elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Nosewheel Steering
Component problem: Malfunctioning
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: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Immediately after initial power application; I noticed the aircraft begin to yaw to the right as we started rolling down the runway for takeoff. I applied left rudder to correct; thinking I had maybe left the nosewheel turned a little when I lined up. But when I got to full left rudder; [I] realized something was wrong so I reduced thrust to idle and stopped the airplane on a taxiway. We notified Tower we rejected the takeoff; ran QRH and evaluated what happened. ATC asked us to move so we started to and it happened again. At that point I decided the aircraft was unsafe so I called Dispatcher and Maintenance and we returned to gate. I spoke with Maintenance the next day and was told they replaced the tiller.




Synopsis: CRJ-200 Captain reported that nose wheel steering was unresponsive during takeoff roll.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZID.ARTCC, IN
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZID
ATC / advisory: Center ZID
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Air Carrier X was enroute from DCA to MCI. The filed route was: DCA..LDN.J134.STL..MCM.BQS4.MCI Air Carrier X was cleared via verbal clearance at DCA with a PDR: LDN.J134.HNN Air Carrier X questioned Clearance Delivery about the route after HNN; whether 'it was still STL or if it was HNN to MCM.' Clearance Delivery advised that after HNN it was 'back to the airway J34 STL.' Air Carrier X acknowledged. At HNN; Air Carrier X turned off the route and preceded direct STL. When questioned; Air Carrier X said that DCA changed his route and that he even questioned it to make sure it wasn't 'skipping an air route or STL'; and claimed that he was cleared after HNN direct STL. At ZID; we are seeing this as a frequent and recurring problem with departures from the DC metro area. For several years; this has been an issue (pilots skipping fixes after hitting a point on a PDR) along J134. I previously suspected that this was either an FMS data base/programming problem; or a pilot knowledge/complacency issue. After hearing the question at Clearance Delivery followed by still more confusion; I believe that this is a pilot knowledge/compliance issue. The CSA 'QA' staff is either unwilling or unable to conduct a thorough examination of this issue. Intended or not; the appearance is that if there is no 'paint scraping' that they don't intend to do anything. There have been countless similar occurrences reported via the MOR process. The MORs are closed without the benefit of a factual investigation. Recommendations include: Eliminating PDRs when the filed route matches the PDR; or nearly matches for functional purposes. I previously made the recommendation to discontinue the PDC program and revert to verbal clearances. This incident seems to indicate that some pilots do not even understand the verbal clearance. Add additional route elements to the portion of the clearance issued with the PDR. Teach the users how to read and interpret the route segments as they apply to 'as filed.' Require air carriers to brief all flight crews on a recurring basis. Publish via AIM and other appropriate publications.




Synopsis: ZID Controller described a course deviation by an Air Carrier flying from DCA to MCI listing PDR vs. file route differences along with 'route' interpretation issues as causal factors.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: P50.TRACON, AZ
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B P50
ATC / advisory: TRACON P50
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: [Aircraft X] checked on and I advised him to expect vectors around an active Fire Fighting TFR for a Visual Approach. After a couple vectors and descents; he was crossing the 6700 ft. and 6000 ft. MVA (Minimum Vectoring Altitude) line. I realized he was already level at 6000 ft. I called the airport and cleared him for Visual Approach once he called the field in sight. I called the supervisor over and told him that I may have issued 6000 ft. to the pilot. When the supervisor listened to the tapes and I did clear him to 6000 ft. and he read back 6000 ft.




Synopsis: A TRACON Controller reported vectoring an aircraft below the Minimum Vectoring Altitude.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-44 Seminole/Turbo Seminole
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Nose Gear
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Evacuated
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Conducting Standardization Flight on multiple practice approaches. We were on the last landing on the ILS on a simulated engine failure approach and before crossing the FAF; gear down call-out was made and verified three green and no gear unsafe lights. Nose gear verified down in the mirror. At approximately 1;000 FT MSL; GUMPS check and again lights and gear verified down and locked. Normal touchdown occurred approximately 1;500 FT from the threshold on the centerline. The nose-gear collapsed and a propeller strike occurred on both engines. The airplane slid approximately 1;000 FT down the runway before coming to rest right of centerline. Batteries; mixtures; magnetos; and fuel were cutoff and a call was made to the Tower about the nose gear collapse.




Synopsis: PA-44 nose gear collapsed during landing.
Date: 201211
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Falcon 10/100
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Routine; uneventful climb up to FL380 on way to FL400 in no turbulence when several waves of rather severe vibration occurred thought airframe. Not able to [isolate] source; but reduction of power and airspeed improved situation; yet phenomenon reoccurred. Requested an emergency descent to lower flight level; finding things 'smoothed out' at FL350. Cleared to FL300 where we reported critical situation had resolved and emergency did not currently exist; yet passengers understandably did not what to continue flight in that aircraft. So; we requested 'normal' handling for a landing at [a nearby airport]. Uneventful descent and landing there.


Second narrative: [Narrative 2 had no additional information]


Synopsis: FA10 flight crew climbing through FL380 reported severe airframe vibration of unknown origin; so they declared an emergency and diverted to a nearby airport.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 15
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: M-20 J (201) / Allegro
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: UNICOM ZZZ
Aircraft component: Landing Gear
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After touchdown while applying brakes; the aircraft began to skid. After the airplane came to a stop; the left main gear collapsed on the taxiway. Airplane was shut down; the fuel was shut off; and passengers deplaned safely.




Synopsis: Mooney M20 pilot reported the landing gear collapsed after landing.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: King Air C90 E90
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Aircraft component: Electrical Power
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At approximately XA:45 local; I departed ZZZ in a King Air; BE9L (90) for a Direct VFR flight to ZZZ1. Enroute I had a total electrical failure. I lowered the landing gear using the alternate method and landed without incident at ZZZ1.




Synopsis: King Air BE90 pilot reported a complete electrical failure while in flight.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: BOS.Airport, MA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground BOS
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Airport
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Taxiing on Delta Taxiway the signage was confusing as to where Delta went and Alpha went.  I made the wrong turn on Alpha at the same time we caught it ATC asked us about being on Alpha.    We made a 180 and got back on D with no problems.  I was confused by the signs although we had the airport diagram out and had briefed; it still caught us off guard since this was the second trip the Captain had made to BOS.




Synopsis: CRJ700 Captain reports reports confusion while taxiing out for takeoff at BOS.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZKC.ARTCC, KS
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: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZKC
ATC / advisory: Center ZKC
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; 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: 50 NM WNW of SLN VOR at FL380 encountered severe turbulence +/- 25 KIAS with a one second overspeed of 5 KIAS followed by stick shaker as airspeed fluctuated. Descended to FL370 to avoid turbulence and again got into severe turbulence 80 NM WNW of SLN VOR. No overspeed; but did get into stick shaker. Descended to FL320 to avoid turbulence. Event was written up and follow up inspection showed no damage. Cause was clear air turbulence.




Synopsis: MD11 Captain reported encountering severe clear air turbulence at FL380 near SLN VOR which resulted in a momentary overspeed and stick shaker.
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZID.ARTCC, IN
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZID
ATC / advisory: Center ZID
Second aircraft: PA-28R Cherokee Arrow All Series
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X en route to LOU was heading west direct to LOU at 12;000 feet MSL. For airspace transition; traffic; and routing I had planned to descend Aircraft X to 10;000 and hand off to Lexington approach. Aircraft Y was en route to LUK at 11;000 feet MSL. When I first looked at the traffic scenario I knew that I needed to descend Aircraft X to 10;000 early enough to get him below Aircraft Y. To provide a service I was trying to let Aircraft X stay at 12;000 for a couple of minutes before beginning his descent. However I started to get a little more busy and a few minutes went by when I noticed I had not descended Aircraft X yet. My plan was to descend Aircraft Y to 8;000 which would have helped with my traffic situation with Aircraft X as well as traffic that was overtaking Aircraft Y. My D-side was training at the time and I had asked him to coordinate a descent on Aircraft Y with LEX Approach. Somehow there was a miscommunication and the altitude was not coordinated. I issued a descent for Aircraft X to 10;000 thinking I still had plenty of room between Aircraft X and Aircraft Y. After issuing the descent I realized I would need vectors to maintain separation. I turned both aircraft 20 [degrees] left for the descent. It still looked tight after the turns had started to stabilize. I asked my D-side at this time if 8;000 had been coordinated on Aircraft Y with LEX Approach. The D-side told me he had not requested lower with LEX Approach so I asked Aircraft X to expedite his descent and turn an additional 20L. I am sure I maintained separation and to double check I watched FALCON which showed that I had 5.35 Miles at the closest point however this was closer than I would have liked. I need to be more authoritative in giving instructions to D-sides especially in training. If there is something for separation that I need done I should do it myself to make sure the coordination is done timely to keep from having to use big vectors.




Synopsis: ZID Controller reported an airborne conflict he observed. Controller descended one aircraft through the altitude of the other. The aircraft were close to losing separation but did not. Controller reported he needed to be more authoritative to the D-Side in issuing instructions for coordination.
Date: 202102
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was the pilot monitoring and my First Officer was the pilot flying from ZZZ to ZZZ1.  The First Officer briefed and the flight computer was programmed for the ILS XXR.  We were flying to ZZZZZ waypoint on ZZZZZ4 RNAV STAR.  When the Approach Controller assigned us the ILS XXC approach; the First Officer incorrectly executed the secondary flight plan.  He asked for my confirmation; but he had already executed the secondary plan before I had a chance to tell him not to do so.  And; he misinterpreted the FMA on his PFD; which led him to make an incorrect turn using the heading mode selector.  This caused a course deviation.  He was confused.  So; I reprogrammed the flight computer to rejoin the arrival route.  Soon after; ATC gave us a heading to intercept the localizer for XXC.  The flight was completed safely and normally.  After the flight; I briefed him on the importance of confirming with the crew before executing the flight computer program; not to be in a hurry; to take time to correctly interpret FMA; and to know how to correct your own mistake when you make one.  During this COVID pandemic period; he has moved from this fleet to XXX fleet then back again to this fleet.  That might help explain his getting confused on this flight computer system.  He took the post flight briefing professionally; and I believe it will help him in the future.  However; I must say that we cannot keep using the pandemic as an excuse for errors and mistakes made on the job.  Professionals should; regardless of the root cause; be able to recognize his or her own deficiencies; and continue to put effort into doing a better job every time.


Second narrative: I was probably off course temporarily while on the ZZZZZ arrival while we were attempting to reload the arrival and changed runway.


Synopsis: Air Carrier flight crew reported a track deviation due to the First Officer's confusion with the FMC. Reportedly; the First Officer has changed aircraft during the pandemic several times which may have contributed to the event.
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZSE.ARTCC, WA
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; Icing
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cardinal 177/177RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZSE
ATC / advisory: Center ZSE
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was in cruise flight at 12;000 FT IMC with no evident airframe icing. I initially lost power and manifold pressure was restored to 10-15 inches by adjusting the mixture. My primary focus was flying the airplane and I likely violated altitude on a number of occasions for the duration of the flight. I did request and was assigned a block to help. However; there were occasions that I was flirting with the lowest assigned altitude to maintain flight. By continuing to manage mixture I was able to continue on and subsequently land at destination. Upon landing I discovered that my air filter was completely iced over in addition to other icing within the cowling. Again; there was no airframe icing. One option to avoid busting my assigned altitude would have been to declare an emergency and to land instead of continuing flight. However; given the power issues I was not comfortable with the current weather at my potential divert airport and looking at my on-board XM weather it appeared conditions were more favorable to the North. I'm currently working with my mechanic to better understand the induction icing issues specific to the Cardinal RG aircraft and researching similar issues.




Synopsis: C177RG pilot reports a power loss while cruising at 12;000 FT in IMC and elects to continue to destination. Post flight reveals the engine air filter to be completely iced over.