elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201812
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke; 6
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: When flying into the pattern; there were 3 aircraft all coming in for a left base for runway 28 at ZZZ. We broke off our VOR A approach and started heading for the left base for runway 28. There were also 2 other aircraft converging for a left base for 28 as tower told them to fly there and report when there. There was a period of time (maybe 30 seconds) where 4 radio calls were made and the tower was not responding to us and the other pilots. These radio calls required responses as well as we were reporting that we were on the last base and other aircraft were making position reports. All 3 of us altered our courses which involved my student and I climbing over final where traffic was located below us and sidestepping to the left to avoid another aircraft. We weren't extremely close to this traffic and the traffic was other 172's like ourselves. There was safe separation here. Evasive action was not taken but it was closer than I would have wanted it to be. I believe tower had a new employee in training or they were doing a shift change. Either way; we altered course and avoided the other aircraft or then asked tower were we should go and they then responded to us. They gave us a right downwind for runway 28 and I believe we were #5 for that runway.




Synopsis: Cessna pilot reported 5 aircraft coming in from various directions to one runway;the pilots took it upon themselves to separate from each other since ATC did not separate or sequence the traffic.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: N90.TRACON, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation Excel (C560XL)
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Climb; Initial Climb
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Aircraft component: Gear Extend/Retract Mechanism
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After completing our SOP after takeoff calls and actions of gear and flaps; I noticed a gear unsafe warning light and associated annunciators out of the corner of my eye. The HYD PRES and STAB MISC lights were illuminated. We ran the Checklist for the Stab Misc and it lead us to pull the Hydraulic Control circuit breaker. Upon doing so; the left main gear dropped. We then ran the Landing Gear Did Not Extend Checklist to get the other gear down; to include yaw and blown bottle. After crew consideration regarding flaps; we decided to reset the Hydraulic Control circuit breaker and normal operations occurred for landing.




Synopsis: A CE560XL flight crew overcame problems with the landing extension and retraction systems and returned to land uneventfully.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: MD-82
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Communication Systems
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Maintenance
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Staffing; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Ramp was closed due to weather. The ramp tower at ZZZ called us and wanted to know what the delay was. I told the Agent; the ramp is closed due to weather. About 10 minutes later the ramp was open; but hand signals only. We could not do a manual [engine] start without communicating with both the [flight] crew and the Mechanic on the engine without a headset. The Lead Mechanic in charge did not want to send at least three people for a Manual start; instead [we] only had two people. When you're getting hand signals from the [flight] crew you can't see the Aircraft Maintenance Technician (AMT) on the engine to signal [a] Start; Stop or Abort. And he; the AMT on the engine; can't see anyone in the front of the aircraft getting signals from the FLT crew; and the flight crew has no idea on what hand signals to use also; because there is no set of guidelines for this. [Contributors were] a lack of safety concerns for employees and the aircraft.Having a system in place and a policy on doing a Manual start with and without a headset to communicate with the flight deck and the AMT manually starting the engine. If you're using hand signals; how many people should we use and where are they positioned at and can you even use hand signals to do a Manual start? Also; how to address an emergency during a manual start with just hand signals. Then put this in a training bulletin.




Synopsis: A Line Aircraft Maintenance Technician (AMT) describes his frustration and safety concerns surrounding a manual engine start procedure on the ramp with limited personnel and having to use hand signals without a standard set of guidelines for everyone to follow. Headsets could not be connected to the MD-82 aircraft due to weather conditions.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; Turbulence
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Autothrottle/Speed Control
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
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After setting normal takeoff power; we experienced less-than-expected acceleration; rotating near 3;000 ft. remaining and lifting off with less than 2;000 ft. remaining on a very long runway.[Suspect] Water intrusion during loading.Crew believes water intrusion into the cargo or aircraft loading areas or electronics bays caused decreased performance or performance indications.




Synopsis: MD-11 Flight Crew reported aircraft slow to accelerate during takeoff.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: JFK.Airport, NY
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Light: Night
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B JFK
ATC / advisory: Tower JFK
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Cleared ILS 22L glideslope out of service approach. First Officer flying monitored approach. ATIS reported 600 foot ceiling. Because of recent database change; approach was flown FCP to MDA. First Officer flew fully configured; on speed; stable approach from FAF (1;800 MSL) to LOC MDA of 460 MSL; arriving at MDA approximately 1 mile prior to VDP. Inbound to VDP; Tower called low level altitude alert. We checked and verified current barometric altitude at 460 MSL and correct altimeter setting. Rogered Tower and continued approach to VDP to uneventful landing. FCP to MDA procedures resulted in level off at MDA earlier than a PROF to MDA approach. This may have resulted in the momentary low level altitude alert. Recommend update FMS database ASAP to allow for PROF to MDA approaches Vs FCP procedures.


Second narrative: [Narrative #2 contained no additional information.]


Synopsis: MD11 flight crew reports low altitude alert from the Tower during an ILS Runway 22L with glideslope out at JFK. The crew had descended to MDA (460) one mile prior to the VDP using vertical speed rather than a profile approach; due to FMC restrictions. No action is taken by the crew and a normal landing ensues.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZID.ARTCC, IN
Aircraft: Regional Jet CL65; Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZID
ATC / advisory: Center ZID
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Workload; Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was the RADAR Controller at IND/HI. My airspace is 300-350. RSH/SHB/TTH 75/34/35 were combined altitude 110-290; sectors were combined for training. RSH handed an aircraft off to me leaving FL210 and transferred communications. The aircraft was climbing poorly to FL310. I called the D-Side and requested control for direct CAE. It was approved. I did this to avoid the inbound MDW/ORD arrival traffic descending to FL300; 80 to 100 miles ahead. I called again and asked ensuring they would provide separation to the MDW/ORD traffic by descending the MDW traffic; or if I should stop at FL290; they said they would separate. The Trainee became over tasked and did not separate; started not taking hand offs; and I turned the aircraft 40 degrees to ensure separation. The Trainee continued to hand aircraft off well below the limits of their airspace. I received several hand offs on aircraft 8;000-10;000 FT below my bottom limits. These aircraft became a conflict with other aircraft below my altitude limits. I turned several aircraft below my limits to ensure separation within the limits of the RSH sector. Several times before the incident I advised the Supervisor to 'split the sector'; he did not. The student asked for a tracker. I believe both the Student and the Instructor were over tasked. There was a heated discussion between the D-Side and the OJTI during the event due to the lack of input from the OJTI to Student. After the session the Supervisor agreed he 'should have split' the sector. DYSIM is the correct venue to 'push' the Trainee; not with live traffic. The Trainee was not prepared to work the volume exposed to and this created an unsafe environment; also placing an undue burden on the surrounding sectors.




Synopsis: ZID Controller witnessed an unsafe condition when adjacent sectors were combined for training and handoffs were not completed as required; the reporter stating the combined sectors should have been split long before the event.
Date: 201212
Flight conditions: Marginal
Aircraft: Citation X (C750)
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: DC Battery
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During cruise; we had a BATT 2 OVERTEMP Red CAS message. We immediately followed the memory items and turned the BATT 2 off.  Then we consulted the Emergency checklist. Initially the Battery Temp started to drop; then after a few minutes of monitoring; it started to rise. At this point we decided to divert to the nearest airport in which we could descend from 41;000 feet.  We contacted ATC and declared an emergency; contacted the company advised them of the situation.




Synopsis: CE750 First Officer experiences a battery over temperature at FL410 and disconnects the battery. Initially the temperature drops then starts to rise and the crew elects to declare an emergency and divert to a suitable airport.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DFW.Airport, TX
Light: Night
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The aircraft had an MEL for inoperative TCAS. The MEL stated only flight in contiguous 48 states allowed; however; the aircraft was being dispatched to Canada. The MEL also stated that if the aircraft was dispatched out of the 48 contiguous states dispatch would have to contact the foreign FIR (Flight Information Region) for authorization to fly non-TCAS equipped aircraft into foreign RVSM airspace. I contacted dispatch and requested a printed statement saying this aircraft was authorized into Canadian FIR with no TCAS. After this request the dispatcher realized he had not contacted the Canadian FIR to get approval for a non-TCAS operation and we were re-dispatched into the Canadian FIR at FL 280 below RVSM airspace. Had I not questioned the original dispatch release (we were originally flight planned at FL320) and the flight had been flown on the original flight plan it would have violated Canadian RVSM requirements resulting in an operational violation.




Synopsis: A319 Captain reported he was planned into Canadian airspace with inoperative TCAS without complying with restrictions associated with that condition.
Date: 202004
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; 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
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Preflight; takeoff and initial phases of flight were normal and uneventful.  While at FL380 and approximately 150 miles west of ZZZ; I decided to empty the center tank of 800 PDS that had migrated during the flight. Also we had a 900 PD imbalance between the left and right wing tanks that I wanted to equalize.  Just seconds into the cross feed we got a 'Left fuel system Lo Press' EICAS immediately followed by the left engine rolling back and flaming out.  I took control of the aircraft and First Officer  retrieved and ran the In-flight Engine Restart Checklist.  Simultaneously; I coordinated with ATC a decent to FL340.  By the time we reached [flight level] 340 the engine was restarted and at idle with all indications being normal we slowly brought the power to a cruise setting.  All indications remained normal and within parameters.  Aircraft control was transferred back to First Officer and I contacted [Operations Control]; [Maintenance Control] and Captain (On Duty) via Airinc. After conferencing with all; we agreed the best and safe course was to continue to ZZZ1.  The flight continued and terminated in ZZZ1 without further incident.




Synopsis: B-767-300 pilot reported inflight engine shutdown during cruise.
Date: 201407
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Power
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Landing Without Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: In my way to home at night and 15 NM East from [a large controlled airport] and at 5;500 FT I lost all my radios equipments due to a lost of electrical power; (an issue with the alternator failure to charge the battery later addressed and corrected); which result in loosing GPS;Transponder; and all outside lights as well.So I deviated to [the large controlled] airport; required me to land with no lights and no radio communication; due to the issue above mentioned; after circled the airport; followed traffic and looked for light signal from Tower. And since I had no radio I figured I wouldn't be able to turn runway lights at any uncontrolled airport; this was my best choice.




Synopsis: A low time C-172 pilot suffered a total electrical failure at night; thus losing all lighting and radio communication capability. The pilot opted to land at a nearby; moderate sized; controlled/lighted airport.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 35
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Trainee
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Workload
Second reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: New Owner; has not flown in over 30 years. Training for currency and time in type for insurance requirements.1. Taxi clearance received taxi to runway 33; via E; A; B cleared to cross runway 04/22; understood; acknowledged; viewed on IPAD; read back by myself. First time to taxi to that runway; used to taxi to 04. CFII involved/distracted in reading back a full route clearance correct read back.2. While taxiing on taxiway Alpha southbound the ground controller said your IFR clearance is available; ready to copy? CFII had done the filing; I the owner was not familiar with routing and the long full route clearance; so CFII was busy reading back the clearance with some misunderstanding about the first fix...LILLY intersection...it was LOUIE intersection...both pilots fully distracted while taxing and talking to ground.3. Aircraft taxied southbound on Alpha crossing the active runway 33. Instructor takes full responsibility as PIC and never should have been taking a full route clearance while taxiing on an unfamiliar airport with an essentially NEW pilot in training.4. Causes: over tasking in the cockpit; distraction while taxiing. Tower: ground controller should not give out full route clearances to an aircraft while it is taxiing. Clearance delivery should be a separate frequency.CFII called the tower supervisor to discuss as soon as he could after landing.


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


Synopsis: A distracted BE35 owner/student and his instructor incurred a runway while taxiing for takeoff as the instructor copied and read back a full route clearance.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Gear Lever/Selector
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Trainee
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Confusion; Distraction
Second reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other takeoff
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: After a successful touchdown and initial ground roll; I began the transition and clean up to continue 'on the go.' Although I do not recall grabbing the landing gear knob and lever; the gear position changed and the nose gear changed to the up position. I may have inadvertently hit the gear lever as my hand went for the throttle. Regardless; the nose gear retracted and the nose of the airplane settled to the runway. The airplane rolled to a stop while the propeller and the underneath of the nose skidded on the runway. No injuries. No damage to other property.From this point on; I will adopt additional 'call out - response' procedures to verify that my hand placement is correct and that the right action is taking place.


Second narrative: [Incident] could have been avoided had the PIC/pilot flying not reached for the gear lever; returned it to the down position immediately upon hearing the gear warning horn; or powered through the takeoff while sufficient airspeed remained.


Synopsis: Transitioning to takeoff from a touch-and-go landing; C182RG pilot inadvertantly raised the gear handle. Aircraft settled onto the runway and skidded to a stop.