elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201709
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic Fluid
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At the gate we were delayed as maintenance troubleshot a 'gushing' Hydraulic leak - their description. They found a nut loose; repaired and sent us on our way. The leak was in the left system; which had dropped to .85; so it was serviced before we departed.[In flight] the ANTISKID light and EICAS message illuminated. Status page showed NORM and ALT system had failed. We ran the QRH and tried to get hold of [dispatch]. SATCOM did not work on either radio; multiple frequencies. We sent an ACARS message; and [Dispatch] responded; was finally able to get through. By this time quantities had dropped from 1.0 to .93 (Left) and 1.01 to .94 (Right); hyd systems. Center Hyd system remained 1.06 steadily. We ran the ANTISKID QRH; did the landing distance performance calculations; and talked to [dispatch] about where we could put it down on a dry runway. ZZZ was still looking and forecasting dry runways which held up.We reviewed options if quantities continued to fall.Monitored the situation; watched quantifies drop to .92; but no further on L and R systems. [Advised ATC] and landed on the longest runway (13;000 ft) which allowed me to brake effectively with reverse and minimize use of brakes.QRH warned about potential for blowing tire; so we asked for equipment. After coming to a complete stop on runway; we were inspected and told nothing unusual. All indications were good in the cockpit so we taxied to gate and parked.




Synopsis: A B767 Captain reported that Maintenance repaired a hydraulic leak prior to departure; during cruise the hydraulic quantity started dropping.
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Oil Pressure Indication
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Departed ZZZ enroute to ZZZ1 at 4;500 ft.  8 miles west of ZZZ2 I noticed my oil pressure gauge reading in the red zone.  I notified ATC of situation and was making a plan to return to ZZZ.  Shortly after ATC notification our radios started to go out.  I squawked 7600 and headed directly back to ZZZ.  I landed without further incident.




Synopsis: Private pilot flying PA28 aircraft reported the oil pressure gauge indicated in the red zone and the radios began to fail during cruise. Pilot returned to departure airport.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B D01
ATC / advisory: TRACON D01
Second aircraft: Large Transport
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Landing 16R in Denver; we were vectored per Denver Approach SOP of nose to nose with a [large transport] landing 16L. Traffic was called out by Approach; we spotted them easily and continued to fly our visual approach. As [the large transport] intercepted their final; we got a TCAS RA to climb. I stated that the aircraft was in sight and that we would continue. Then we got another 'climb' command followed by 'descend'. We reconfirmed aircraft in sight and continued the approach. The TCAS continued to alert of imminent death for the remainder of the approach; down to about 500 feet AGL.Denver's policy of placing aircraft on a collision course for the parallel south runways has never been; is not and will never be safe. Adding super-sensitive safety equipment bellowing about imminent demise during the most critical phase of flight does not enhance an already unsafe situation. I remain stymied as to why this remains an acceptable method of doing business.Offset arriving aircraft on parallel approaches. It can't be that hard. Incidentally; the individual factors noted above were all induced systemically by FAA procedure and normal TCAS operation.




Synopsis: Air carrier pilot reported receiving an RA and ignoring it due to DEN TRACON SOP of running nose to nose approaches to Runways 16L and 16R.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: TEB.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Learjet 45
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B EWR; Class D TEB
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were cleared on the RUUDY departure at Teterboro for Runway 24. I set the altitude for 2;000 FT but planning to cross WENTZ at 1;500 FT then climbing to 2;000 FT. After takeoff and on climb I selected the autopilot; I looked at the altitude and distance from WENTZ and saw that we would be at 1;500 FT well before the intersection; so I reselected the altitude alerter to capture at 1;500 FT. As I was monitoring the autopilot and climb I noticed that we were not capturing the preselected altitude. I disconnected the autopilot; and applied nose down pressure to level however we climbed through and hit 1;700 FT before returning to 1;500 FT. I was fully aware of the altitude restrictions and planning to arrive at the proper altitudes. I was actively monitoring our situation; and took action before we went through 1;500 FT. We were in turbulence and had a high rate of climb even though I had the power pulled back.




Synopsis: LR45 pilot reports exceeding 1;500 FT prior to WENTZ on the RUUDY 4 departure from TEB when the altitude alerter is changed from 2;000 FT to 1;500 with the autopilot engaged. The altitude is quickly corrected back to 1;500 FT from 1;700 FT.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BWI.Airport, MD
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class B BWI
ATC / advisory: Tower BWI
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: The ramp lights for the new BWI cargo ramp are very bright and distracting when landing Runway 10. Under VMC; the lights are so bright that they significantly and artificially illuminate the Landing Zone of Runway 10 as compared to the surrounding area thus degrade the effectiveness of the REIL. Also; the lights are not angled down sufficiently and immediately impair peripheral night vision during the landing flare. Finally; under low ceiling/visibility; the lights will most likely illuminate the waterborne particles to an extent that it will make it more difficult to visually acquire the landing runway.




Synopsis: Air carrier pilot reported ramp lights for new cargo ramp are too bright and cause a distraction during landing at BWI.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: TEB.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 4
Light: Night
Aircraft: Challenger CL600
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B NYC
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On the LVZ4 arrival at; we were assigned a heading and altitude of 2000 after passing MUGZY waypoint. Descending through 3000 and approaching 2300 we received a low attitude alert; 'caution terrain'; from the GPWS. New York approach queried us seconds before the altitude alert saying 'Aircraft X maintain 3000'. The autopilot was disconnected; power was added; and a climb to 3000 was accomplished. We told New York approach that we were last assigned; and read back; 2000. We acknowledged the 3000 with a read back; the autopilot was re-engaged; and no further action was taken.


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


Synopsis: CL60 flight crew reported receiving a low altitude alert from the GPWS and ATC on approach to TEB due to a clearance miscommunication.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
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: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class B ORD
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Exited Penetrated Airspace
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Software and Automation; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was taking off from ZZZ to ZZZ1 for landing practice and familiarizing myself with a new auto pilot (AP) installed in the plane that I had just been shown earlier on the ground.After engaging the AP and setting the altitude for 3;500 feet MSL under the bravo; I turned my attention to the GPS and working on modifying my flight plan and setting my course. When I rechecked the instruments; I had unknowingly continued my climb to 4;100 feet MSL penetrating the ORD Bravo airspace that had started at 4;000 feet MSL. Upon realizing where I was; I disengaged the AP completely; lowered the nose and descended to 3;300 feet MSL and proceeded to continue my flight.I was in the ORD Bravo airspace for less than a minute.I needed to double check that the AP had actually done what I had set it for as opposed to assuming that the altitude was held where I had set it. I also should have continued west from ZZZ instead of turning southwest to clear the bravo completely prior to working with the AP.




Synopsis: PA-28 reported inadvertently flying into ORD Class B airspace due to newly installed autopilot.
Date: 202011
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Undershoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Upon executing a missed approach; the aircraft was leveled off early. The error was recognized and the aircraft put back into a climb to reach its target altitude for the missed approach. Pilot flying became disoriented after the acceleration and climb on the go-around in IMC. The aircraft was light and the majority of experience was on the Y series. It had been 15 days since the last flight; and 76 days since flying in an X [series] for the pilot flying. The PF reaction to the increased pitch attitude and acceleration was to level the plane prematurely.[Need] Review of SOP procedures for go-around; and mental preparation for pitch attitude changes from the Y to X series on the X type aircraft on takeoff and go-around configurations.




Synopsis: Air Carrier First Officer reported not following SOP's during a missed approach and stated that an extended period of time off was a contributing factor.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: Beechjet 400
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: UNICOM ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: [I was] PIC flying pilot. Requested vectors for the RNAV 28 approach in VMC conditions. Wind variable 3 kts. Turned on outside the final approach fix. Aircraft was configured and stabilized at FAF and checklist completed. Descended via VNAV to 100 ft. above MDA then transitioned to VASI at this time. Transition from VNAV to VASI was briefed prior and confirmed at transition. Autopilot and yaw damp were disconnected between FAF and transition. Crossing the threshold; we discovered that the landing lights were not on. As we touched down normally I called for landing lights and momentarily looked up and to right to confirm switch position. At this time; the aircraft drifted left and a slight impact was felt by both crew. Aircraft was returned to the runway centerline. Post flight revealed damage to the left trailing flap and left leading edge due to impact with runway edge lights. I believe the primary reason for the lateral deviation was me as flying pilot removing complete attention to the lateral path of the aircraft at such a critical moment of the flight. Although I only diverted my eyes for a second it was enough time to become disoriented enough to allow the aircraft to drift left during a dark night landing. Had I simply concentrated on the left and right runway edge lights in front of me the roll out would have been dark but normal. It is possible-but not common-for the landing lights to extend but not sequence on. This is a situation neither the SIC or me had seen before. I believe modifying the SOP call to 'landing lights extend/on' instead of the checklist response of 'as required' could help alleviate confusion for future crews.




Synopsis: BE-400 pilot reported contacting runway lights during landing.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: When we parked at Gate XX; the Ramp Agent used hand signals to indicate the chocks were installed. I released the parking brake. The aircraft started to role; and the Ramp Agent immediately signaled to apply the brakes. The aircraft rolled aft approximately three to four inches. Upon speaking with the Ramp Crew; I was informed the ramp had installed the aft chock with it not flush against both nose tires. It was slanted to one side. When I released the brakes; the aircraft rolled aft; startling the Ramp Agent installing the nose wheel lockout pin; and the Marshaller. They told me that they had issues with Gates XX and YY that slope away from the terminal. They have issues with having to pull the aircraft forward to get the aft chock out from these two gates. They stated Gate XX was a particular problem; as if the brakes were released and the chock were to fail; the aircraft would role across the ramp. I suggested they file a safety report; and that I would do the same with Operations. I filed a report and am notifying Company and the FAA of a possibly safety issue at Gates XX and YY at ZZZ.Incorporate language into the ZZZ airport pages that Gates XX and YY slope aft; and that Flight Crews should keep the parking brake set at these gates until prepared to push.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain reported that after the Marshaller indicated the chocks were installed; they released the brakes and began to roll backwards. The Captain would like to see warning publications regarding specific gates which have a slope.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Reciprocating Engine Assembly
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Ran out of fuel in 1 tank; switched tanks could not get engine started. Initiated a precautionary landing in a field. Upon landing did not flare enough on the round out and struck wooden prop. Caused delaminating of wood on 1 blade of prop.




Synopsis: Wilga 80 pilot reports exhausting fuel in one tank and being unable to restart the engine when fuel is switched to the remaining tank. An off airport landing is undertaken resulting in propeller damage.
Date: 202110
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MIA.ARTCC, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B MIA
ATC / advisory: Center MIA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Climbing out of MIA on the HURCN1 RNAV Departure; we were issued a clearance stating; 'Climb via the HURCN1 except maintain FL230.  Approaching FL 190; the VNAV changed to PATH and directed a level off at FL190.  Thinking we were still on vectors; I continued climbing to about 19;250 feet.  After a brief discussion with the First Officer; I returned to FL190 since the next Waypoint JOENZ required a crossing between 11;000 feet-19;000 feet.The problem is that this JOENZ Waypoint is conditional in that it requires us to fly the 342 radial out of NIBLT and expect radar vectors to JOENZ.  By the time I was reaching FL190; we were within 10 miles of JOENZ and queried ATC about whether we should be at FL190 as well as were we going to JOENZ or not.  ATC replied and issued us a climb and maintain FL230 and direct JAYMC; the last point on the SID.In hindsight; I should have leveled off at FL190 based on the language of the SID page; then queried ATC.  However; this new SID out of MIA can be confusing when you are issued a Climb Via with altitude constraints; but you are not technically cleared to the Waypoint requiring the altitude constraints.I recognize these are new SID procedures and that more careful reading by me would have probably prevented this; but I would like to suggest that any Climb or Descend Via routings either be connected up with no vectors or conditional expects; or have hard altitudes for the last Waypoint passed while waiting on an ATC clearance to proceed on the remainder of the SID/STAR.




Synopsis: Captain reported confusion over a new SID procedure out of MIA; which resulted in missing a crossing restriction.