elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202010
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: PCT.TRACON, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZDC
ATC / advisory: TRACON PCT
Second aircraft: Cessna Aircraft Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was flying with my husband a student pilot. I am a flight instructor. He was sitting in the left seat; I was sitting in the right seat. We were heading northeast bound at a VFR cruising altitude of 3500 feet. Our airplane is equipped with ADS-B in and out. We had VFR flight following with a distinct squawk code and were on frequency with Approach. I looked at our GPS map screen. I periodically check the screen for traffic that I may not see outside. I saw a target moving directly towards us; southwest bound; showing the same altitude. I looked outside; and did not see the aircraft. I listened to Approach and the controller was busy vectoring other airplanes. According to our GPS screen; the target was approximately 4 miles away from us. We had a strong tailwind and were moving 140 knots over the ground. I immediately told my husband to turn to the right and put us into a climb. He did the requested maneuvers. As we climbed to 4000 feet we saw the airplane pass under and to the left of us. If we had not made an evasive maneuver we probably would have hit each other. According to my ADS-B information; the airplane coming towards us was from a flight school. After we cleared the airplane; we again descended to our VFR cruise altitude of 3500 feet. Approach did not mention anything about the traffic or altitude change.




Synopsis: An Instructor pilot reported they detected conflicting traffic on their ADSB and had to take evasive action to avoid a collision. They received no traffic information from ATC.
Date: 201707
Location: EGTT.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
ATC / advisory: TRACON EGTT
Aircraft component: Flight Director
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Cleared on an intercept heading for 27R at EGLL in IFR conditions; the PF selected Approach and the FMC intercepted the localizer.  We reported established with the final controller and were cleared to descend via the glide-slope and handed off to tower. About that time; the FMC flight director commanded a turn to the south to intercept the localizer; which was centered on the raw data portion of the EADI and EHSI. The aircraft; on autopilot; started to deviate south of course. I instructed the PM to reselect LNAV to recapture the localizer; then to reselect Approach mode to re-intercept the final approach course. He did so and the aircraft recaptured the localizer. It then proceeded to turn to the North and once again deviated about a dot width (on the expanded scale) to the north. At this point I instructed the PF to disconnect the Autopilot and fly the raw data manually. EGLL tower asked us if we were established on the localizer and I replied that we were experiencing some navigational anomalies. He replied in the affirmative and we continued. We finally were centered on the localizer at approximately 1300 feet above field elevation concurrently with breaking out of the undercast. We confirmed that we were lined up on the localizer AND 27R and landed uneventfully. The weather WAS NOT what was advertised on the ATIS and this particular aircraft; while under the Ops Bulletin regarding Nav anomalies; was not suitable for IMC flying into EGLL due to its known difficulties with the FMC and Mag Var Tables.

Callback: Captain reported that the Ops Bulletin mentioned in the report is for specific company 767-300 aircraft with inaccurate Mag Var corrections that may cause LOC deviations and/or FMC errors. Captain added that they had engaged LOC beyond the FAF as suggested in the Ops Bulletin.



Synopsis: B767 captain reported experiencing navigation and course control deviations while flying the ILS approach to EGLL.
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Throttle/Power Lever
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Student
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was on a left closed pattern and after completing the GUMPS check on my downwind was cleared for a touch-and-go. After passing the landing point; I pulled on the carb heat; and pulled the throttle back for 1;500 RPM; at the same time as setting the flaps at 10 degrees as I had done for the touch-and-go before this event; and started pitching for 80-85 before I noticed that the RPM's had descended to 900. Immediately I pushed the throttle back in; to no effect. Checking the ignition switch; the primer; the fuel selection (which was at both); and the mixture (which was at full-rich); I started pitching for 65 knots and contacted the Tower that I was experiencing engine problems. In the heat of the moment; I'm still unsure if I used the word emergency; but I remember saying that I did have engine problems. After being told that I was [cleared to land]; and asked if I needed any assistance; I replied that I might need assistance and set my flaps back to neutral. I was able to land and taxi back to the FBO. However; during the taxi; the RPM jumped back up to 1900 RPM's and wouldn't go down regardless of leaning the mixture or pulling on the throttle. And at the entrance to the FBO; I took out the keys and turned off all the equipment; and got out of the plane; where I explained to the mechanics at the FBO what happened.




Synopsis: C172 student pilot experiences loss of throttle control when power is reduced abeam the numbers in the traffic pattern with the engine at 900 RPM. A successful idling approach and landing is accomplished. During taxi back to the FBO engine RPM increases uncontrollably and the aircraft is shut down short of the ramp and Maintenance is called.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground SFO
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: As we approached runway 19R the SFO tower controller issued 'position and hold runway 19R' instructions. Unfortunately; the radio call sign was blocked as it so often is in SFO. Prudently and in the interest of safety on a dark and stormy night that was utilizing a seldom used departure configuration; my FO keyed his mic and said 'that was blocked; was that for Aircraft X?'. Rather than reissuing the instructions or simply confirming it was for Aircraft X; the tower controller replied something to the effect of 'obviously it wasn't blocked because you're replying.' My FO was speechless at this amazing disregard for safety so I keyed the mic and said 'the call sign was blocked so we're confirming rather than risk a violation.' The tower controller then replied; 'WOW!' and then very slowly; condescendingly and unprofessionally replied; 'Aircraft X; clearrrred into possssition and holllld runwaaaaay onnnne ninnnne riggggght.' Besides being unforgivingly unprofessional this was a complete failure of understanding the importance of clear and concise communication that is absolutely critical for safety. I shudder to think of the potential disastrous consequences this tower controller's attitude; unprofessionalism and careless disregard for safety could lead to. Upon landing; I called SFO tower and spoke with [the] tower supervisor; listened to my comments and said he would pass it along to the controller's supervisor. I asked the [Supervisor] to mark and save recorded tapes for the time during our departure. I also let [Supervisor] know I wanted to file an official complaint. [Supervisor] said he would have the controller's supervisor call me. I request specific follow-up on this matter.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported confusion due to a stepped on transmission from ATC. When they queried ATC; the Controller responded unprofessionally.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: PHX.Airport, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class B PHX
ATC / advisory: Tower PHX
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: After touchdown on Runway 25L; the ROPS (Runway Overrun Prevention System) activated commanding 'maximum braking'. Maximum braking was applied and the aircraft easily slowed to a safe speed to exit the runway at the planned exit point. The safe outcome of the landing was not in question during the roll out. The approach to flare was normal and stabilized at 1;000 ft. Flaps full was selected and auto-brakes medium due to a shorter than normal runway. A runway assessment estimated that the required landing distance was 5;798 ft. using our configuration; and the available landing distance was 7;800 ft. (6;840 ft. landing beyond the glideslope). During the flare; the airplane floated and would not settle. We ended up touching down at the end of the desired touchdown zone. A higher than desired flare and shifting winds may have also contributed to the event. When the airplane began to float the airplane should have been allowed to settle firmly onto the runway. During the crew debrief the Captain and I both agreed that the safe outcome of the landing was not in question; but had the aircraft floated longer; we were prepared to execute a go-around. Runway 26 was initially assigned then closed and we were switched to a shorter runway.


Second narrative: Before 1;000 ft. AGL we were at final configuration; on target and glide slope. In the flair the Pilot Flying caught a float to a landing at the end of the touchdown zone. During roll out to exit at G2 we received a ROPS (Runway Overrun Protection System) alert for max braking and the Pilot Flying transitioned from auto brake to manual braking; making the G2 turnoff. Float to a landing at the end of the touchdown zone. If at any point the approach is in doubt go around. Transition from auto brakes to manual braking earlier as the situation warrants.


Synopsis: A321 flight crew reported that a wind shift during final approach resulted in a long landing and activation of the Runway Overrun Prevention System.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Engine failed on takeoff; [approximately] 200 ft. off end of Runway XXL. Conducted off field emergency landing [on] road. Gear partially failed on landing. No injury to passenger; pilot; no structures. Airframe; engine damage.




Synopsis: Pilot reported engine failure after takeoff resulting in an off-field landing.
Date: 201705
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Just before descent at FL300; on the Arrival; I noticed an acrid smell and then saw smoke pouring into cockpit from what seemed like 'everywhere'. First Officer (FO) and I simultaneously reached for and donned our O2 masks. I was Pilot monitoring (PM) and took aircraft control. I coordinated with ATC for vectors direct [destination] and a descent. The FO established cockpit communication and we troubleshot the problem. The arrival and approach had been briefed. We had no warnings; or cautions; just smoke. We turned the #2 Pack off and turned the air temperature down. The smoke stopped billowing out and began to dissipate. We checked on the [passengers] and they had no indications of fire; or smoke. We briefed them what was going on and what our plan was. After 5-10 minutes no smoke was visible; or smelled. We stowed our O2 masks and continued without them. The HUD was MEL-ed and proved distracting because of bad information on the previous flight. We transferred control back to the FO during the descent. He made an uneventful approach and landing; taxied clear to taxiway S via S4. Emergency vehicles met and inspected us; then led us to parking. Aircraft Maintenance was debriefed at the jet as was the duty officer telephonically. The maintenance write up stated that 3 water separators were changed and the aircraft was returned to service. Change water separators; or inspect more frequently.




Synopsis: MD11 flight crew reported smoke in the Flight Deck. They donned oxygen masks and ran the appropriate checklist. This resolved the problem and they continued to destination.
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DFW.Airport, TX
Aircraft: Commercial fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower DFW
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: I was asked while taxiing over the DFW North Bridge westbound if the lights on the new B Terminal extension were a problem. They are very bright and not hooded for westbound taxi that I could tell. I have recently been doing research on pilots and vision. It can take the better part of an hour to develop night vision and this exposure during a taxi to [Runway] 18L is a night vision destroyer; especially when told to follow traffic from D and B terminals. I don't know if this was a Ground Controller doing opinion research or part of an airport survey. I know an Engineer who was involved with the last light update on the C and A terminals and it was a very well considered project that required several adjustments to accomplish. Similar effort should be devoted to this project as well. I voiced my concern to the Controller based on my research and the other two opinions I heard raised no concern. I think this needed to be looked into.The FAA provides the following guidance in regards to night vision. The rods can take approximately 30 minutes to fully adapt to darkness. A bright light; however; can completely destroy night adaptation; leaving night vision severely compromised while the adaptation process is repeated.




Synopsis: When asked by Ground Control to assess the level of brightness of the terminal lights on a new section of Terminal B at DFW an air carrier Captain; serendipitously involved in pilot vision studies; described the unshielded lights as a 'night vision destroyer;' in particular for traffic taxiing westbound.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B DEN
ATC / advisory: TRACON D01
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We had an arrival change to KOHOE 3 arrival with RNAV GPS Z RWY 35 R. It seemed correct; then on arrival it made a circle. I tried to reload arrival. ATC just gave a vector and cleared the visual approach 35R.




Synopsis: 737 Captain reported flying a RNAV approach which seemed correct; then the aircraft made a circle; ATC gave the pilot a vector for the visual approach.
Date: 202004
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Cloudy
Light: Night
Aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: PFD
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Earlier that morning we operated Aircraft X from ZZZ1-ZZZ. On the landing rollout we had an electrical anomaly that caused several of the primary displays to go blank. Upper EICAS; CA (Captain) PFD; MFD; FMS; And FO (First Officer) PFD. This was subsequently followed by a strong electrical burning smell. This was entered into the logbook with a few other discrepancies. We reported later that afternoon to operate Aircraft X as different flight number from ZZZ-ZZZ2. Local Maintenance said they have been troubleshooting this issue all day and believed it to be a screen overheat caused by a faulty pack valve. The logbook was signed off and we blocked out to taxi for takeoff of Runway XX. On takeoff around 400 feet the screens again went blank. We continued flying using the standby instruments. We indicated to Tower we needed to return and she handed us off to Departure to be vectored for an approach; the weather was OVC008. We notified ATC with departure and was vectored back around for the ILS XY. After landing the Fire Marshal entered the cockpit and indicated he smelled an electrical burning smell. This was once again entered into the logbook as a repeat item.


Second narrative: Captain's primary flight display failure. Top EICAS display failure. FO (First Officer) primary flight display failure. During takeoff in IMC at night between gear up and 400 feet AGL. Repeat write up! We smelled smoke and had multiple screens fail. Wrote it up; Maintenance worked on it all day. Failed again in critical phase of flight. Crash Fire and Rescue boarded the airplane also smelled electrical smoke and fumes!


Synopsis: B767 flight crew reported an air turn back after maintenance failed to repair failed cockpit displays and the problem reoccurred on takeoff resulting in a return to departure airport.