elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202109
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SR22
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: I requested VFR flight following to ZZZ1 (a westerly departure) on the ground with ZZZ ground.  I was issued a squawk code and frequency.  I was subsequently cleared for takeoff by ZZZ Tower.  I was on initial climb out and began a turn to the west. I heard an aircraft report; 'we have a Cherokee right in front of us'!  At that moment my traffic information system called; 'traffic same altitude nine o'clock'.  I looked again to my left and saw a high wing aircraft within 100 feet of me at the same altitude!  He was so close I thought we were going to collide!  I had little time to react and the aircraft passed within a few feet behind me.  I pressed the PTT switch and said; 'that was close!'; to which the (presumably) pilot of the other aircraft responded; 'was that on purpose'?  I responded; 'of course not'!  I don't understand this comment.  It was as if Aircraft Y saw the impending convergence and decided to remain on course even though I was on his right side.  A few seconds later ZZZ Tower initiates my hand off to contact Approach.  I responded with; 'ZZZ Tower; go ahead with your telephone number' as I was incredibly shaken up from the extreme near miss and wanted to debrief post landing.Why did the controller not prevent this?  many minutes after my near miss the ZZZ Tower controller comes on frequency and advises all traffic the radar is out of service or intermittent.  I understand that equipment can fail however; he should have had a mental picture of proceedings and not cleared Aircraft Y for an extended right downwind to Runway XX when I was departing for a westerly destination.After landing I called the ZZZ Tower at XX35 and spoke to Name; the ZZZ Tower supervisor.  I discovered the following. I think the near miss aircraft was Aircraft Y.  A flight school aircraft based at ZZZ. There is an apparent familiarity between the controller and the (presumably) CFI onboard Aircraft Y.




Synopsis: Pilot reported taking evasive action to avoid a collision with another aircraft. It was later determined that the Tower radar was intermittent.
Date: 202110
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZJX.ARTCC, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: Center ZJX
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue; No Specific Anomaly Occurred Unwanted Situation
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Concerning trend of increasingly surprising and inefficient ATC reroutes with new RNAV procedures; today was just an example.  We received a completely unexpected reroute from JAX Center; significantly of original course via the PRICY1 Arrival.   We expressed concerns to two Jax Center Sectors and one Miami Center Sector that the reroute would put us in an uncomfortable fuel situation due to the excessive addition to our original planned route.  ATC not only did not respond constructively to our comments; they proceeded to route us further out of the way.  We were one or two minutes away from declaring minimum fuel and considering declaring a fuel emergency and diverting when they finally turned us towards our destination.The reroute added over 100nm and 20 minutes of flying time to our original route; most at a very low altitude at high fuel flow and low speed.  We've been flying in and out of ZZZ; our home base; for over 20 years and NEVER have received a routing such as this; it was not a 'plannable' occurrence.  In the end; we went from landing with 1000 lbs of fuel above target reserves; to landing with 700 lbs under target reserves.Unexpected and unreasonable ATC reroutes onto new RNAV procedures and the unwillingness or inability of controllers to work with pilots when the situations create a significant situation is creating extreme hazard in the NAS.  This is only an example; many operators I've talked to; including our own pilots; have noticed a marked increase in inefficient or even unflyable reroutes in the Florida airspace since the launch of the new airspace initiative in April.  Some of our common regional city pairs now take 30 percent more time and fuel then they did last March and ATC seems less able to be flexible when needed for weather avoidance or other operational considerations.




Synopsis: Corporate pilot reported ZJX Center rerouted them such that flying time was increased considerably and caused a low fuel situation. Reporter stated concerns that reroutes using the new RNAV procedures in the area may be inefficient and creating unsafe situations.
Date: 201410
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Bonanza 36
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Throttle/Power Lever
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After takeoff was unable to reduce to cruise power so proceeded to a nearby airport and landed with full power to runway where I pulled mixture to idle and did a power off landing.The cable mounting in the A36 is such that after 3300 hours on the bracket it allowed the cable to fall free from the mount. If the mount was reversed gravity would then hold the cable in place and not depend on a swedging tension to hold the cable sheath in place.




Synopsis: BE-36 pilot reported his throttle cable came loose leaving the engine at full power. Pilot proceeded to a nearby airport where he shut down the engine and landed dead stick.
Date: 201311
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZAU.ARTCC, IL
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Airbus 318/319/320/321 Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZAU
ATC / advisory: Center ZAU
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Confusion; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness; Workload; Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: After briefing the descent/arrival TRIDE.1 Runway 10C into ORD we were discussing an apparent discrepancy between the Arrival Chart and what the FMS was displaying. (Chart shows GIBNS to JUKIC then 090 HDG; FMS showed GIBNS to BAIRY [ILS 10C IAF] we never did figure out which was right). We were given clearance to cross 20 south VINCA at FL330. Pilot flying dialed in 330 and proper crosschecks and callouts were made. Pilot flying then entered VINCA/-20 in the MCDU. We got distracted trying to figure out the discrepancy and started down late. During the early part of the descent ATC queried us if we were descending and would we make the crossing. I replied we would not; we would be a bit high. ATC re-cleared us to descend to FL330. We replied we would expedite to FL330. One of us should have been aviating.




Synopsis: An A319 crew became distracted while comparing the FMS track of the ORD TRIDE ONE RNAV Arrival; ILS 10C which indicated GIBNS direct BAIRY while the paper chart indicated GIBNS; JUKIC then heading 090. The crew failed to begin a descent for a crossing restriction.
Date: 201209
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MKC.Airport, MO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 99
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower MKC
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: During taxi to the active runway normal communications with Ground Control did not reveal any communications with ground or maintenance vehicles. Taxiway A at the end of Runway 1 was closed and Taxiway B is approximately 500 FT down the departure end of Runway 1. The pilot not flying advised the Tower that we would like to back taxi for the full length of the runway. The Tower Controller stated to us; 'cleared to back taxi; turn right heading 030 after departure; cleared for takeoff.' The back taxi to the displaced threshold; turn around and lineup at the threshold took approximately 45 seconds. Final checks were completed and the autothrottle system was engaged. As we began the takeoff roll I verbally announced the spotting of a tractor to the left. It was on the west side of the runway on Taxiway D moving east toward our active takeoff runway and I observed its speed and lack of deceleration. As the tractor entered the runway we were at approximately 70 KTS and 1;000 FT into the takeoff roll when I determined to abandon the takeoff and the pilot not flying announced 'abort; abort; abort.' We began a very benign discontinuation of the takeoff. The tractor cleared the runway to the east side as the pilot not flying made the first radio call to the Tower to advise him of our aborted takeoff. There was no initial response and a few seconds later a second call was made. The Tower Controller then responded with an apology and clearance to make a 180 turn to back taxi. During the back taxi the Controller mentioned he had lost track of the tractor while he was on the phone to Approach Control. We were re-cleared for takeoff which was uneventful. I believe this was one Controller working both Ground and Tower frequencies and responsibilities. I believe that the ideal weather conditions and relatively overall low traffic volume contributed to the Controller losing his vigilance and becoming distracted by a phone call.




Synopsis: A Captain rejected the takeoff on MKC Runway 1 from about 70 KTS as a tractor entered the runway.
Date: 202105
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZZ; Tower ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Horizontal Stabilizer Trim
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Flight called approximately 10 minutes after departure stating that they had a frozen stabilizer.  The crew said that the aircraft was still controllable with increased difficulty.  When they called they were dumping fuel with intentions of returning to ZZZ.  They dumped 82;000 lbs of fuel at X;X00 ft.  The fuel jettison system failed before they could get under max landing weight.  They continued to burn the remaining amount in a holding pattern.  Flight [advised ATC] and landed the aircraft safely.




Synopsis: Dispatcher reported aircraft returned to departure aircraft after the stabilizer froze and the fuel jettison system failed.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 210 Centurion / Turbo Centurion 210C; 210D
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Landing Gear
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Gear Up Landing
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On a local post annual inspection flight in my Cessna 210B I experienced a failure to retract in the gear system. The wheels appeared to be in; but the gear doors would not close. The checklist calls for lowering the gear and after obtaining a 'green light'; to return and land. I put the gear handle in the down position and the gear unlocked and fell out of the wheel wells but would not extend. Again; following the checklist I extended the emergency gear handle and attempted to extend the gear manually. After numerous attempts to pump the gear down over 1 1/2 hours I had what appeared to be a nose gear extended but not the mains. This aircraft has hydraulic flaps as well that use the same engine driven pump. The flaps operated normally and the reservoir was full. Analyzing the situation I determined that no amount of pumping would get the gear down and locked if it wouldn't operate on the fully functioning engine driven pump. I exhausted all the options listed in the checklist including cycling the gear numerous times to no avail.At this point with about one hour of fuel remaining I requested and received special handling from Tower. I made one pass to allow Tower personnel to inspect the gear from the outside. They confirmed that the mains were not fully extended.After one last attempt to pump the gear down I elected to retract the nose wheel and land gear up. On the second pass I touched down on centerline approximately 1500 ft from the approach end. The aircraft slid approximately 400 ft and came to rest straight ahead about 35 ft right of centerline. The winds were from the left. The aircraft sustained minimal damage and after jacking it up and extending the gear by hand it was towed to the ramp and secured. The ATC personnel were professional and helpful. The ground rescue personnel were also professional and well trained. We are still looking into the cause of the gear failure but current speculation is a fault with the gear selector valve on the hydraulic power pack.




Synopsis: Cessna 210B pilot reported landing with the gear up after all efforts to extend the gear failed.
Date: 202001
Aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pitot-Static System
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy; Equipment / Tooling; Logbook Entry; Procedure
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Tasked to work non routine iPad write up for failing First Officer lower pitot/static system. The non-routine work history indicated the previous crew had troubleshot the cause down to the elevator feel computer. My work mate and I decided to do a test equipment test first to verify the integrity of the hoses and manifolds of the test unit. We found multiple problems with leaking hoses and a loose pitot connection.After obtaining a tight test system we performed a successful low range leak test of the lower probe. I signed off the write up as accomplished and noted the finding of bad test equipment on the sign off. I referenced the pitot/static [manuals] found on the job card that generated the non-routine.After the aborted takeoff on [date]; I was tasked with troubleshooting the First Officer airspeed indication failure; associated with the upper First Officer pitot probe. Upon removing the upper probe the quick disconnects for the pitot and 1 of 2 static lines partially engaged. Have pitot probe task cards amended to reflect the connection of the quick disconnects as an Inspection item as per [company procedure].




Synopsis: Technician reported unserviceable test equipment caused a misdiagnosis of a pitot/static problem and an aborted takeoff.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
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: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While in cruise phase of flight; we encountered moderate turbulence. The auto pilot disconnected. Pilot flying reduced airspeed. A smell similar to ozone developed on the flight deck. We coordinated with the Flight Attendant. She smelled it as well and attempted to find a source. The smell briefly dissipated but returned. No smoke; fire or other unusual indications were noted. The autopilot was reconnected and functioned normally. The smell continued; therefore as a precaution; we donned the oxygen masks and [notified ATC]. The flight landed without further incident.The unknown source of the odor was the major threat. The ability to communicate with ATC was difficult due to an extremely busy frequency. Once the oxygen masks were on crew communications became more difficult as well. This was my first event that actually required crew coordination while using the masks. Training communication techniques in the actual aircraft with masks on would have been a valuable tool for me.




Synopsis: EMB-145 First Officer reported donning oxygen masks in response to an odor; resulting in difficult communications.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: D01.TRACON, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-900
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B DEN
ATC / advisory: TRACON D01
Aircraft component: Horizontal Stabilizer Trim
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After takeoff the Captain (Pilot Flying) could not trim the aircraft with yoke trim switches. I could not trim the aircraft with my yoke switches either. Captain manually trimmed aircraft with trim wheels. After aircraft was trimmed we did the 'electric trim inop' QRH checklist but electric would not work. Captain contacted Maintenance Control and Dispatch and decided to continue to ZZZ at a lower altitude and speed. Dispatch sent a new flight plan for corrected fuel burn. Asked Center for no large speed and altitude deviations and advised the problem; ATC Supervisor decided we were an emergency. Landed without further incident.




Synopsis: B737 First Officer reported a stabilizer electric trim control failure on takeoff.