitude. Elected to return to [departure airport] due to 33 knot crosswind at [destination airport]. Executed a flaps 28 landing. Landed uneventfully.




Synopsis: MD-11 First Officer reported returning to the departure airport after experiencing a leading edge slat issue.
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LAS.Airport, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B LAS
ATC / advisory: TRACON L30
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Fatigue; Training / Qualification; Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Workload; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were assigned the GRNPA 1 RNAV arrival into LAS and after passing BCE; we were cleared direct to TRROP. While with Approach Control; we were assigned the RNAV Visual to Runway 19R. We were a little unclear as to what that meant and we assumed we were cleared for a visual approach after joining the approach course for the RNAV GPS 19R and turned away slightly from our course to TRROP. We then remembered that we had the special RNAV approaches and within 10 seconds were back to direct TRROP for the charted course. Approach Control queried us that we were indeed still going to TRROP and we confirmed that we were. The remainder of the flight was normal and no separation issues with other traffic occurred.The use of the word 'Visual' in the approach is somewhat confusing; especially after a long duty period. Since this approach is an actual IFR approach; perhaps renaming it RNAV 19L/R 'Victor' and eliminate the word visual or something along those lines would reduce the chances of crews making the same error.




Synopsis: Air Carrier First Officer reported confusion about combining the term VISUAL with RNAV and suggested eliminating VISUAL and label a RNAV with a visual segment using a letter with the RNAV Runway combination.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Reverser Translating Sleeve
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Lead Technician
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We had just finished replacing the Thrust Reverser Blocker Doors on the #2 engine of Aircraft X which we had been working on for a couple of days. The only fully qualified mechanics on duty were myself and [another technician]. As [the other technician] was unable to climb the thrust reverser fan duct in order to access the upper blocker doors the inspection and sign off of those doors fell to me. I had climbed up the fan duct of the thrust reverser several times over the previous and current shift. As the job was finished and we were preparing for ops checks I climbed into the fan duct to conduct a final inspection of the installation and to make sure no tools or FOD had been left behind. During my final inspection of the left hand side my foot slipped off the hinge fitting I was using as a foot hold and I slid down the fan duct. My foot landed on the wedge fairing but due to its sloped shape I slipped to the forward side landing my weight on the very tip of the fairing breaking it off. Confined space; lack of maneuvering room; and lack of secure foot or hand holds contributed to the incident. As I am a large individual I had to contort my body in the very forward portion of the duct just behind the blocker doors. This afforded me just enough room to bend my legs to climb up the duct using the hinge fittings and the aft side of the wedge fairings to support myself. When the blocker doors are removed there are places to use as hand holds but with the doors installed there are no secure hand holds. Per the [maintenance manual] there is an access platform system of foam blocks designed to be used in the thrust reverser fan duct to prevent falls or damage to the aircraft. However due to my size and the lack of space I am not sure I would fit in that location if any additional equipment was installed with me. Also performing the door adjustment requires the access platform to be removed. Based on the [maintenance manual] description of the platform I believe it could be used but only you are able to remove sections so you could adjust the height. If the tool has to be installed as a whole assembly it would not be effective for this task due to having to remove it to perform the door rig.




Synopsis: Maintenance Supervisor reported that the tip of a fairing on a Boeing 777 fan reverser was broken off during maintenance.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DVT.Airport, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower DVT
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After landing on 25R at DVT I was just exiting the runway on Taxiway A8 when I heard Aircraft Y announce that he was going around because; 'That guy is still on the runway.'  I suddenly heard a loud engine/propeller sound and saw the right wing and extended main landing gear just outside my left side window.  He appeared to be over the runway and I would estimate at an altitude of about forty feet.  I was just off the runway on Taxiway A8 and had not crossed the Runway Safety Area/Holding Position lines into the ground movement area.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported a critical ground conflict with another GA aircraft while exiting the runway after landing at DVT.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: APC.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: Marginal
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Falcon 900
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZOA
ATC / advisory: Center ZOA
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: The event occurred while being vectored onto VOR RWY 6 approach into APC. We were at 4;000 feet and were told to turn left to join approach course. The TCAS system then gave us a Resolution Advisory to DESCEND immediately after reading back our instructions. The autopilot was disengaged and we descended following our VSI. The TCAS system then gave us another Resolution Advisory to CLIMB while we were in the descent. The Resolution Advisory was followed exactly how we are trained. CLEAR OF CONFLICT was announced and we saw the small Cessna pass below us off our left wing. If we would have taken the turn we would have been pointed directly at the traffic that caused our Resolution Advisory.There needs to be better separation between VFR and IFR traffic in this area.


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


Synopsis: Falcon 900EX flight crew reported receiving an RA on approach to APC when ATC gave them a turn clearance; which they felt could have resulted in a collision had it been followed.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Flap Control (Trailing & Leading Edge)
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting; Workload
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Weather; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon leaving; the WX (Weather) forecast for ZZZZ was -RA OVC 025 tempo OVC 012.  Upon arrival; the ATIS was showing -DZ BKN 003; TEMPO 2000 RA.  ZZZZ1 WX was similar but ZZZZ2 was VFR; dry runway.Arriving at ZZZZ; we initially planned an Autoland.  When lowering the flaps to 1; we noticed a split in the gauge but no EICAS.  One flap read 1 when the other read zero.  The handle was rechecked and the gauge was tapped.  We ran the TE (Trailing Edge) flap disagree checklist and planned a full LE (Leading Eddge) slat VREF 30 + 40 approach as directed and used the longest runway; best weather and driest runway.  That was ZZZZ2 which was our primary alternate.  Dispatch concurred with this decision and SATCOM patch with [Operations Control] offered no extra ideas.  ZZZZ was ruled out due to almost CAT III conditions with a wet and shorter runway.We landed with 8500 pounds of gas taxied to the gate.  One brake peaked at 4.  Of course the FA's; (Flight Attendants) PAX (Passengers) were notified.  [ATC was advised] as well.


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


Synopsis: B757 flight crew reported a trailing edge flap anomaly upon extension; resulting in a diversion to an airport with a longer runway.