elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Gear Pins
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We arrived at the aircraft in the morning and performed a detailed inspection. All the gear pins and the ADG safety pin were in the storage closet. We taxied out and took off from Runway 14. At positive rate FO called 'gear up' and we received a gear disagree warning and an indication that the left main gear was still down which was confirmed by the tower. I performed the QRH and notified ATC; Dispatch and Maintenance. We returned to land as directed by the QRH. When we arrived at the gate I inspected the left main gear and found a gear pin installed. I had no reason to suspect a pin was missed on the walk around because there were 4 in the storage closet. First of all; we should have done a more thorough detailed inspection. Secondly; If Maintenance installs pins and gives the A/C an Airworthiness signoff; they should be sure to pull the pins; maybe a checklist should be implemented for Maintenance if one is not already in use. Lastly; The Company should mandate that if a pin is installed by anyone on our A/C; it should be required to have a bright; clean flag.




Synopsis: CRJ200 Captain reports performing a preflight in the morning and noting three gear pins in the storage closet. After takeoff the left main gear will not retract. Upon returning a fourth gear pin is found installed in the left gear; without a flag attached.
Date: 201812
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: Cessna 402/402C/B379 Businessliner/Utiliner
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Returned To Gate
Contributing factors: Airport; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: I landed the aircraft 25 minutes prior on the same runway and had good directional control. Light snow continued to fall; but none stuck to the aircraft. There was no ice on the aircraft. A runup and call to flight service for my clearance was performed. An aileron position to the left; to counter the wind was applied and the power was put in patiently; with the momentary pause at approximately 29 inches for the turbochargers to spool up. More power was added as an instrument/annunciator panel scan was done quickly. The aircraft started to weather vane into the wind and began a slow turn towards the left. The rudder pedals for nose wheel steering had no effect as the tire was 'plowing' on the brushed runway. As the aircraft approached 40-50 kts; the rudder started to take effect. The airplane then started to get pushed towards the right side of the runway. After one attempt to fix the change in direction to avoid oscillating and over correcting; I decided to abort the takeoff; and slowly closed the throttles to not upset the aircraft. Flight service was called to cancel the clearance and I passed the information on to a cargo carrier departing next. The cargo pilot acknowledged and took the runway. The [cargo] pilot had a considerably shorter takeoff roll and was airborne without delay in his [aircraft.] Our passengers were de-boarded and the airport manager brushed the runway a few more times. I called the on call duty manager to make sure I wasn't missing anything as per protocol.  After about a 30 minute delay and the runway re-swept; I attempted another takeoff. The runway condition was visibly better; and directional control was adequate for the takeoff. A pilot report to the station was made and a short conversation was had with the incoming pilot on company radio. The rest of the flight continued without any other problems.[This airport] has consistently poor runway; taxiway and ramp conditions in snowy and icy conditions. Even with local knowledge and experience as a guide it can still remain a challenge. Short of an aggressive plowing and brushing operation; I don't see any easy fixes.




Synopsis: C402 pilot reported rejecting the takeoff on a snowy runway after experiencing directional control difficulties.
Date: 201409
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Second aircraft: EMB ERJ 135 ER/LR
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During our initial descent we heard another aircraft (EMB135) switching Approach.  We were switched in time to hear him cleared for a visual approach; cleared to land Runway 22; cautioned to 'keep it in tight; you have an Embraer 145 right behind you'. That was us. ATC cleared us first to 3000 FT and vectored us around ; then down to 2500 FT (as I remember); asked if we had the field; then cleared us to land behind the other aircraft.  We got the yellow tcas warn; which went almost immediately to red (I looked up and saw the landing lights of another aircraft just as the tcas gave us the 'climb; climb.) my First Officer immediately applied full power and abruptly rotated the aircraft nose high; as ATC called to tell us to climb to 3000 FT.  We told him we had the other aircraft in sight; and he had missed us by 200 FT. in fact; passengers on the right side saw the other aircraft pass just below us. we were told to maintain separation from the other aircraft; then cleared to land rwy 22. The other aircraft strayed WELL out side the area where ATC had cleared him to operate; failed to keep a proper lookout; and appeared completely unaware of his surroundings. (In addition; he almost collided with us during taxi out from the station when he had been cleared to taxi behind us; he appeared to want to 'race' us to the runway.) In general a pretty amateurish display that could have cost lives.




Synopsis: EMB145 Captain reports a NMAC with an EMB135 during a visual approach. The EMB145 crew complied with a TCAS RA to climb and avoided the nearly head on EMB135 which apparently did not comply with an ATC clearance to 'keep it in tight'.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: DAL.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
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 DAL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Airport
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We landed on DAL 13R and we taxied up C to Runway 36 to D1 and then into the ramp. Several aircraft were parked facing northeast behind Taxiway P. Another carrier's aircraft [Aircraft Y] was parked smack dab on top of Taxiway P facing the terminal. The centerline for Taxiway P went directly underneath the center of the fuselage with the nose of the aircraft approximately 30 feet over the line and toward the terminal. I think there were hard to see barricades marking P as closed. I don't recall seeing anything barricading Q. The centerline green taxiway green lights for both P and Q were on full bright indicating an open and clear taxiway. However; there appears to be inadequate wingtip to nose clearance on aircraft parked on P if we taxied our aircraft on the green taxi centerline lights for Q. There was a white line between Q and the terminal the purpose of which I'm not sure. We taxied in with our nosewheel just to the right of the white line to our gate. This seems to be a hazardous set of conditions; especially when taxiing between larger airliner aircraft [B737/A320 series] and other overnighters on P and aircraft at the gate.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reports that overnighting aircraft are parked north of Taxiway P at DAL with some aircraft actually on P. The green taxiway centerline lights remain illuminated even though Taxiway P is completely blocked. Taxiway Q is used with a deviation south to avoid the aircraft parked on P.
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Light: Night
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ORD
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Our flight [12X1] was operating as ATC call sign [2X1A]. We followed our taxi instructions out to Runway 22L via B and D. Meanwhile; Company flight [12Y1]; operating in the new paint scheme; was cleared to Runway 22L via M. We; 2X1A; had been advised by Tower of our sequence for takeoff behind the ERJ flight in front of us and were told to be ready to go. Tower had been launching 2 to 3 flights between arrivals; we would be the 3rd and last before the next arrival.The ERJ in front of us was cleared for takeoff; and I heard Tower say; '2X1A line up and wait; be ready to go.' As I was turning on the lights for takeoff; I heard my First Officer respond to Tower and I started to taxi out onto the runway. As I taxied onto the runway I heard Tower say; '2 aircraft answered that call; it was only for Company 12Y1.' I immediately advised Tower; 'Company 2X1A took that call and now we're in the way.' Tower subsequently cleared us; [Company 2X1A]; for takeoff and no further discrepancies occurred.I firmly believe that the original takeoff clearance was for us (2X1A). Also; I do not know who the other aircraft that answered was; because Company 12Y1 (who was sitting off our right and pointed toward us) never turned on any lights; started moving; or made any indication that they thought the call was for them. Further; we had clearly been told our sequence before hand.The cause of this incident was the similarity of flight numbers 12X1 and 12Y1 with the non normal call sign thrown in; as well as the close physical proximity of those flights. The Tower Controller was doing an excellent job of launching aircraft that evening. He had a very long line on the ground; with inbound aircraft to the same runway. I don't know what other aircraft answered the takeoff clearance; but I'm sure this tripped the confusion. I still believe we were cleared for takeoff; but then he just read the next Company flight number accidentally when questioning the '2 responses' he had received to the takeoff clearance.




Synopsis: Similar sounding call signs and high density takeoff/landing operations resulted in communications confusion and a possible runway incursion at ORD.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
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: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: FCC (Flight Control Computer)
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
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 Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At Vr; approximately 137 knots; aircraft had a pronounced right yaw lasting briefly.  There were no gusts at the time and no pilot input to the rudder.  This pronounced yaw lasted about 2 seconds and then ended with the aircraft stable afterwards. rest of climb out; level off and descent into ZZZ was uneventful regarding this issue.  Called maintenance enroute; plus submitted a report. In addition; mechanics met the aircraft in ZZZ to discuss.


Second narrative: On t/o roll we experienced 'hard push' to right (approx. half distance to runway edge).  winds were calm; engine indications normal; no pilot inputs.   A/T was engaged with reduced pwr.  Regained center line and continued flight with no further incidents


Synopsis: Pilots reported an uncommanded yaw at Vr.
Date: 202105
Location: PKWA.Airport, FO
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Landing
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Equipment Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: We have been made aware of the PKWA (Bucholz Army Airfield Kwajalein Island) runway being shortened from 6;668 feet to a new LDA (Landing Distance Available); ASDA (Accelerate-Stop Distance Available); TORA (Takeoff Run Available); and TODA (Takeoff Distance Available) to 6;058 feet. This is due to what has been called a 'displaced threshold' on both ends of the runway. However; I was expecting pavement from the start of the original Runway 6 with chevrons or similar markings as per the AIM. However; what I saw on final was the first 400 feet of Runway 6 is now coral; gravel; and dirt...not pavement. It is not a displaced threshold; the runway now actually starts 400 feet further down the island. There are temporary lights placed on the pavement to indicate the starting edge of the new runway edge. The approach end of Runway 24 has been displaced 140 feet and still has pavement that is repainted with a temporary threshold and is marked with temporary lighting as well. The performance on the Takeoff Data Message has been adjusted correctly. The PAPI are out of service as well to ensure you are not guided into an early landing as well. Don't expect a displaced threshold on Runway 6 per the NOTAM; expect a new start to the runway surface.




Synopsis: Pilot reported issues relating to the shortening of the runway at PKWA airport.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Icing
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Caravan 208B
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: I was dispatched for flight and preflight planning showed that the flight could be conducted under VFR; and was confirmed and released after a preflight conversation with [Dispatch]. Accordingly I departed with VFR fuel requirements; without a planned alternate. The flight was unremarkable until I was 40 NM out of my destination; when I checked the AFIS broadcast. The AFIS reported 1/4 mile visibilities with RVR of 1200V2000. I did not have sufficient fuel to divert to another airport and decided to contact Center. Center issued me a pop up clearance and asked if I was able to join the hold at 9000 ft. I informed center that I was minimum fuel and would like to initiate the approach to rwy 28 immediately. My request was approved by Center and I initiated the approach which resulted in a missed approach. Center asked my intentions; and I stated that the visibility on the west end of the runway appeared to be better than the east end; and I requested the approach to rwy 10. This approach resulted in a successful landing on rwy 10. With the available fuel on board; about 40 minutes at the time of landing; I feel my decision to make the approach was my best; and safest option.The lesson I have taken away from this event is that I will no longer trust the TAF to make my fuel planning decisions and will subsequently carry more fuel in order to allow myself an 'escape plan' to a more suitable landing alternate in the future due to the possibility of deteriorating weather conditions at my intended landing airport.




Synopsis: C208B pilot was dispatched with minimum fuel to a remote airport forecasted to remain VFR. Upon arrival; the airport was IMC and he missed the first approach; but landed on the second approach on the runway opposite direction. TAF forecasts to remote airports should be questioned.
Date: 201211
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: MEM.Airport, TN
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZME
ATC / advisory: Center ZME
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Check Pilot; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Time Pressure; Workload
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; Chart Or Publication; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We were cleared to descend via FNCHR1 [North Transition] RNAV STAR; landing Runway 36L at MEM. As we approached STANI on the VNAV computed vertical path; ATC assigned speed of 250 KTS. Speed intervene mode was initially utilized until the FMC could be reprogrammed. As the aircraft slowed; it went above path even though we utilized drag devices. The aircraft could not cross STANI at the charted altitude restriction (FL230B) due to the speed assignment and; thus; crossed at approximately 23;800 FT (800 FT high)The OPD (Optimized Profile Descent) RNAV STARs into MEM are a work in progress as everyone gains experience. As such; all parties should be aware that airspeed clearances that vary from the OPD as published (and reflected in the FMS)--especially if given in the proximity of an approaching waypoint with constraints--will prevent these constraints from being met without very aggressive maneuvering of the aircraft. If speed reductions are necessary; ATC should remove the higher altitude constraints on the OPD as a part of the speed clearance / assignment.


Second narrative: No substantive additional information was provided in the secondary narrative.


Synopsis: A B757-200 established on a 'descend via the FNCHR RNAV STAR' clearance was directed to reduce speed to 250 KTS outside of STANI which caused them to be unable to cross STANI at or below FL230 as charted.
Date: 201704
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: EHR.Airport, KY
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class G EHR
ATC / advisory: CTAF EHR
Second aircraft: Helicopter
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: As I was preparing to land; a target was showing up on the TCAS on descent into EHR; I thought it was another plane; but it was not broadcasting. I tried to contact it with no response. I was able to activate the pilot controlled lighting on the CTAF; so I know [I] was tuned in to the right frequency. There was a helicopter on the ground when we landed.We unloaded some things. I announced my intentions to takeoff on the CTAF. There was no response. Shortly after I departed; a helicopter suddenly popped up within 200 feet of my plane. The helicopter was flying in the same direction as me parallel to my aircraft. I turned quickly to the right and continued climbing to create more distance between me and the helicopter. I tried contacting it on CTAF; but there was no answer. I never got a response from it. It did not register on my TCAS.




Synopsis: Pilot of a small aircraft departing an uncontrolled airport reported a near miss with a helicopter departing at the same time.