elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201808
Location: D01.TRACON, CO
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E D01
ATC / advisory: TRACON D01
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Undershoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Observer
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were reassigned to the ANCHR 4 RNAV arrival and confirmed that all fixes; altitudes; and speed restrictions were correctly depicted on the CDU. We also loaded the ILS to 35L and selected the BOSSS transition for situational awareness purposes. At approximately 14000 feet; the FAA inspector who was observing from the jumpseat; alerted us that we were not going to make the DOGGG restrictions and we noticed that its altitude and speed restriction were deleted in the CDU; after we confirmed that they were there when we initially loaded the ANCHR 4. The First Officer (FO) informed ATC that we would not make the restrictions and we were re-cleared to 9000 feet with speed at our discretion. I told the FAA inspector that we had the same issue on a previous flight and did not know why it was involuntarily deleted after confirming that it was properly loaded. During the debrief; the FAA inspector realized what caused this and we believe that this should be brought to the attention to all pilots. He told us that by selecting the BOSSS transition; where BOSSS is to be crossed at a higher altitude; took precedence over DOGGG. DOGGG on the RNAV arrival is to be crossed at 210kts and at 11000 feet. On the ILS 35L approach plate; BOSSS is to be crossed at 210kts but at 12000 feet. We had a similar scenario on [a following] flight. Although we selected the PURRL transition for ILS 35R. However; PURRL is to be crossed at 9000 feet; which is lower than DOGGG but nonetheless DOGGG's restrictions were deleted. While the approach transitions are very useful for situational awareness; they caused us to have a possible altitude and speed deviation and we recommend that this be disseminated for safety reasons.




Synopsis: A 757 Captain reported that a crossing restriction on the arrival was not meet and the deviation was pointed out to the crew by the FAA Inspector on the observer's seat.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Dash 8 Series Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Power
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Manuals
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Just short of the gate [the First Officer] engaged the APU (Auxiliary Power Unit) starter. This action caused a DC bus fault; a Number 2 Generator fault and the APU appeared electrically dead. We stopped the aircraft; set the [parking brake] and pulled the Non-Normal Checklist. Next we called Maintenance and we were instructed to try to start the Number 1 Engine. The engine spooled up slowly and weaker than normal so I discontinued the start before the introduction of fuel. The main battery started to rise in temperature very quickly. So we powered the aircraft down; removed the passengers and notified Maintenance.




Synopsis: The pilots of a commercial aircraft were unable to start the Auxiliary Power Unit due to an unknown electrical problem. Maintenance suggested restarting the left engine; but the attempt created a rapid rise in the temperature of the main battery; so the Captain aborted the start and powered down the aircraft.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Taxiing to gate we were told to give way to outbound aircraft and then cleared in. Aircraft was configured per SOP; APU off; #2 engine shut down. As we came to a stop short of RF; I depressed the brakes and reached for the parking brake lever and inadvertently started closing the #1 fuel lever. By the time I realized my mistake; the engine had already started shutting down. The aircraft was powered down to the battery with no additional generator available. I started the APU and subsequently restarted the #1 engine. The aircraft was on battery power for several minutes while waiting for NDs and PFDs to power up. We then taxied to the gate.




Synopsis: A B737 Captain unintentionally shutdown #1 engine on a taxiway with both the APU and #2 engine shutdown before reaching the gate. The APU was started to restart #1 for gate arrival.
Date: 202110
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A320
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Rudder Pedal
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Rolling takeoff; First Officer flying; at transfer of control; First Officer powered up and almost simultaneously as Captain's hands on throttle / 40 knots 'Airspeed Alive' First Officer calls out 'you have control; you have control'; as I started to take over; [the] nose began veering right and due to low speed and long runway elected to discontinue takeoff / reject unaware of nature of the problem. Once aligned with centerline and taxi speed; 'remain seated' announced by Captain as we cleared runway. First Officer declared his rudder pedals had broke free of adjustment and went to the floor giving him no rudder authority. We elected to return to gate where maintenance locked pedals into desired position in accordance with the MEL.




Synopsis: A320 Captain reported a rejected takeoff and return to gate caused by the First Officer's rudder pedal adjustment failing.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: NCT.TRACON, CA
Flight conditions: Marginal
Aircraft: PC-12
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C SJC
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: I was training a trainee on the sector. It was marginal IFR weather and instrument approaches were needed. Aircraft X was in the arrival flow behind Aircraft Y. The trainee was delay vectoring ahead and assigning speeds to try to maintain separation. At 25 miles from the field the Aircraft X was already 4.3 miles behind Aircraft Y (wake turbulence required 4 miles) and he was still delay vectoring ahead. I told the trainee to delay vector Aircraft X because he did not have enough room. The trainee refused to listen and instead slowed Aircraft X to 150 kts; I think. After telling the trainee multiple times to delay vector Aircraft X the trainee continued to issue slower speed assignments. Aircraft X ended up over the initial approach fix at 6;500 feet at 120 kts. The crossing altitude at that fix is 4;000 feet. I told him to break the aircraft out. He then proceeded to clear them for the approach. I immediately told him to break the aircraft out and the trainee did. He issued a descent to 5;100 feet and a left turn heading 180.The pilot made the turn and continued a rapid descent and told us he was working on something. He descended to 4;700 feet. I took over the frequency and issued a low altitude alert. Aircraft X was heading towards a 5100 foot MVA (Minimum Vectoring Altitude). Aircraft X started a climb and entered the 5;100 foot MVA at 4;900 feet. Aircraft X had gear and flaps already down and apparently was struggling with the aircraft to climb after they were given the approach clearance and slowed to such a slow speed. This trainee has a history of completely ignoring instructions. I need to take the sector away from him as soon my first instruction is ignored.




Synopsis: NCT Controller reported that a trainee's failure to follow instructions caused an aircraft to descend below MVA.
Date: 201401
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: 1MS8.Airport, MS
Aircraft: T6A Texan II / Harvard II (Raytheon)
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E NMM
ATC / advisory: TRACON NMM
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: We routinely lose radio contact on TEX2's inbound to 1MS8 at 3;000 MSL. As previously reported  the trees around the main transmitter site need to be removed. They have grown to the point that they are hindering radio coverage. While this may be a routine occurrence; what happens when routine turns into an emergency?




Synopsis: NMM Controller expressed concern regarding radio loss events allegedly due to trees near the main transmitter site.
Date: 201904
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SEA.Airport, WA
Aircraft: Dash 8 Series Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B SEA
ATC / advisory: Tower SEA
Second aircraft: A319
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Encountered wake turbulence on final for a visual approach 34L SEA backed up by the RNAV Y 34L approach. The wake turbulence was from an A319.




Synopsis: Dash 8 Captain reported encountering wake turbulence on final approach to SEA in trail of an A319.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: DFW.Airport, TX
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Widebody Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Ground Personnel; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling; Human Factors; Airport
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During taxi-in to the gate; at DFW all three cockpit crew observed the clear area to be clear of all surrounding ground equipment or other obstacles. We made cockpit callouts to that effect; 'clear left' and 'clear right.' We slowly continued in to park as normal under DGS (Docking Guidance System) guidance. At approximately 14 ft. to go (as displayed on the DGS) we felt the aircraft stop. After a short period; around a minute; ground crew signaled from the right side of the AC (Aircraft) to shut the right engine down and made a gesture which looked to me like we had hit something. The FO (First Officer) shut the right engine down. Ground crew then communicated via interphone we had come in contact with ground equipment. The right engine nacelle was damaged due to this contact.I believe this event occurred because there are multiple 'clear areas' depicted by the white and red lines creating ambiguity as to proper clear areas. The ground equipment we contacted was in fact parked behind a white and red line but the aircraft final parking spot has the wing and engines encroaching over 'this very' white and red line. From the cockpit we observed the parking area to be clear as we approached but the actual stopping point places the aircraft over these lines. I believe this is what caused this incident.I think revisiting the physical placement of the clear area white and red lines would eliminate the possibility of crew members and ground crew thinking the area is clear but in fact is not.


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


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported that due to ambiguous markings in the clear/safe space at the gate; the aircraft came in contact with ground equipment.
Date: 201605
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CVH.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: CTAF CVH
Second aircraft: Sail Plane
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After practicing some ground reference maneuvers I decided to land at CVH. The winds were favoring runway 24 (3150 feet x 100 feet). I had landed to a full stop and taxied back to runway 24 for takeoff and return to [another airport]. There was a lot of activity at CVH that day with glider operations. I was waiting at the hold short line for a glider tow to depart on runway 24. After watching the glider tow takeoff I announced my takeoff on the CTAF and entered the runway. I checked for traffic on upwind - it appeared clear - I did my cockpit checks and began take off roll. Shortly after I heard the glider pilot announce on the CTAF that he was stopped at the other end of the runway. (Following that call were two more calls from landing traffic in the pattern for runway 24; a powered aircraft and a glider.) He had released from the tow plane prior to take off. What I saw take off turned out to only be the tow plane. My situational awareness of what was happening was clouded by what I thought I saw. Heat waves coming off of the runway pavement made it hard to discern what was at the other end of the runway. I made the decision to take off and cleared the glider by several hundred feet.Things that would help prevent this situation from occurring again. Making sure traffic has really cleared the area before entering the runway for takeoff. If in doubt don't enter - make a radio call to see if the takeoff traffic has cleared. Being prepared for the unexpected and allowing enough time to react to it. React in the safest way.




Synopsis: C172 pilot reported taking off over a glider he failed to see before starting his takeoff roll.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: GWW.Airport, NC
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: CTAF GWW
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: I was flying from ZZZ to ZZZ1. Have flown this route before and stopped at GWW for self serve fuel. This was my plan again this time. Approached and landed without incident; pulled up to the fuel area and started to get out of my airplane when a couple of trucks pulled up next to the airplane and one gentleman indicated that the airport was closed. On approach; had seen what looked like some work being done on a taxiway at the opposite end of the runway; but the runway was clear and was able to exit the runway well before coming close to any of that activity. The gentleman acknowledged that they had not yet placed the X's on the runway numbers and he advised me that I could go ahead and fuel and take off forthwith. And that they would put the X's out on the Runway numbers as soon as I took off. I did so without delay and while enroute checked the NOTAMs for GWW and I had indeed missed the NOTAM related to the airport closure. As a result of this experience will incorporate thorough checking of NOTAMs into my flight planning and call ahead to any airport where I plan to stop. I also recognize some haste in my preparations for the flight; as I wanted to complete the trip before weather conditions deteriorated. This haste contributed to missing this important NOTAM. This has been a most valuable lesson and it is sincerely hoped other pilots can learn from my mistake; as I have.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported landing at closed airport with no visual indications. Pilot reported failure to review NOTAM.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Fuel System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: The flight crew noticed a discrepancy between the fuel totalizer and the calculated fuel of approximately 7;000 lbs when they contacted dispatch. The dispatcher; the crew and tech tried to ascertain whether or not they had a fuel leak or were over burning in the left engine (due to a fuel imbalance between the left and right wing tanks) or had a malfunctioning totalizer. Once tech was able to get a snapshot of the fuel tanks; it was determined that the totalizer was working correctly and the discrepancy was now over 10;000 lbs between the totalizer and the calculated fuel. The flight diverted and made an emergency landing. According to all the position reports I had received that included the fuel; the fuel was the same as the flight plan fuel. This is due to the fact that all the position reports are based on the calculated fuel. The calculated fuel is based on what the FMC calculates the fuel flow [is] through the engines. The only way a fuel leak will be detected is when the crew cross checks the totalizer fuel against the calculated fuel. One of the reasons that the FAA requires position reports with time; altitude and fuel is so we (dispatchers) are aware of possible over burns or fuel leaks. This procedure on the B777 of only reporting the calculated fuel on automated position reports seems like an unsafe procedure; as the dispatcher is not getting an accurate reading of the fuel actually in the tanks of an aircraft.I believe there is a way that the totalizer fuel could be put into the free text part of the position report as an extra safety step. I do not know if there is a way to program the B777 to report the totalizer fuel instead of the calculated fuel in the automated position reports.




Synopsis: Dispatcher reported the flight crew discovered a fuel leak on their B777 that would have gone unnoticed by the Dispatcher because enroute fuel reports transmitted to Dispatch are calculated rather than actual fuel on board numbers.