elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201309
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Hydraulic System
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Initial communication with tug operator and initial pushback was SOP. Clearance to start both engines was given during pushback and acknowledged by me. I directed my First Officer to start the engines. When pushback was complete; the brakes were set. At that point the tug operator asked me; 'Am I cleared to disconnect?' I looked at the ECAM and saw the NW STRG DISC message still displayed. I told the tug operator that he was using incorrect terminology; that the NW STRG DISC message was displayed and that he was to disconnect the tow bar; then remove the bypass pin. By this time #1 Engine was started and I told my First Officer to delay starting the number two because of the confusion with the push crew. Note that hydraulic pressure is supplied to nose wheel steering when the #1 Engine is started and the bypass pin is removed. I believe the tug crew then removed the bypass pin prior to disconnecting the tow bar. Had the nose gear been cocked it would have immediately centered which could have caused serious injury in the worse case and damage to equipment and the aircraft in the best case. After clearing the push crew we continued with the start and completed the flight.




Synopsis: An air carrier aircraft was pushed away from the gate by a tug operator unfamiliar with pushback SOP and phraseology.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-30 Twin Comanche
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Me and my student were cleared for a touch and go on Runway XX. Upon landing safely; my student added power to begin the take off when we both immediately noticed that the left engine was not giving us power. I assumed the flight controls and pulled both throttles back and maintained centerline. That is when the left engine failed. I then continued rolling down the runway and exited off on Taxiway XX where we then contacted Ground. Both the airplane and crew were safe. The engine never started again; and we requested a tow from the airport to the local FBO. An hour later we started the plane again; and attributed the engine failure due to heat after talking to the owner about what happened.




Synopsis: Instructor pilot reported on the takeoff roll the aircraft's left engine failed and the instructor initiated an RTO.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Citation Excel (C560XL)
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 Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Evacuated; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was sitting in cabin discussing unrelated maintenance issue with Maintenance Control. FO (First Officer) was in cockpit preforming preflight and startup checks. As the APU was starting I smelled an electrical odor and asked my FO if he smelled it. I then looked up and saw smoke coming from above and below instrument panel. Told him to shut down and get out. Aircraft shutdown per QRH memory items and evacuated. Smoke began to dissipate immediately after power removed. Confirmed no visible fire. Battery disconnected and aircraft secured. Avionics bay opened and small amount of smoke vented no visible fire. Aircraft secured. Notified Flight Control; Maintenance Control and Assistant Chief Pilot. No passengers were on board. No injuries to crew. No visible damage to aircraft.Suggestions: Unknown without defined cause.


Second narrative: Upon completion of exterior preflight. I followed procedure to power up the airplane. Upon putting the battery switch in the on position a faint electrical smell was noticed which is normal in this airplane. The APU was started and its generator engaged. Smoke began pouring out from both the top and bottom of the avionics panel with a strong electrical smell. The smoke appeared to be from a possible electrical fire so procedure (per QRH and memory items) was followed to immediately power down and evacuate the airplane. The smoke ceased when power was removed from the aircraft and a strong smell of burning electronics noted in the cockpit and in the forward avionics bay doors. We secured the aircraft and disconnected the battery following successful deplaning. Suggestions: Unknown until the cause of the failure can be determined.


Synopsis: C560XL flight crew reported a fumes event during pre-flight which progressed to smoke pouring from the avionics panel resulting in passengers being deplaned.
Date: 201406
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: MMMX.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: Tower MMMX
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Aircraft
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Approaching Mateo (SMO) on the AVASAR 2A approach to RW 5R; 'DR' (dead reckoning) appeared in the PFD. We had discussed and briefed that this could happen based on conversations with other pilots that had recently flown to MMMX. At this point; the Terrain Display disappeared. Aircraft speed was 160 knots and on profile. We used RMI and Raw Data to verify situational awareness.   Fully configured aircraft for landing prior to MEX 253 lead-in radial. Picked up course prior to PLAZA and double checked position of aircraft. (On glideslope and course). At about 600 feet AGL; we received a 'Terrain Terrain Pull Up' warning. Immediate visual reference to surrounding terrain was available in the form of: PAPI; localizer; glideslope; visual cues and Approach Plate Orientation.  The aircraft appeared to re-orient itself shortly after the warning; as the 'DR' light extinguished; Terrain re-appeared and I chose to continue the approach. No further anomalies were noted and we landed without incident. We suspect there is something causing a navigation anomaly on certain approaches into MMMX.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information]


Synopsis: Air carrier Captain experiences a loss of GPS signal approaching SMO during arrival to MMMX. This had been expected due to other crews having experienced the same anomaly. A terrain warning is issued and ignored on short final as the GPS returns to normal.
Date: 201807
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: CAK.Airport, OH
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C CAK
ATC / advisory: Tower CAK
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Fatigue
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While enroute to CAK; the aircraft was descending through 4;500 MSL to 3;000 MSL while cleared direct to the CABLE Outer Marker. The aircraft had been cleared for a Visual Approach to a Runway 1 and was in communication with CAK Tower. At approximately 4;000 MSL and six miles from CABLE the PM (pilot monitoring) advised his concern that the aircraft's altitude and current configuration were such that it was unlikely to arrive at CABLE configured to execute a stabilized approach. Simultaneously; CAK Tower contacted the aircraft to determine if it would like vectors to continue its descent and extend its final approach course. The PM accepted this offer and CAK Tower subsequently assigned a right turn to 140. A second vector to 190 was then assigned. During the turn to 190 an EGPWS (Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System) 'Caution Terrain' warning was activated. The PF (pilot flying) disengaged autopilot and executed a climb of approximately 400 feet and the alert cased ceased. The PM notified the Tower of the alert and the altitude adjustment that was made in response to it. The approach and landing was then completed. It is unclear as to why the alert occurred as the aircraft was on vectors and was well above CAK Tower's Minimum Vectoring Altitude. The timing of this event (10.4 hours into the duty day / Leg 3 / at night) serves to emphasize the importance of being aware of the potential for situational awareness to degrade near the end of long duty days. Pilots should always review of any notes contained in the Station Bulletin that relate to the approach during the approach brief.




Synopsis: Air Carrier pilot reported responding to a questionable 'caution terrain' EGPWS warning.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: JFK.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B NYC
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Human factors: Workload; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After given a heading and descent from LGA; last fix on the arrival; NY approach advised us 'ILS 4R;' providing our expected landing runway. Given further descent to 3000 feet; speed 180 knots; and vectors to the approach; handoff to arrival control. Overtasked controller provided us vectors to dogleg; then stated 'cleared ILS 4 left.' This took us by surprise; given our previous runway assignment. When I asked to clarify runway assignment; controller entered conversation with an [another aircraft] flight; trying to ascertain runway desired -- obviously confusion as to which aircraft was clarifying runway. The congested frequency prohibited our clarification; so we went with our last clearance; to fly ILS 4L; and we were handed off to tower. We were immediately high on profile for that runway. Pilot Flying (PF) disconnected autopilot and began configuring; while I inserted new approach and called tower. Tower advised an aircraft departing prior to our arrival. The late approach change; high altitude; and initial confusion caused a scramble to get fully configured and stable by 500 feet. At that altitude we were still 20 knots fast; but I decided to continue; due to departing aircraft potentially becoming a traffic conflict on go around. We slowed and were stable on short final; rest of leg uneventful.Overtaxed arrival controller confusing call; signs and assigning runway change late; on dogleg above vertical profile. In the future; I will clarify runway assignment upon handoff from approach to arrival controllers. Will demand lower altitude if above vertical profile.




Synopsis: A B767 Captain reported receiving a late runway change for the ILS on a parallel runway. The Captain was unstable on approach; but elected to continue landing due to the potential conflict with a departing aircraft if they would have gone around.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: TPA.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B TPA
ATC / advisory: Tower TPA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Distraction; Troubleshooting
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Equipment Issue; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On visual approach to Runway 01L Tower Controller called an 'altitude alert'. We were cleared for the visual to Runway 01L to Tampa. The glideslope to the ILS 01L was NOTAM'd Out of Service.  Tower instructed us to maintain 2;600 feet until north of Macdill AFB. I had briefed that this would cause us to be high and that I would configure the aircraft for landing at 2;600 feet and prior to Macdill.  I had also briefed that we would need a high rate of descent to get us on glide path.  Once north of Macdill; and runway in sight; I disconnected the autopilot; and started to hand fly the visual approach. At approximately 1;000 feet the First Officer stated we were approaching the (visual 3:1) glidepath.  At that time; I had started to reduce the rate of descent.  At about the same time the Tower called an altitude alert for Aircraft X.  I started to pick up the PAPI and saw we were below glidepath.  I continued reducing descent rate to intercept the PAPI glidepath.  Aircraft was on glidepath and stable at 500 feet. Landed normally. [Suggest] Brief the visual in more detail on 3:1 glidepath and required rate of descent to intercept from above.


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


Synopsis: Flight crew reported being low on final into Tampa while conducting a visual approach and was unaware until the PAPI was in sight.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: X26.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E X26
ATC / advisory: UNICOM X26
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: [I] was being assessed for proficiency check in Gyroplane which required closed circuit short approaches using runway 23 at Sebastian Municipal (X26); which is a right hand traffic pattern. Students were in the traffic pattern flying a wide pattern using 1.5 mile legs. This procedure [is] to insure they do not conflict with the skydive operation. I had just completed a touch and go where I climb to 300ft; then turned right to clear the runway centerline. A student and instructor had turned final while I was on short final.As I started the turn I noticed the Cherokee attempting to pass me on the right. We both took evasive action: I turned left and he turned right to a crosswind. At no time did the instructor indicate he was going to pass on the right. 91.113 does state overtaking aircraft should pass on right but this action in a right hand pattern is dangerously wrong. The left side in this case is vacant.This appears to be a case where rules and common sense depart from reality. The aircraft prior to evasive action was very close; closer than 100 ft.




Synopsis: Gyroplane pilot reported a NMAC with a light aircraft in the pattern at X26 airport.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On a night approach to ILS XX ZZZ; we requested and were being vectored for an ILS to Runway XX. We were just northeast of the ZZZZZ fix on the ILS on a modified left base; on vectors. We were level at 6000 feet with the autopilot on. We were at 210 knots; Flaps 1 and slowing to 190 knots. We were receiving delaying vectors due to traffic inbound for Runway XY and our procedure to only use Runway XX at night. We received a Terrain Warning and executed the proper procedure for 'Terrain; Terrain'. During the procedure (I was flying) the First Officer notified ATC that we were responding to a Terrain Warning. We then received clearance to level at 8000 feet; which we did. (We only received one warning). We then received another vector to intercept the ILS and a clearance for the approach. We executed a normal approach and landing after that to Runway XX. ATC asked us to contact them on arrival. I called ATC (ZZZ Tracon) and spoke with the Tracon Supervisor who was also on duty vectoring us. He said that they had looked this over and that we were inside the 6000 foot MVA [Minimum Vectoring Altitude] corridor and that the nearest obstacle was 11 miles away at 5500 feet.




Synopsis: A320 Captain reported receiving a Terrain warning and violating a Minimum Vectoring Altitude area.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: IAD.Airport, DC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B IAD
ATC / advisory: TRACON PCT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During ILS approach into IAD; we received a TCAS RA. Which we climbed from 2;500 feet to 3;000 feet at approximately 2;500 FPM. We believe the traffic was a phantom target. The yellow traffic moved from one side of the screen to the other and we never received a clear of conflict. The intruder just disappeared from the screen. After a momentary level off at 3;000 feet we were cleared down to 2;000 feet. We continued with the ILS approach and landed without incident.




Synopsis: An air carrier took evasive action from a TCAS RA which transited perpendicular across the TCAS screen. The crew believed a phantom target was the source because no clear of conflict was issued.