elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: TPF.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PC-12
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G TPF
ATC / advisory: CTAF TPF
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Other Person
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While landing on runway 22 at TPF; under VMC conditions; the flight crew observed a barge in the channel that crosses the short final of Runway 22. At the south end of the barge was a tall wheelhouse belonging to what appeared to be a tugboat pushing the barge. The left seat captain was Pilot Not Flying (PNF) and both pilots had a clear visual of the barge and determined it would not present a safety concern to the short final that the aircraft was on; with only a slight deviation from centerline alignment. Pilot flying (PF) altered course slightly to the north of runway 22 and returned to centerline after passing the barge safely. While passing the barge; the Captain observed the wheelhouse off the left wing and below the aircraft. Aircraft landed without apparent incident and taxied into the ramp and shutdown.A line service employee later informed the Captain that the FAA had called about 'missing an aircraft by 100 feet.' Being that there was no other aircraft in the pattern when the crew landed; it seemed like it was another plane. A short while later; the company called and conferenced in a representative from the Tampa Bay Area Coast Guard who advised the Captain that his aircraft had come within 100 feet of a vessel and had 'scared the [expletive] out of the pilot in the vessel's wheelhouse.' The Captain apologized for any confusion and maintained that the crew had visual contact on the barge and had maneuvered to avoid presenting a hazard to the barge and both crew had extensive knowledge of the boats and vessels that operate in the channel near runway 22. The Coast Guard representative appeared somewhat appeased with the explanation of the events given and reminded the Captain that boats had been hit by planes before; before ending the call.With the channel in such close proximity to the runway and it being the active runway; it would seem it would benefit all parties for vessels transitioning the water to monitor CTAF; and if the barge captain had been; there would have been communication that a Pilatus was landing; had them in sight; and would not present an issue despite the relative proximity of both vessels.




Synopsis: PC12 Captain reports deviating slightly to the right during a visual approach to Runway 22 at TPF; to avoid a tugboat pushing a barge in the channel. The tugboat Captain apparently filed complaint with the Coast Guard.
Date: 201901
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
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate
Contributing factors: Procedure; Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: First Officer loaded bags and then 2 passengers. We then had the aircraft de-iced due to existing ice on wings. We started aircraft per procedures with Gate Agent/Company. We followed aircraft appropriate checklists and then listened to ASOS for current weather. We then made a radio call on CTAF of our intentions to taxi to runway.Ramp area and entrance to taxiway leading to runway had been plowed. We continued to taxi toward runway until we slid about approximately a foot to the right of the center of taxiway and I applied brakes to stop aircraft. Upon inspection while stopped inside aircraft; we noticed a snow pile on right of taxiway between centerline and edge of taxi way. We then asked passengers if they were harmed. No one on the plane was injured or harmed. We then called on Company frequency and shut down both engines. We waited to have the aircraft to be towed to the hangar. Passengers were unloaded to the FBO shuttle that met them at the aircraft.Maintenance vehicles came over immediately after aircraft was stopped on taxiway and we were unable to disembark and they began to remove snow pile on taxiway in front of aircraft; prior to us inspecting aircraft. No damage obvious damage to aircraft. Very poor plowing technique. Taxiway entrance leading to Runway 35 was fully plowed. After approximately 100 feet; snow pile existed on right side of taxi way; upon exiting and inspecting aircraft and taxi way after the event.The taxiway was inconsistently plowed and nothing was NOTAMed and/or on the AWOS and Maintenance vehicles who were plowing on the CTAF had not alerted us of any snow piles or plows following taxi radio calls.  Establish two way radio communication with Airport Maintenance from snow plows that all snow and debris and equipment are clear of taxiways and runways.In the event of no equipment or personnel; make sure Airport Manager NOTAMs all airport and runway conditions as required for safe operations.




Synopsis: Air taxi pilot reported stopping on the taxiway due to remnant snow on the taxiway.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Normal takeoff; pilot flying announced abnormal vibration. Vibration grew in severity as speed increased maintained airspeed below maneuvering and started air return procedures. On descent vibrations continued and lead to emergency declaration; normal landing.




Synopsis: An EMB-145 developed a severe vibration after takeoff so the crew declared an emergency and returned to land.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PIT.Airport, PA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B PIT
ATC / advisory: Tower PIT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Approximately 2;300 feet MSL on RNAV (GPS) RWY 10L PIT (ILS out of service) night VMC on PAPI glideslope; runway in sight; fully configured; stable and cleared to land. [Received] GPWS TERRAIN TERRAIN PULL UP. Despite being on glide slope and believing we were nowhere near terrain; began escape maneuver (TOGA and pitched up) and warning went away. Discontinued escape maneuver and continued stabilized visual approach to normal landing.


Second narrative: EGPWS/GPWS terrain warning while on night visual approach to PIT [Runway] 10L. Performed terrain avoidance maneuver; warning immediately ceased as throttles advanced to TOGA thrust; continued approach and landed.Night VFR arrival into PIT ILS 10L Approach out of service. RNAV (GPS) RWY10L approach planned. On descent; GPS Primary on both FMGC's; accuracy confirmed HIGH; approach fix altitudes; final approach course; and FPA checked with approach chart.On 11NM left base leg for RNAV (GPS) RWY 10L. Autopilot; auto-throttles off. Speed 190; Flaps 1; 3000 MSL. Vectored 080 to intercept; cleared visual 10L. NAV lateral guidance engaged outside of RACOO (the FAF). Crossed FAF at 180 kts; FINAL APP engaged; Flaps 2 selected. Flaps 3 selected shortly after crossing FAF (approximately 1850 RA); then Gear and Full Flaps approximately 1700 RA. On track; on RNAV glide path; PAPI showed 2 red and 2 white. Got EGPWS/GPWS aural terrain warning (I recall 'terrain; terrain; pull up'). Captain stated that didn't make sense; I verbally agreed but executed the terrain avoidance maneuver since it was night time. The warning immediately ceased as the throttles were advanced to TOGA. We were fully configured; above glide path with PAPI showing all white. We visually confirmed no terrain hazard existed; and decided to continue the visual approach. We elected not to go heads down and re-program the approach and instead Selected VAPP speed and Selected 700 VSI for SA. The aircraft was stable at 1;000 [feet]; stable at 500 [feet]; and a normal landing was performed. After landing; IRS NAV drift and NAV position confirmed tight.


Synopsis: A319 flight crew reported receiving a GPWS terrain warning on RNAV Approach. Alert silenced as soon as escape maneuver was initiated.
Date: 201710
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation X (C750)
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Navigational Equipment and Processing
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We had a dual IRS failure immediately after takeoff. The nav database was updated that morning. We got no indications in the cockpit until the dual failure. The system logged 3 pages of faults and codes; starting when we left [departure airport]; but we got no EICAS messages in the cockpit. We navigated visually to [destination]. Navigation was reduced to only the standby magnetic compass and dead reckoning on the short flight. All navigation ability was lost. I have many reasons to suspect that Maintenance loaded the wrong database that morning. A different database was loaded at [destination] and their narrative was that no failures were noted; even after simulated flight parameters were entered. Luckily we were VMC on the short flight and we were able to complete the flight without further incident. No emergency was declared because it was roughly a 20 mile flight; and VMC prevailed.I would like to know why a Citation X lost all navigational ability in flight. Obviously this was a very serious issue and could have been exponentially worse in IMC conditions. How can a dual IRS aircraft; with a split bus electrical system fail at the same time? I believe the wrong database information was entered that morning. A detailed follow up is needed for this potentially serious condition.




Synopsis: Citation X Captain reported loss of all nav capability except standby compass shortly after takeoff. Captain suspects anomaly was related to improper nav database software load.
Date: 201911
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I'm am writing this report in the hopes that it reaches a level where this repeated violation of our CLEAN RAMP POLICY can be corrected. On flight ZZZ1 to ZZZ while parking in ZZZ there were cones inside the safety zone. These cones were inside the Aircraft Safety lines; but behind the RED FIRE LANE lines.It seems that our ground crews are now using the RED FIRE LANE markings as our Aircraft Safety Lines. Repeatedly; when arriving in ZZZ this is the case and when asked to move them confusion arises. The red and white safety lines are clearly marked yet items are moved only to be placed behind the Fire Lane Lines instead of outside the actual Aircraft Safety Lines.It took a good 15 minutes to have this corrected which held up our passengers; the vehicle traffic on the ramp; the next crew departing and on and on. I'm curious as to what the Fire Marshal would have to say if they knew that objects were intentionally being placed inside the fire lane when airplanes approach? Can anyone help rectify this recurring problem? Inform ground crews that the Red Fire Lane lines are not the Aircraft Safety Lines.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported that Ground Personnel are not keeping the ramp aircraft envelope clear.
Date: 201904
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class A ZDV
ATC / advisory: TRACON D01
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were descending on the PEEKK 3 RNAV Arrival into DEN. At around 17;000 ft we talked to Approach Control and were given the RNAV (RNP) Z 16R. We were expecting the ILS 16R; so the new approach was entered and briefed. Around the same time and in the descent to 11;000 ft we received multiple airspeed changes by ATC. At 11000 ft at CEPEE aircraft did not turn on course to AAGEE; but instead continued on a 353 straight ahead course line. We made a manual heading change to follow the correct course within a couple seconds of passing CEPEE. ATC then canceled the approach and gave us a vector to intercept a visual final for 16R. We intercepted final and landed 16R.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported a track deviation occurred on arrival into DEN; citing a late clearance change as contributing.
Date: 202001
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: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were approaching Gate XX at ZZZ in day; VMC conditions. As we entered the ramp on the Charlie line from the south port the Captain verbalized the threat of vehicle traffic crossing in front of the aircraft as we approached the gate because there is a busy vehicle traffic lane running adjacent to the B terminal. We scanned out of our respective sides of the aircraft and identified multiple vehicles approaching to pass in front of our gate.As we were approximately one half airplane length from crossing the vehicle lane and with marshalers in position we expected to see the approaching vehicles slow and stop. Instead the first of the few; a tow vehicle with baggage cart in tow; accelerated to pass in front of us. We were at a slow speed but the Captain braked to yield and bring us to a stop. Now more cautious the Captain resumed a slow taxi and we observed a larger tow vehicle with large trailer in tow accelerate to pass in front of us. The Captain braked again and a third baggage tow vehicle raced in front of us.We identified the safety infractions to ramp and the Ramp Controller confirmed that she observed the actions of the ground traffic and was on the phone; presumably to pass feedback. The ramp controller suggested that the marshalers may not have been sufficiently positioned out in the alley for vehicles to recognize that an aircraft was approaching; but based on the position of the aircraft there was no doubt that we were arriving to the gate and that the vehicles should have yielded.




Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported that several ground vehicles failed to yield; resulting in a critical ground conflict.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: MCP
Component problem: Malfunctioning; Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Confusion; Troubleshooting; Workload; Distraction
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Aircraft X had a Rockwell MCP; the one with the small pushbuttons; instead of the traditional classic paddle switch MCP. It worked without incident our first leg.  During taxi out for the second leg; the First Officer (FO) asked; 'Do you want that?' and pointed to the CWS A light illuminated on the MCP. Somehow either it had engaged itself or we had somehow inadvertently pushed it. He looked puzzled. Since I was familiar to this from my Safety work and having had it previously; I said; I would explain this in-flight and pushed the autopilot disconnect button. We got the Autopilot Disconnect horn; and the CWS A light extinguished. We rechecked everything and took off. Everything worked fine the next two legs. I was fortunate to have a very sharp FO who first noticed the trim wheel moving without pilot input during taxi. It seems these new style MCPs may be incompatible with the older model aircraft. I know we have had several rejected takeoffs when the trim started to run with un-commanded pitch and roll commands during takeoff roll.It seems in the interest of safety we need to get a full understanding of this anomaly and either correct the situation or provide adequate training and or procedures to prevent this from creating an undesired aircraft state. NOTE: we didn't write it up because we couldn't tell if we had inadvertently pushed it or it had turned itself on. From a human factors perspective; it would be very easy to unknowingly lightly push it while the FO performs his flows.


Second narrative: Captain's leg. On taxiway C; CWS engaged on taxi out to departure runway in commanded engagement. I noticed that the trim wheel started to move as we were taxiing. I looked over to see if the Captain was trimming the aircraft and he wasn't. I looked up at the Mode Control Panel and saw the CWS light illuminated. I informed the Captain and he disconnected CWS using the autopilot disconnect switch. We discussed the issue prior to takeoff and he said some of the MCP panels have had a history of this. We briefed our departure to include watching to make sure it didn't happen again. It didn't nor did it happen from the [previous] leg. No other issues.


Synopsis: During taxi for takeoff; a B737 Mode Control Panel (MCP) Control Wheel Steering (CWS) engaged and began trimming the horizontal stabilizer. The First Officer caught the trim movement and disengaged CWS.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: PC-12
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Other Medical Transport
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon departure from ZZZ Rwy XX just after lift off a toxic smelling odor entered the cockpit and cabin. The Medical Flight Crew expressed much discomfort and began looking for smoke as the odor smelled of burning chemicals. I continued the departure under IFR in VMC. I was switched to Departure from Tower. The crew reported seeing a haze of smoke in the cabin. I immediately requested priority and turned back to ZZZ; switching back to the Tower and letting them know I was coming in to land. They cleared me into RWY XY where I landed without incident. I had the fire department dispatched. After landing I was cleared to fast taxi to our ramp and as I never actually saw smoke or fire. I had the crew get the extinguisher and they exited as soon as we stopped. I secured the aircraft and exited.




Synopsis: Pilatus PC-12 Captain reported a fumes event immediately after takeoff resulting in a return to the departure airport.