elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Ground Excursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was instructing student how to taxi a PA 28-180 Piper aircraft. This was student's first exposure to the PA 28-180. Student had successfully executed several stops during the taxi practice. As we approached the end of the taxiway (from west to east) I instructed her to stop! However at this time she applied only right brakes and the airplane went into the ditch. This happened before I was able to recover! The ditch was a 5 ft drop off from the taxi way. No one was injured.




Synopsis: PA28 instructor reported the student pilot applied only the right brake when stopping and left the taxiway surface into a ditch.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SR22
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: UNICOM ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Landing Without Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While on a private pilot training lesson; we had finished our coursework for the flight and were returning back to ZZZ for a full stop landing. Enroute we had loaded up the UNICOM frequency and ADS-B weather; which was showing wind calm. With our approach being from the northwest; we determined a left downwind for Runway XX was our easiest entry into the pattern; and made radio calls accordingly. Upon touchdown; we began our roll-out; and saw an aircraft on the opposite runway approaching us. We braked hard and deviated away from the aircraft on the runway. Upon realizing our mistake we tuned to the Tower frequency and were instructed to taxi clear of the runway to park.




Synopsis: SR22 flight instructor reported mistaking a towered airport for one that was non-towered; which resulted in landing without a clearance and a ground conflict.
Date: 202107
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Light: Night
Aircraft: Medium Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Equipment Issue; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Airport; Company Policy; Human Factors; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While on approach into ZZZ; an aircraft on the ground reported an APU fire message they had on approach and that they believed there was no fire. While we were on short approach into ZZZ a fire vehicle pulled out of the fire station and up to the hold short line and said they were going to cross the runway. We made two radio calls stating we were on short final and the fire vehicle stated that they know we are on short final and that they will be off the runway momentarily. We performed the balked [landing] in ZZZ at about 100 feet because the fire vehicle was still on the runway. We then returned back to the field and landed.[There was a] possible fire for [an] aircraft on [the] ground on the opposite side of [the] runway fire station. [It was] night time with rain that possibly lowered visibility from the ground; but flight visibility was at least 10 miles [and the tower was closed]. Enhanced training for operators of ground vehicles that may operate on the runway [is recommended].




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported executing a go-around due to a fire truck entering the runway on short final to an airport when the Tower was closed.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DSM.Airport, IA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Icing; Rain; Snow
Light: Night
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Confusion
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Upon arrival to Des Moines; there was no communications regarding which gate to park. Our gate was occupied; adjacent gate was occupied by one RJ but no-one was out there to receive the airplane in the second space. Turns out the bridge had broken and it was being repaired before our arrival however; it was not repaired in time. Someone failed to take the initiative to have a backup plan in place in the event the bridge was not available by our arrival time. Finally; we saw activity to guide us to Gate XY. The ramp area at Gate XY was snow covered however; part of the lead-in line was visible. We parked; set the brakes; turned off the seat belt sign; ran the parking checklist; received signal to release brakes. Very shortly after; the airplane started to slide! Apparently; there was ice on the ramp under the snow. After brake release; because of the ice and the ramp was not level; the plane just took the chocks with it in the slide. I received the frantic signal to set the brakes and noticed out of the corner of my eye the bridge going backwards to try to get out of the way. Then; I was told we needed to start engines to reposition the plane. Seatbelt sign back on; announcement made; engine start; slight reposition; engines off; seatbelt sign off; announcement; checklist - continued to remain in my seat until all passengers deplaned just in case it happened again.It appeared that the ramp personnel were pretty young and I know that they were doing their best however; because there was no contingency plan in place for parking this plane; the ramp was not properly prepared to safely receive the aircraft at Gate XY (cleared of snow; ice and deiced). Later; I was told that ramp services had been farmed out to a 3rd party operation. It seems that additional training/information needs to be considered regarding a properly prepared safe parking area especially; with winter type operations. We were lucky; no-one was injured and nothing was damaged. Action must be taken to maintain a high priority for safety.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported the aircraft blocked in; shut down; and was chocked at a backup gate is DSM. There was snow and ice on the ramp and after brake release the plane slid backwards taking the chocks with it.
Date: 202102
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: B787 Dreamliner Undifferentiated or Other Model
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: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Fatigue; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: We encountered a significant unforecast mountain wave. Autothrottles were slow to react. I called out acceleration to Captain who was pilot flying. He acknowledged but did not react to the acceleration. We started to overspeed so I deployed the speed brakes and pulled back the throttles. Lost 500 feet in recovery. Reported altitude loss  and wave to ATC. Debriefed event and discovered pulling throttles back was counter to FM guidance. During debrief we also discussed late departure and long taxi with complications on ramp due to weather on departure as contributing to our reaction to this event due to being fatigued. Good debrief.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported an altitude excursion occurred when the flight encountered an unforecasted mountain wave.
Date: 201512
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: FDK.Airport, MD
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Light Transport
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Ground Excursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After landing at Frederick Airport (KFDK) during darkness; I exited runway 23 and started taxiing north on Taxiway 'A'. I asked the co-pilot; to help give me taxi guidance; since the Tower was not yet in operation. She told me to taxi left onto 'G' taxiway. That led us incorrectly; to the AOPA Gangar. Unable to go further; I asked her about the taxiway on her side; the right side of the aircraft. It was too dark to see where it led and she said 'it looks like it ends and goes into a grass area.' I looked left and saw a taxiway that I assumed would take us back to 'A' and then the approach end of Runway 5. These taxiways ½ way down 'G' taxiway are unmarked and unlit at any time. The taxiway did not go very far left; so I followed it around to the right making a 90 degree right turn. As I turned; we were facing a set of 'T' hangars. I stopped and asked again; what she saw; which was hard for her to see. It appeared to me that we were about to cross a small section of turf and I could see the AOPA concrete and taxiway just ahead. I slowly taxied and the aircraft slid down a grass embankment that neither of us had seen; because of the cockpit being so high. All the landing lights didn't illuminate a thing. I attempted forward and reverse thrust to free us. But to no avail.My recommendations are:1.Both of us should have watched our iPads and noticed unmarked taxiways ahead. 2.Taxiways should all be illuminated.3.On 'G' taxiway facing AOPA I should have shut down and called for a tow.4.The irrigation depression that the aircraft slid down should be marked on the taxi chart.5.Not flying with only 6 hours of sleep.6.Having copilots be type rated as PIC in [the aircraft being flown]




Synopsis: Captain reported getting lost on unlighted taxiways after landing before dawn with the Tower closed at FDK. A taxiway excursion occurs and the aircraft becomes stuck in soft soil.
Date: 201207
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: DC Battery
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Communication Breakdown; Time Pressure
Second reporter function: Technician
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL
When detected: Other Post Flight
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: MEL; Procedure; Logbook Entry; Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: CRJ-700 aircraft which had; Main Battery voltage dropped throughout flight in ZZZ1.  Called out Maintenance to defer the Main Battery Charger per MEL 24-32-02 which also calls out for deferring the Main Battery; Flight Data Recorder (FDR) and both clocks. I accidentally selected the incorrect MEL 31-21-01a; instead of MEL 31-21-01b in Saber Maintenance Program that was similar; but wasn't the most restrictive. I did not catch my mistake and deferred incorrectly in Saber program and on Aircraft Logbook as well. I recognize my mistake; it was an incorrect mouse click on my part. I was under pressure to minimize Maintenance delays for the airlines and for passengers. I was stressed in my personal life and having starting my new 12-hour schedule change;rotating work schedule; plus the fact that I was having to do 'everything' with my new job and dealing with an incident that happened five months ago in the ZZZ2 Hanger which I will have to testify in court for another Mechanic/ former Supervisor.


Second narrative: I was was involved in an incident in which an incorrect MEL was applied. A CRJ-700 aircraft arrived in ZZZ in July 2012 with a PIREP for 'MAIN BATT VOLTAGE DROPPED THROUGHOUT FLIGHT.'  The Main Battery Charger was determined to be the cause of the discrepancy.   The Main Battery Charger was then deferred per CRJ700 MEL 24-32-02 then requiring the Main Battery (MEL 24-32-01) both Clocks (MEL 31-21-01) and the Flight Data Recorder (FDR) (MEL 31-31-01) be deferred as well.  The Maintenance Controller and myself ended up deferring the Clocks under MEL 31-21-01A; CAT C; for one clock; but both clocks were placarded.


Synopsis: A Maintenance Controller and Line Mechanic report about applying an incorrect MEL to a CRJ-700 aircraft when they deferred both aircraft clocks under an MEL for one clock.  The Main Battery Charger was also deferred requiring both clocks; the Flight Data Recorder (FDR) and the Main Battery be deferred under different MELs.
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Nose Gear Door
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling; Human Factors; Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part; Manuals; Chart Or Publication; Aircraft
Primary problem: Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part

Narrative: Nose Landing Gear (NLG) AFT Door. AFT Hinge Repair Bushings Part Number (P/N) XXX-1. These flanged bushings are part of a repair for worn hinges (Oversized). The problem is this P/N XXX-1; I believe; are not Manufactured (MFG'd) correctly; compared to the others we have had in the past. These bushings are approximately half the length of the others. If you look at Page 4 of 4; of the Airbus Supplement to the Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) 52-003; it does not show what the length should be for the Flanged bushing; but the non-flanged bushing shows a typical length of .155' to .160' of an inch. In my opinion the flanged bushing should be .155' to .160' of an inch; plus the flanged dimension of .078' to .080' of an inch. Most of the bushings are found in [Stores] Kit XXX [Parts Bin] for the Maintenance Base; since this is a common repair at every [C-Check] visit.

Callback: Reporter stated the Flanged/Hat bushings were driven by a Service Bulletin from Airbus and made in their Air Carrier's Machine Shop. But the Airbus Maintenance Supplement to their Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) never gave any dimension length. So the drawings from company Engineering to the Machine Shop never included the Flange/Hat thickness dimension as an additional length to the original Aft Door hinge fitting bushings. The Machine Shop had assumed the 'Hat' thickness was inclusive of the total bushing length; due to the Engineering drawing did not specify otherwise. There are two bushings involved; one bushing floats and one is the 'Flange/Hat' bushing.Reporter stated the Airbus Service Bulletin was issued in response to pilot reports about high noise vibration in the aircraft's nose section during Takeoff rotation. The Flange/Hat bushings were designed to protect the Aft Door rod assemblies from being crushed during re-assembly. The bushings were only part of the Service Bulletin to address the nose vibrations.



Synopsis: A Technician reports the Nose Landing Gear (NLG) Aft Door; Aft Hinge Repair Bushings found in their Stores Kits are approximately half the length of the replacement bushings they have been using in the past on their A320 aircraft during Maintenance Visits. The bushings were part of an Airbus Service Bulletin to address nose vibrations on takeoff rotations.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: MKO.Airport, TX
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Super King Air 200
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZFW
ATC / advisory: Center ZFW
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Aircraft X was VFR orbiting over MKO when I took over the sector.  The previous controller advised me Aircraft X would be looking for an IFR clearance back to PWA at some point.  When Aircraft X was finished with the orbit over MKO they requested to return to PWA VFR at 10;500.  I instructed Aircraft X to maintain VFR and ERAM [En Route Automation Modernization] initiated an auto handoff as the aircraft neared TUL APCH airspace.  I noticed FAIL flashing in the 3rd line and pointed Aircraft X out to TUL APCH on the 5 line.  As Aircraft X approached Stillwater Low (K62); I initiated a handoff using 'K'.  FAIL flashed in the third line again and I initiated a directed handoff to 'K62'.  As the aircraft neared the ZKC/ZFW boundary I observed the CID of the aircraft change and an R appear in the data block and proceded to transfer communications to SWO Low.  Approximately 10 minutes later SWO Low called me on the 51 line and requested I initiate a flash to OKC approach.  I informed the controller that I did not have track control of the aircraft.  The ZKC controller advised me they did not have track control or radar identification of the aircraft and that it just showed up on their frequency.  I was unable to manually take track control of the aircraft via /ok or trk /ok and K62 performed the coordination needed with OKC Approach.  I'm not sure what happened within ERAM that caused Aircraft X to show as being under another sectors control when neither sector had control of the aircraft but the consequences could be serious if an IFR aircraft enters another controllers airspace without coordination. ERAM should be looked at to understand how this automation failure occurred and correct any bugs or mis-configurations that caused it.




Synopsis: Fort Worth Center Controller reported a problem with En Route Automation Modernization and an airspace violation relating to the problem.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; Icing; 6
Aircraft: King Air C90 E90
Operator: Personal
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Landing Gear Indicating System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter VFR In IMC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was the single Pilot of a flight in my King Air flying passengers from under VMC conditions with VFR flight following. The conditions were night; VMC with a ceiling at 4600 feet AGL and visibility 6 miles.  I was handed off to approach then ZZZ tower who then cleared me to land; but asked for a 3 mile from ZZZ report.  While in VMC conditions; I lowered my gear at approximately 7000 feet MSL and 5 miles and from ZZZ with the runway in sight.  I did not receive all three green 'gear down' annunciators.  I informed ZZZ tower that I had to go around.  As I went around; I had to climb for terrain clearance.  As I began to trouble shoot the problem; I entered into freezing rain.  The rain formed sheets of ice on my windscreen which disabled my forward visibility and thus my ability to maintain VFR.  I immediately requested an instrument clearance from tower and climbed out on radar vectors per their instructions.  As I began my climb into VMC conditions; I began to develop large amounts of mixed rime and clear ice which my anti ice and deice systems could not keep up with.  I had time to determine that the omission of the one landing gear annunciator; was caused by a set of burned out bulbs.  I had spares on board and quickly changed them out.  The three green gear annunciators worked indicating gear was indeed down at this point. I flew the ILS 12 approach into ZZZ without any further problems.  My airplane was 8 days past its 24 month pitot/static and transponder check.  I have subsequently had the 24 month check on these systems 4 days later.  The systems checked out fine with no errors; large adjustments or repairs.




Synopsis: King Air pilot experiences two green lights and a blank indicator when the gear is extended for landing. A go-around is initiated and while troubleshooting freezing rain is encountered requiring an IFR clearance and vectors for an approach. The gear indicator bulbs are changed and a normal landing ensues.