elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201409
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: EC145
Operator: Other EMS
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Main Rotor Brake
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Other EMS
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Human factors: Time Pressure; Workload; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Setting Takeoff Power
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Weather; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While waiting on hospital roof for patient and medical crew; I noticed visibility decreasing with storms to the north and south of our route of flight; both moving East.  I texted the crew still in the hospital that 'we need to get going.'  Admittedly; I was in a hurry.  I used the rotor brake on shut down; staying in the cockpit for NVG security.  Once the crew arrived I started the run up; I did not brighten the CAD as I normally do; missing the Rotor Brake Caution warning.  I ran the throttles to FLY and didn't notice the warning until my before take off check.  TOO LATE!  I learned several lessons.  Always use the check list especially in a dark cockpit.  Don't let weather/patient status get me in a rush.  Leave my hand on the rotor brake lever until returning it to the down position. Brighten the CAD (as I usually do) BEFORE any other step. No excuses; just stupidity and being human I guess.




Synopsis: EC145 pilot; concerned about weather and the need to expedite departure; failed to note that the main rotor brake was engaged until after the throttles had been advanced for takeoff.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: 8B5.Airport, MA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cardinal 177/177RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Other Simulated engine out
Airspace: Class E ZBW
ATC / advisory: CTAF 8B5
Second aircraft: Ultralight
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working with an instructor on wings & Instrument Proficiency Check (IPC).  Just finished turns; climbs; descents and unusual attitude recover under the hood (which served as clearing turns) and transitioned to a simulated engine out.  Spotted an airport; and entered a non-standard steep descending right base to set up for simulated engine out landing.  We were not on CTAF. We noticed a possible ultralight on high left base beginning to break off their approach.  We immediately broke off the approach to the right and climbed out of the pattern.  We then got on CTAF; but didn't hear any other traffic. The instructor didn't want me aware of the nearby airport; and was simulating an IFR emergency; breaking out of IMC; to a power off landing.  This resulted in no radio calls being made; and only one pair of eyes clearing the area prior to the simulated emergency. The radios could have been set up for CTAF frequencies in the area without necessarily informing me of the nearby airport. This would have made it easier to get onto CTAF and announce for traffic without referring to charts.  A call then could have been made as soon as I had spotted the airport as the intended point of landing.  Also if we were 'monitoring' CTAF; the instructor might have heard the traffic even though I was not aware of our position.  However even with that; we don't know that the other aircraft had a radio.




Synopsis: Cessna pilots were conducting a simulated engine failure under simulated instrument conditions and failed to make the recommended airport traffic pattern radio calls.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SBN.Airport, IN
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: No Aircraft
ATC / advisory: Tower SBN
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Ground; Supervisor / CIC; Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Other Numerous Vehicles in Area
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was relieving the Local; Ground; and CIC position in the Tower which is normally combined to one position. The controller working position giving the brief happened to be a Supervisor.  Our main runway; Runway 27L was closed.  The brief only included one truck which had access to the movement area (some confusion about that truck as well started when it was told by the controller to hold short of all 'non-movement areas').  I questioned the briefing because I noticed many; many vehicles on Runway 27L that I was not told about. The Supervisor said they were just 'over in that area' and were very good about calling on frequency before coming 'this way'. I said I was under the understanding that a vehicle needs a clearance to be on any runway; open or closed.  I said I was only comfortable with taking the position if the Supervisor specifically told me it was okay to have a large amount of vehicles out there with no clue who they are or what their clearance is.  He approved the operation.  After the brief I decided to clean up the situation and ask all vehicles their numbers and what they had clearance to.  Approximately 8 vehicles had access to the runway; and 5 or so of them had the entire 'west side;' which per the LOA; gives them access to the north parallel runway as well and closes that runway.  I was informed by a previous controller after the fact that this Supervisor was given a detailed brief of all vehicles on the runway; all associated magnet reminders with vehicle numbers were displayed and that he chose to put them all away and disregard all of the information regarding their clearances. I recommend all controllers use standard procedures with airport vehicles and include the use of magnets in the SOP.




Synopsis: SBN relieving Local Controller reports of an operation in which the FLM had vehicles approved to be on and or near the closed main runway.  The FLM had removed all of the magnets which signified the vehicles call signs.  The relieving Controller had to obtain information from each vehicle to find out its clearance.  The relieving Controller was briefed about one aircraft and there were a total of eight.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
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: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: Tower SFO
Second aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: SFO changed 28R to 19L short notice. Vectors for 19L ILS. On base leg told to intercept 020 radial and follow to airport. I put SFO 020 in fix page and raw data SFO VOR while FO flying built intercept leg 200 to SFO. Intercepted 020 radial in LNAV. 10 miles called airport in sight. Advised traffic for 19R as EMB170. Traffic in sight. Landing check completed at 1000 ft stable approach; FO hand flying with auto throttle on. Traffic appeared very close exactly parallel even while we were offset from 19L centerline. 900 ft got TCAS RA fly up indication. Told FO to follow commands. Re-verified visual separation ok with EMB170 and turned TCAS to TA mode cancelling RA. Immediately following was low glideslope warning. Told FO fly up and capture glideslope. Distracted by false TCAS RA and fixation on very close parallel traffic. Back on GS at 700 feet and stable. Uneventful landing. Note: we were not on the localizer yet (flipping 020 SFO radial) and approaching at an angle to 19L so validity of GS may have been suspect as well as possibility of GS distortion for our runway due very close parallel traffic. I chose to accept that we were close enough to centerline that it was valid warning.


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


Synopsis: B757 flight crew reported a TCAS RA and low glide slope warning while on a visual approach to SFO Runway 19L with parallel traffic for 19R.
Date: 201402
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Luscombe Model 8/Luscombe 50
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Object; Ground Excursion Runway; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Upon touchdown aircraft drifted off right side of runway and impacted runway sign. Right quartering crosswind at time of landing possibly 5 to 8 knots. Damage was minimal and was able to tow aircraft back to hangar. Recurrent tailwheel instruction.




Synopsis: Luscombe pilot reports a runway excursion during landing while receiving recurrent tailwheel instruction.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: VIDP.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: TRACON VIDP
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Human factors: Workload; Time Pressure; Human-Machine Interface; Distraction
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Airport; Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: On climb out from VIDP we were assigned 2600 feet; but overshot that by approximately 300 feet and were correcting back when a higher altitude was given. We were on NADP-1 profile with accel ht of 3000 feet which created a high workload immediately after takeoff. We also had our runway changed 3 times (4 iterations of loading the dept) with different clearances for each runway (initially cleared to 6000 feet on RWY28; then finally cleared 2600 feet on RWY29). We were running RWY change checklists; considering anti-ice requirements; and considering if the First Officer could takeoff in the reduced vis. We did not adequately consider the NADP-1 accel ht being higher than cleared altitude since it was initially not a problem with a 6000 feet level off.


Second narrative: It was a very foggy evening in Delhi. Runways 29 and 28 were alternately closing due to visibility issues. Between pushback and our final takeoff we received 5 runway assignments. The runway and departure changes were incomplete each time and I had to query the controller regarding which SID and transition and altitude.


Synopsis: Following multiple runway changes due to varying visibility the flight crew of a B777 eventually took off from Runway 29 at VIDP but; with an initial level off at only about 1;800 AGL; the pilot flying overshot by about 300 FT. A nearly coincidental clearance to higher precluded the need for an abrupt return to their cleared altitude.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Icing
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Squat Switch
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Diverted; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: In flight we received an air/ground sensor failure followed shortly after by a thrust reverser disagree message. We consulted the QRH and contacted MX via ACARS. The concern was that we would be operating an aircraft with possible reduced braking at an outstation with a short runway and once we extended the landing gear that they would not retract. We were approximately 100 miles from ZZZ and I suggested we divert there rather than return. MX and Dispatch agreed so we amended the flight plan and diverted to ZZZ. We ran the QRH and noted all the potential problems with the failure (i.e. no spoilers; reversers; potential lack of nose wheel steering.) The weather at ZZZ was clear below 4000 ft with almost unlimited visibility as well as a long runway that more than met our needs. We finished the checklist and were vectored on approach to ILS 24L when Tower commanded us to abort the approach just inside the FAF and immediately turn left to 150 and climb to 4000 ft. Apparently there was an aircraft which had declared an emergency and was losing their ability to control the aircraft so ATC had them go in front of us. The go-around was uneventful except we were vectored around through some moderate icing and picked up a significant amount on the gear since we were unable to retract them because of the sensor. We ran the appropriate checklists and got immediately back on the same arrival and exited the icing as soon as practical. We landed without incident and were able to taxi to the gate where MX met us and swapped out the aircraft. The checklists really covered everything and the diversion was pretty standard until we had to execute a missed approach. We weren't certain whether the gear would come up; but we strongly suspected they would be stuck in the down position and discussed the consequences and what our actions would be. We were not expecting the moderate icing; it wasn't mentioned in the AIRMETs; ATIS; or by ATC. The severity of it was surprising and could have caused significant problems had we not been able to exit so quickly.




Synopsis: EMB-145LR Captain reported diverting to a nearby alternate after losing the air/ground sensor in flight.
Date: 201412
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: W29.Airport, MD
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class E ZDC
ATC / advisory: TRACON PCT
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; 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; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Instrument training flight departing from a non-towered airport. While in the run-up area at W29; Bay Bridge Airport; I directed my student to contact Potomac Approach and obtain an IFR clearance. He connected with Potomac via cell phone and obtained the clearance. I verified the clearance he copied then asked if we were provided a 'Not off by time' or 'Void time' and my student said; 'No.' I therefore assumed we were cleared us for IFR release. We departed W29 in VMC conditions and complied with the clearance. During initial contact with Potomac once airborne; the controller seemed surprised we were checking on with IFR procedures because she asked if we were given a release or void time; my student replied with 'No.' She asked if we were VMC and we confirmed we were in VMC conditions. The controller then provided us an IFR clearance direct to SBY at 5;000. She told us next time on initial call-up when trying to obtain an IFR clearance to state we are VMC and requesting the clearance. Looking back; I should have more aggressively reviewed the clearance my student copied. Since he spoke with Potomac via cell phone; I could not monitor the call. I should have ensured that Potomac provided the 'Cleared for release' statement. In this case; I don't think Potomac provided either a cleared for release or void time.




Synopsis: Instructor and IFR Student pilot depart uncontrolled airport without a release from TRACON controllers working the airport.
Date: 202003
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Workload; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Cabin Crew reported bad smell on first call. Second call about a minute later; smell and fumes worsening. Captain and I started the QRC and QRH Checklists. Diverted into ZZZ. Upon our debrief we realized we forgot to run the Divert Checklist.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported a fumes event during cruise resulted in a diversion.
Date: 201709
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 15
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-18/19 Super Cub
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Rotorcraft; Flight Crew Multiengine; Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Confusion; Time Pressure; Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was flying at 4500 feet; and; had been flying for about 90 minutes. [Mid-flight]; I felt a funny vibration on my rudder pedals-my RPM was 2300. Knowing that I could have a problem; I headed West toward flat land; approximately 5 miles away. I changed fuel tanks and put on carb heat.The engine RPM started dropping slowly and at 2000 RPM; I called Approach and told them that I might have to make an off-field landing. The engine sputtered to idle and I did my emergency checklist and safely landed with no personal injuries or damage to the airplane. The airplane was towed 1.5 miles to an empty lot.The next morning; the airplane was inspected and checked by two mechanics; the A & P who performed the last annual inspection; and myself. I was given FAA permission to take off. I took off on the right fuel tank. After 5 minutes; the RPM started to fall; and I determined that I was going to have to make [a second] off-field landing. I did; and no one was injured and there was no damage to the airplane. The airplane was towed back to the empty parking lot. At that time; the four of us noticed that the left fuel tank gas cap was missing. [Two days later]; the airplane was disassembled in my presence and trucked to [the maintenance facility]. During disassembly; approximately four (4) gallons of fuel was drained from the left fuel tank and eight (8) gallons from the right fuel tank. The airplane was reassembled in my presence on [the third day]; and will be thoroughly inspected.




Synopsis: A Piper Super Cub pilot reported making two off field landings due to engine performance problems; possibly due to a fuel system anomaly.