elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201605
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: C90.TRACON, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B C90
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Chart Or Publication; Human Factors
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: During our initial call to Midway clearance; we were assigned the following route for weather upon which it was read back and spelled to the controller:MIDWAY.2 ACETO ADELL ARLYN STL...ETCOn departure; we were assigned a heading from Chicago departure and then asked to proceed to ACETO..upon completion of the turn we were told we weren't proceeding toward the correct fix. We then clarified the fix with the similar spelling of another fix ACITO.




Synopsis: Instructor pilot reported confusion with a similar fix name that caused the flight to be off course.
Date: 202010
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: RFD.Airport, IL
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Light: Night
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower RFD
Second aircraft: Large Transport
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight; Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Aircraft Y was cleared for an approach and was cleared to land. Aircraft X called Ground to taxi and was given taxi instructions. This instruction should have resulted in Aircraft X coming out of the Ramp and making a right turn on to the taxiway. Aircraft X instead crossed the taxiway and made a right turn onto the runway. When Aircraft X entered the runway; Aircraft Y immediately stated; 'There's something on the runway;' and I initiated a go around. Aircraft Y went around and conducted another ILS approach to successfully land. Aircraft X exited the runway and continued down the taxiway to Runway 07; where they then departed.Aircraft Y was at 300 ft. at a ½-mile final when the go around was initiated. I asked the pilots of both aircraft to contact the Tower and notified them that I would file a report on the event. I did not say the words 'possible pilot deviation' to Aircraft X; as required to issue a proper brasher warning. I also did not get the pilots' names; phone numbers; and certificate numbers; as I did not know that these items were required until I began filling out the report. I did note on the report that the aircraft were both air carriers; and the information was able to be obtained by referencing the callsigns.I believe the weather was a contributing factor to Aircraft X making an incorrect turn; as it was raining moderately with periodic gusting wind. A ground based radar system or a taller Control Tower would have been incredibly helpful in this circumstance; as the taxiway and runway are pretty much indistinguishable from each other at night. The lights of the two blend together and you cannot tell which is which.




Synopsis: Tower Local Controller reported a taxiing aircraft entered an active runway while an arriving aircraft was on short final and issued a go around to the arriving aircraft.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-32 Cherokee Six/Lance/Saratoga/6X
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Parked
Second aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Aircraft component: Parking Brake
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown; Ground Event / Encounter Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Incident occurred on ramp. I was in plane alone and my engine was running while parked (with parking brakes on; and feet on the brakes). Looked down to figure out departure procedure. My plane rolled forward and hit parked jet. That plane had no occupants and was disabled due to mechanical problems. I shut down and got out of plane to check damage. Incident could have been avoided if clearance had been obtained and determined before starting engine.




Synopsis: The pilot of a PA-32 became distracted on the ramp with the engine running and rolled into another aircraft on the ramp.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SAC.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D SAC
ATC / advisory: Tower SAC
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During an ILS Runway 02 practice approach into SAC; with clearance to land from COUPS intersection and following instructions from SAC Tower to break off final and circle to land east the landing Runway 20; the private pilot rated instrument training pilot (Pilot Flying) descended below the circling minimums for the approach (500 ft. MSL; 476 ft AGL) to 276 ft. AGL while on downwind for Runway 20. While completing the approach; verbal instructions were given by the Flight Instructor to maintain circling minimums on the downwind and climb immediately to protect the MDA. The pilot flying was observed by the instructor that they descended rather than climbed; resulting in the flight instructor repeating instructions to climb immediately for obstacle clearance in a congested area. The instructor voiced 'climb climb climb' and took the flight controls; and assisted the student in climbing back up to the circling MDA; where the controls were returned to the student once the airplane was stabilized and the hazard removed. The student was briefed on the faulty approach after landing and additional training was given to illustrate the importance of maintaining MDA on all approaches; maintaining positive aircraft control; and executing the missed approach promptly if the approach becomes unstable. The student voiced that they were certain the aircraft stalled; and was the reason for the uncontrolled descent. However; the airspeed remained well above stall speed and the aircraft was in a low angle of attack state up to and during the descent below MDA. The student was given additional training to aviate; navigate; communicate and to fly the airplane first; and finally; to follow FAA guidance to instrument cross-check; interpret the instruments; and control the airplane. The student was not observed to descend below MDA on subsequent instrument approaches following this incident.




Synopsis: Flight Instructor reported that his student descended below MDA during a circle-to-land approach.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke; 7
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: De Havilland Canada Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
Aircraft component: Ignition System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After replacing points in a magneto which had destroyed itself; I flew back to the home base. A few miles from base I had a total engine failure. I did not have enough altitude to make the runway and set down in a field. There is no apparent damage to the aircraft. Apparently the Gipsy Major engine runs both magnetos from a common drive. It is believed the common drive failed.




Synopsis: DHC-1 pilot reported a magneto failure resulting in an off airport landing.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: S46.TRACON, WA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Gulfstream IV / G350 / G450
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E SEA
ATC / advisory: TRACON S46
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Airport; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: [Aircraft] was being vectored for the ILS Runway 14R into BFI. The aircraft was at 4000 feet south of ZZZ for a regional jet departing ZZZ southbound climbing to 3000 ft. Once that conflict was passed; [aircraft] was descended to 3000 ft. and issued traffic on a VFR target southbound at 2500 feet. Once past that traffic; [aircraft] was descended to 2200 ft. and turned left to a base heading of 220 degrees. Again; traffic was issued for the 2500 feet target and they got that traffic in sight. Additionally; traffic was issued for another target northwest-bound at 1700 feet. As [aircraft] was turning to join the localizer from the southwest; the 1700 feet target started to climb into the [Medium Transport Aircraft]. Traffic was again issued and [aircraft] responded to a TCAS RA and descended. As [aircraft] was climbing back up to 2200 feet; the previous 2500 feet target started a turn towards BFI on the localizer; descending. [Aircraft] lost sight of that traffic and was given an altitude of 2100 feet and turned to the southwest to avoid the descending VFR target. [Aircraft] responded to a second RA for that target. [Aircraft] advised with BFI in sight and was cleared for the visual approach.  The BFI final must be protected or there will be an accident at some point. There needs to be airspace underneath the ZZZ Bravo that is sterile so jets going 200 knots can safely arrive at BFI.  Until this happens; there will continue to be near misses into BFI.




Synopsis: Approach Controller reported vectoring an aircraft on an ILS Approach to avoid two separate unidentified VFR aircraft not in communication with ATC.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SNS.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Temperature Inversion; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E NCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Aircraft component: Cylinder Head Temperature
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Weather; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was doing a normal climb out of SNS and was vectored due east (090) by Flight Following to avoid incoming traffic into SNS on the ILS 31 approach. This direction pointed me to the hills east of Salinas; which concerned me as I did not have enough altitude to clear them by 2;000 ft yet. The plane was acting sluggish and seemed a little slow. I had leveled off intermittently during the climb to do a visual check and to help keep the engine cool. What I didn't know and later discovered in conversation with my IFR CFI who was the one doing the ILS approach with another pilot was that there was a Temperature Inversion that morning (my opinion due to the heat from the San Jose Valley area as it was headed to 100F that day). It was under 70F at takeoff.As I was approaching the ridge line; I noticed that the Engine Temp had creeped up quite a bit; so I leveled off to cool it down. But it didn't stop and continued to overheat way past the red line and pegged the Oil Temp Gauge. The Oil Pressure was in the green; but seemed to drop some. It was at this point; I did a 180 degree turn back towards Salinas (SNS); and contacted NORCAL that my engine had severe overheating and was headed back to Salinas to land. I was using VFR flight following during my flight after takeoff. NORCAL gave me a vector to Salinas Runway 31 and I began my descent. It did cool down approximately 3 miles from the runway. I landed OK and taxied to the Ramp; and parked. Inspection of the airplane showed no fire. I checked the oil & it showed 5.5 quarts (I had added 1 quart prior; so was at 6 at takeoff). I contacted the FBO to advise of the problem and that the A&P should check out the plane before anyone else flew it & squawked it on their system. Conclusion from discussions with other pilots was that C172s have a cooling issue since they have a small oil cooler; no cowl flaps; the climb out; and that the Temperature Inversion helped push the engine Temp into the red.




Synopsis: C172 pilot reported returning to the departure airport due to high cylinder head and oil temperature; possibly due to a significant temperature inversion.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ANC.Airport, AK
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Windshear
Aircraft: Widebody Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Takeoff Roll
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Returned To Gate
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Normal pushback and start. Prior to taxi; we setup three runway changes in the FMS due to rapidly changing winds. First RWY 33; then RWY 25L; and finally RWY 15. Windshear advisories were not included in the most current ATIS report. Last reported winds were 120/15G26 KT. During takeoff; we received a 'HEADWIND SHEAR' CAWS (Caution and Warning System) alert at 154 KT; which was also our V1 speed. Captain commanded and executed a reject. Airplane easily decelerated to taxi speed with at least 2000 feet remaining. Cleared the runway and taxied back to our departure gate; but kept the engines running while we reviewed rejected takeoff and brake cooling procedures. While in the gate; I advised Operations and coordinated with Maintenance for a tire and brake inspection. After receiving updated fuel burn calculations from Operations and confirmation from Maintenance that our current brake temperature allowed a subsequent takeoff; we pushed back for another attempt. Taxi and subsequent takeoff on RWY 15 were uneventful. Rapidly shifting winds.




Synopsis: Flight Crew flying aircraft encountered Headwind Shear on takeoff roll.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: PHL.Airport, PA
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: First Officer
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Procedure
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: This report does not involve an event; it is rather a warning that there is a potential problem that crew members need to be aware of. Specifically when PHL ATIS is advertising '....landing converging ILS 9R; 9L and 17......' and when subsequently 'cleared approach converging ILS 9R' none of the crew members or instructors I have asked is aware of what exactly the term 'converging' represents; or what this requires that they do differently. The term when contained in the title of the approach; as it is in PHL; IAD; MSP means that the missed approach is different from an otherwise identical approach by the same name but lacking the term 'Converging.' Of even greater significance is the fact our aircraft FMC in each case contains only one of the two possible approaches. The vulnerability being a pilot who is cleared 'Converging ILS 9R' and subsequently directed to execute a missed approach; if that crew follows the missed approach in the box; it will take the flight directly into the flight path of another aircraft. Suggestions; crews should be cautioned to recognize why the term 'Converging' is put in the title of an approach and what it changes from what they were expecting. With regard to changing the FMC I believe that the company should query both equipment manufacturers for possible solutions.




Synopsis: Corporate pilot voiced concern regarding the term 'converging' on several approach procedures noting the term is less than clear in it's meaning and flight crew requirements.
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Aircraft: MD-88
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Emergency Exit
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Passenger
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Passenger
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: The seats are arranged so the exit aisles are blocked over the wings. I've taken pictures. Both my to and from flights had the same situation.




Synopsis: A passenger reported seats were blocking access to overwing exits on an MD-88.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: N90.TRACON, NY
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working combined position on the late night shift. The weather at the airport was low visibility with visibility down to 1/4 of a mile. During an arrival push my RVR equipment failed for an unknown reason. Due to the unavailability of other runways; I was forced to switch to an approach which is an uncommon approach for our sector. Over a year ago construction had changed the MVA in the area of the approach but I was not sure if the MVA map was updated. I could not remember what the new MVA was or if the map I was looking at was updated so I used the map which I thought was the most up to date and descended the arrival aircraft to 2;500 FT MSL. I inquired about the new MVA and was informed it had changed to 2;800 FT MSL. I immediately corrected it for all of the other aircraft I was working and no other planes were descended below the MVA. The map needs to be changed immediately or some other map change needs to be developed to advise other controllers of the new MVA.




Synopsis: N90 Controller described a below MVA event when he/she failed to note a change in the MVA requirements and issued an assigned altitude below the altitude limits.