elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LVK.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke; 5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Champion Citabria 7ECA
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower LVK
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Sport / Recreational
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Takeoff roll
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airport
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On initial contact with LVK Ground; I requested a left crosswind departure. I was instructed to taxi to 25R via Kilo and Bravo; and told to be sure to give my departure request to the Tower. I taxied to the run-up area and performed the run-up checks. I called LVK Tower and announced; 'Ready for take-off on 25R and left crosswind departure.' The Tower responded 'Cleared for takeoff on 25R and left turn approved.' I taxied onto the runway; and advanced the throttle; and began my take-off roll. Then I saw the underside of an aircraft about 75 FT above me; and heard someone on the frequency announce they were going around. I took action by retarding the throttle and applying the brakes; coming to a halt just past the Delta Intersection with 25R. At that point the Tower said [to me]; 'I thought I cleared you off 25L;' and I replied that I understood the clearance to be 25R. At that point the Tower asked if I could accept an intersection takeoff from Delta; and I replied in the affirmative and did so.




Synopsis: Citabria pilot is cleared to Runway 25R via Taxiway's K and B at LVK. After the run up the pilot is cleared for takeoff on Runway 25R with a left crosswind departure. Upon advancing the throttle another aircraft is seen to be going around and the takeoff is rejected.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ORBB.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Suspected GPS jamming event approaching waypoint DARIX (N3558.0/E4418.2) at FL 340. Noted no GPS available for approximately 1 minute; then became available again for a couple minutes; then no GPS available for approximately 16 minutes until normal GPS signal approaching VOR station SRT in Turkey. Suspected GPS jamming occurred through an external source.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported experiencing jamming of GPS signal at FL340 while flying in Iraqi airspace.
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZNY.ARTCC, NY
Light: Night
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZNY
ATC / advisory: Center ZNY
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: I was taking coordination from an adjacent sector and writing on strips; and when I focused back on the scope I saw the event happening. Aircraft X was climbing to FL340 northeast bound to fulfill the requirement to Sector 86; and had Aircraft Y opposite direction at FL340. Both aircraft got RA's. This sector is difficult when either W122 or W72 is active. There's only one airway for northeast and southwest traffic; and the SOP's and LOA's require multiple altitude changes head on. We also receive traffic at the same altitude head on from Sector 86 and ZJX. I believe we need an extra airway south of the warning areas to better deal with the traffic volume in SWAP.




Synopsis: Controller observes operational error and places partial blame on airspace and LOA.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Aircraft: Airliner 99
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Indicating and Warning - Hydraulics
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Takeoff Roll
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During the takeoff roll around 60 kts; the hydraulic low indicator illuminated and the takeoff was aborted. I became aware of the event around 60 kts. during the takeoff roll. I am not sure why the hydraulic indication illuminated; it could be that the gear on this particular airplane had just been serviced.The normal procedure for an aborted takeoff was performed.The proper procedures were followed for the situation; but nonetheless always scan all annunciations during takeoff roll.




Synopsis: Airline Captain reported an uneventful RTO event due to warning light illumination during takeoff roll.
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: DAL.Airport, TX
Aircraft: Cardinal 177/177RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower DAL
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Instructor; Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was training a Controller on the Local Control West (LCW) position. The trainee was doing well. I watched the C177 taxi out and looked at his departure strip to double check what my trainee was checking. I saw the C177 do almost a complete 180 on Taxiway Lima near the approach end of Runway 13R to do a run up. The C177 called ready for departure. The trainee acknowledged and issued the hold short instruction. The pilot of the C177 read back the instruction completely with hold short; runway; and callsign. Then we discussed the operation developing for [Runway] 13L with an aircraft in position and an aircraft turning a shorter right base than expected for 13L. We started discussing the need to spin the aircraft of final to ensure departure-departure spacing and arrival-departure spacing. At this point I noticed the C177 had taxied across the 13R hold line. I took over the position by giving the aircraft on final for 13L a left 270 to rejoin the final and then instructed the C177 to make a 180 and taxi back across the hold line. I made two or three more transmissions and then gave the position back to the trainee. I then advised the FLM to initiate a possible pilot deviation. When the C177 crossed the non-standard hold line for Runway 13R; there were no aircraft inbound for runway 13R. The Runway 13R hold line is in a non-standard location from the runway edge. No other Tower controlled airport in the country has a hold line 477 FT from the runway edge. I believe the non-standard location of this line caused the pilot to look for a hold line in a more standard location from the runway edge. I recommend that the FAA Airports Division re-evaluate this hold line in accordance with the TERPs manual and recommend the design for the 13L hold short line be re-evaluated.




Synopsis: DAL Controller described a runway incursion event on Runway 13R claiming the non-standard distance of the line form the runway is problematic and changes should be considered.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Time Pressure
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: As the Captain taxied the airplane clear of the runway there was a power transfer accompanied by EICAS messages indicating that the L UTIL BUS OFF and R UTIL BUS OFF. As we taxied to hold short of parallel runway; I informed the Captain 'getting low oil pressure on the left engine' and pointed to the status showing oil pressure was now in the red; indicating approximately 12; and falling. EGT started to climb and the Captain said 'that's weird I think we might have lost the left engine' and then pointed at N1 which now indicated 5.0. At that point EGT began to rise rapidly. The Captain commanded 'Get the QRH and let's shut it down.' I was reaching to get the QRH as EGT reached the red zone and I said 'Should I just cut off the fuel?' The Captain said 'yes; just go ahead and cut the fuel then we can do the QRH.' I placed the left fuel control knob in cut off. EGT reached a peak of 990. We ran the QRH procedure for shutdown/secure and taxied to the gate. The message on the status page indicated 'L ENG LP PUMP.' Maintenance was called and informed of the shutdown.


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


Synopsis: B757 flight crew reported that shortly after landing and while exiting the Runway; a left engine low pressure fuel pump failed which resulted in a decreasing RPM and high EGT. The engine was shutdown; the QRH completed and the flight taxied to the gate.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Helicopter
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Ambulance
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: While en-route to pick-up a baby with the NICU team and the spare isolette/incubator; a pump on the isolette caught on fire in cruise flight. The Flight Medic was able to extinguish the fire with a bottle of water before the Flight Nurse was able to pass the Flight Medic the fire extinguisher. Hospital Communications were informed of the incident immediately. I performed a landing in a vacant lot. Fire and Police responded. The Medic Company responded and transported the NICU crew; with a different isolette; to the referring hospital and completed the transfer by ground. A base Mechanic also responded to the scene and conducted a thorough check of the aircraft. The defective isolette was removed from the aircraft and transported back for further inspection.




Synopsis: Helicopter ambulance Captain reported an empty baby incubator caught fire while in flight.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Passenger
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: The entire coach cabin panicked when they smelled the strong fumes. Notified the Captain only for him to make a PA saying 'it's normal'. Now I've have an excruciating headache ever since the exposure.




Synopsis: A321 Flight Attendant reported smelling 'strong fumes' in the cabin resulting in health issues.
Date: 201903
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Other Under Tow
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Workload; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Observer
When detected: Other During Tow Procedure
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The issue is a near miss aircraft collision between aircraft parked at Parking Spot X and Parking Spot Y on due to improper or deviation from towing procedure approved for that specific location. During a routine parking spot and aircraft location inspection; I noted a two-man crew; one wing walker and the tractor driver attempting to push back aircraft on spot Parking Spot X. With the tail pointing about 45 degrees to the blast fence; without fully clearing or lining up with the center line and not clearing the aircraft parked on spot Parking Spot Y; the only wing walker jumped into the tug with the tug driver. Now as the driver was cutting to get to the center line; the right wing was about 24 inches or less from making contact with right stabilizer of the aircraft parked on spot Parking Spot Y. I parked my truck behind spot Parking Spot Y in the taxi way attempting to communicate with them. When they noted my presence; the tow driver stopped and the wing walker emerged from the tractor; I also emerged from the truck and the Ramp XX Lead who was on routine inspection of the area also noted the potential accident and was racing to stop it. We collectively guided the tractor driver to push back and after a few attempts he was able to get the right angle to clear the aircraft wing tip to the elevator of the aircraft parked on spot Parking Spot Y.A minimum of two wing walkers should always be used when moving wide body aircraft from spot Parking Spot X. The wing walkers should stay on ground until the towing aircraft is centered on the taxi center line pass spot Parking Spot Y.




Synopsis: Reporter reported a near collision of B777 and another aircraft that was avoided during tow procedure.
Date: 202010
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate; Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Passenger originally assigned seat X1 boarded via a wheelchair. Once she was at the top of the ramp it was discovered she cannot walk on her own. She sat in heavy rain for several minutes while the assisting agent ordered an aisle chair. Due to the rain; her daughter; who was originally seated in X3; picked her up and helped her on board. The Ground Service Agent also assisted and I did as well once she was inside the plane. Because she was completely unable to walk on her own; shaking and extremely unsteady; I advised her to take seat Y3 as it was the most accessible to her immediate seating need. I did not move her. Once she was seated; and with her daughter's permission; I opened the blanket bag and covered her. I also moved her daughter to be near her. I did not follow our company policy to keep seat Y3 unoccupied due to COVID.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Flight Attendant reported not following COVID-19 seat policy in order to assist a passenger.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PC-12
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: PC-12
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: As we were joining an extended left downwind for Runway 16 at 1;900 feet; a PC-12 contacted Tower for departure as they were holding short of Runway 11. Tower instructed the PC-12 to hold short for crossing downwind traffic for Runway 16. The PC-12 held short. As other traffic landed on Runway 16 Tower instructed the PC-12 to line up and wait on Runway 11; and to hold short for downwind traffic. After a few moments he then cleared the PC-12 for takeoff; afterwards telling us to watch out for the departing traffic off Runway 11. The timing was perfect for a collision as the PC-12 took off with no relative motion; climbing to directly intercept our flight path. After the TCAS announced 'TRAFFIC!' we were forced to adjust our downwind leg; with a climbing left turn to avoid a collision with the departing PC-12.Tower could have waited for us to cross the departure end of Runway 11 before clearing the other PC-12 for takeoff.




Synopsis: A PC-12 pilot reported that while on downwind ATC released another PC-12 for takeoff from a crossing way; resulting in an airborne conflict that required evasive action.
Date: 201411
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: The ERJ 135 and 145s that come into [a specific] gate are having to be parked off the center of the lead in line in order for the upper draw bridges to fit into the aircrafts properly.  Some of the problem may also be contributed from the dog-leg lead in line that swings out and the aircrafts do not have enough straight away to line up on the gate straight. Sometimes leaving the tail end of the aircraft out over to one side which adds to the positioning of the bridges being off. Another added concern here is from time to time there may be different team leads working this gate. If the team lead is not aware of how the aircrafts line up on this gate where it is supposed be could result with the upper drawbridge positioned in the aircraft improper. This will result with a very unsafe positioned drawbridge. This will result in passengers stepping onto the bridge with both the passenger and the bridge collapsing.




Synopsis: An air carrier ramp worker is concerned about jet bridge misalignment due to aircraft not being able to track the gate centerline due to a dogleg lead-in line.
Date: 201204
Location: MDW.Airport, IL
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class C MDW
ATC / advisory: TRACON C90
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airspace Structure; Chart Or Publication; Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: The MOTIF 4 Arrival into MDW has a number of expected altitude restrictions; like crossing MINOK at 6;000 FT. The problem is that ATC never gives you a clearance that corresponds with the arrival. They may want you at 6;000 FT somewhere; but it's not where you expect it to be at MINOK. Same goes with the other ATC restrictions. As we are getting more and more into the VNAV use and using 'descend via' clearances; we are spending much more time briefing and setting up the FMC to make sure things are all set for us to monitor. When those instructions are modified; it's now a game to re-program the FMC and make sure you stay on top of the aircraft; whereas years ago before VNAV/autothrottles/RNP etc. we just did it all in our head. Look; I don't mind if things change and we have to modify our plan; but this happens every single time I fly into MDW. It's like what's the point of having a STAR and briefing it if we're never going to fly it like it was briefed. All we're doing is adding complexity to the cockpit as we approach a high task loading environment; and for what appears to be no apparent reason. If the STAR is not designed well; then let's change the STAR. If the altitudes work; then let's use them. If not; let's get rid of them or change them to something that does. It's a great example of 'normalization of deviance' in operations that nobody's going to know about until it bites someone in the tail and everyone accuses the pilot of being unprofessional. In actuality; ATC is forcing pilots to come up with their own workarounds to a system that doesn't work as designed.




Synopsis: Pilot reports ATC altitude assignments on MOTIF 4 Arrival into MDW are consistantly at odds with the published restrictrictions.