elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Cessna Citation Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Door Warning System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After departing and enroute to [our destination] we had a 'door not locked' warning light illuminate. This was followed by a 'cabin 10;000 feet' warning. This occurred at approximately 9;500 feet MSL. We immediately stopped the climb and advised Center of the problem. They assigned us a lower altitude. We then requested vectors to the nearest suitable airport.We made an uneventful landing [at the nearest airport.]Upon investigation we discovered there were 2 green indicators flags that were not aligned perfectly. Aligned; but a fraction from perfect. It appears that this also allowed the cabin to 'climb'.We re-filed; loaded the passenger; and triple checked for perfectly aligned indicator flags after securing the main cabin door.Continued to [our destination] and landed without incident.Everyone should carefully check the main door green flags for 'perfect alignment' before beginning the taxi roll. They must be perfect! Especially flying older airplanes.




Synopsis: The flight crew reported illumination of a 'door not locked' warning light; followed by inability to control cabin pressurization. They diverted to the nearest suitable airfield; corrected the problem; and continued uneventfully to their destination.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: HDC.Airport, LA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: SR22
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Taxiway; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Upon landing Runway XX; the Tower made what I recall to be the following instruction. 'Aircraft X turn left at the end of the runway taxi to parking over to Ground; welcome back'. At this time; I flipped to Ground frequency to monitor Ground however I did not make a call to the Ground Controller; I was however monitoring Ground and continued to taxi down Taxiway XX; crossed the threshold of [Runway]; down Taxiway XY to parking. This is my home base; and I was parking at FBO. Upon disembarking from the cockpit; I was told by the attendant that the Tower had called them on the phone and asked that I call them. I was not aware of why they would be asking however I complied and called them. The Facility Manager then informed me that I had not been cleared to cross Runway XY and that he considered this a runway incursion. I told him I was under the impression I had been told left at the end and that I had been cleared to parking by the Tower and had been monitoring Ground although I had not made a call. I understand I should have called Ground; which is the factor I will change; but they commonly ask me to monitor Ground and often I just stay with Tower at this small airport. There were no aircraft in the area and there was not any near miss thankfully; but I will be making every effort to clarify the Tower and Ground calls in the future rather than taking the left at the end and taxi to parking as proper clearance to cross a runway.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported a miscommunication with ATC led to a taxiway and runway incursion.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: UAO.Airport, OR
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class D UAO; Class E P80
ATC / advisory: TRACON P80
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Airport
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: On a VFR flight I obtained flight following from ZSE ARTCC. ARTCC provided VFR flight following and asked what altitude I would be flying at. I advised ARTCC I was level at 1;500 feet. On my direct flight while ARTCC was providing VFR Flight Following Advisories ARTCC asked me to squawk 1200 and handed me off to TRACON by saying 'squawk 1200; contact Approach in your area they cannot pick you up at that altitude and they will assign a new squawk'. I made several attempts to contact TRACON they did not reply. I finally switched to TRACON on a different frequency and they immediately replied; issued me a new squawk; and asked my position. I reported my position at 1;500 feet. They identified me and said proceed to cross over the tower mid-field and enter left downwind for runway 10L.  I acknowledged. Shortly thereafter TRACON mentioned that an airport is now Class D; I replied 'yes I'm aware of that; and that I was under flight following with ARTCC just prior to them handing me off to TRACON'. Prior to that I reviewed my current VFR sectional and IFR approach plates for the airport and no tower frequency was listed. They show CTAF 122.7. I found it unusual to be questioned about class D when I was under flight following from Center and they handed me off to TRACON.




Synopsis: An aircraft was receiving VFR Services from Seattle Center (ARTCC). The ARTCC terminated service with the aircraft and advised them to contact Portland TRACON overlying the aircraft's route. The TRACON advised the aircraft that they had transitioned through UAO's Class D airspace. Even though this designated airspace is not yet published the pilot was aware of it. The pilot believed since he was receiving ATC service from the ARTCC he was allowed to transit this airport's Class D airspace.
Date: 202112
Location: IAH.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B IAH
ATC / advisory: TRACON I90
Second aircraft: UAV: Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification; Workload
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Unauthorized Flight Operations (UAS)
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During initial climb through 8;000 ft. out of IAH en-route to ZZZ on the LURIC8 departure northbound; we were informed by ATC that there had been a previously reported sighting of a drone quadcopter on our route. We were told its last reported position was at our 10 o'clock and within five miles. I was hand flying the airplane and the Captain maintained a close watch outside. As we accelerated through 10;000 ft. the Captain suddenly saw it visually off the nose. We continued our climb and it went under us at a high rate of speed. The Captain reported to ATC that we had seen it and it went under us. They asked for an estimate of how close it came to us. It was hard to determine; as we are so used to seeing certain size targets (other airplanes) and I had no idea how big this one was so initially the Captain said we cleared it by maybe 1;000 ft. or less. I never was able to see it; as I was focused on flying the airplane.


Second narrative: During initial climb through 8;000 ft. out of IAH en-route to ZZZ on the LURIC8 departure northbound; we were informed by ATC that there had been a previously reported sighting of a drone quadcopter on our route. We were told its last reported position was at our 10 o'clock and within five miles. The First Officer was hand flying the airplane and I maintained a close watch outside. As we accelerated through 10;000 ft. I suddenly saw it visually off the nose. We continued our climb and it went under us at a high rate of speed. I reported to ATC that we had seen it and it went under us. They asked for an estimate of how close it came to us. It was hard to determine; as we are so used to seeing certain size targets (other airplanes) and I had no idea how big this one was so initially I said we cleared it by 1;000 ft. but on hindsight there is really no way to know for sure and my feeling is that it was probably quite a bit closer.


Synopsis: Air carrier Flight Crew reported being informed by ATC of previous sightings of a UAS. Flight crew experienced an airborne conflict with the UAS while climbing away from a Class B airport during departure.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Speed All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On final approach to Runway 09L the Captain asked for and was approved for a sidestep to Runway 09R. This was approximately 2;000 FT MSL while on a VFR LOC approach. The sidestep was performed normally by me. At approximately 1;000 FT; or slightly lower; I noticed the autothrottles had disengaged for some reason and the airspeed had bled off to approximately 7 or 8 KTS below VREF. I subsequently manually added power and lowered the aircraft nose. The required speed was regained; but the aircraft was slightly high on the glide slope now. I further lowered the nose and was able to get back on path around 500 FT. The landing was normal; if slightly long; after that. A go around maneuver would have been the more prudent decision for this approach.When it was discovered that the autothrottles has disengaged; then a go-around should have been initiated.




Synopsis: A B737-800 autothrottle disconnected on final prior to 1;000 FT but went undetected the until 1;000 FT; about 7 KTS below VRef; and during recovery the aircraft went above glideslope and finally landed long.
Date: 202002
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B787-900
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Second aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Relief Pilot; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Cleared to push at ZZZ. ATC taxi instructions were to follow narrow body and proceed for [Runway] XXR. In the right turn we observed a B777 taxiing eastbound on B. We immediately stopped taxi; however Aircraft Y did not and they continued to taxi on a collision course with our aircraft. We yelled on GND (Ground) freq for Aircraft Y to stop and they complied. Subsequently; and unbelievably; GND instructed them to continue taxiing to which a clear collision would occur. They began to taxi forward and we again had to yell on GND freq for them to stop. We were then in very close proximity with neither aircraft could move. We called GND and OPS. A tug was sent out to push us back onto C. Proceeded without further incident. Ground Controller acknowledged his mistake several times while taxiing out.


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


Synopsis: B787 flight crew reported a near collision with a B777 on a taxiway.
Date: 201709
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ATL.Airport, GA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ATL
ATC / advisory: TRACON A80
Second aircraft: MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We were assigned 210 speed 2.5 miles behind a MD-80 cleared for a visual approach in ATL. We got a wake turbulence event; recovered and continued. ATC asked our speed. We said 185; but did not report wake turbulence because of busy radios. We landed as preceding aircraft was clearing the runway. On a visual approach we accept separation and wake turbulence responsibility; and I am aware of flying assigned speeds to help their reduced separation. I found that reporting wake turbulence to ATC is required at a RECAT airport. I recommend that three miles be minimum spacing and that ATL should use their south runway more to handle their traffic load.


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


Synopsis: B737-800 flight crew reported encountering wake turbulence in trail of an MD80 on approach to ATL.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On departure we performed a rejected takeoff due to pack one fail message at approximately 40 kts. Message on EICAS. Pack one fail.




Synopsis: First Officer reported receiving a Pack failure EICAS message; resulting in a rejected takeoff at 40 kts.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: APU
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Workload; Distraction; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We were on with approach in the final segment of our flight from to ZZZ. Approach had cleared us down to 6;000 feet and as we were passing through 10;000 I started the APU in anticipation of deplaning at a hard stand.  As I started the APU I picked up the checklist to finish the approach check and when I glanced back at the EICAS I noticed the APU had hung around 55%. As I reached up and pressed the stop button the APU fire warning appeared. We were approximately 10 minutes from landing and were briefed and set up for the visual landing into ZZZ. As I discussed the situation with the First Officer I ran the QRH APU Fire In-flight checklist. At the completion of the checklist all indications showed the fire had been extinguished.  I decided that we would continue into ZZZ. The First Officer prompted me to advise the Tower; I then declared an emergency and had Tower scramble Fire and Rescue. I also advised the Flight Attendant of the situation.  The aircraft was exhibiting no problems and we were anticipating on a normal landing; but I wanted her ready to evacuate if need be.  Tower cleared us for XXR and we landed normally and pulled off onto the taxiway.  The First Officer requested the fire trucks to inspect our tail section for any sign of smoke or fire; while they did so he advised the passengers of the situation explaining the presence of the airport fire personnel to allay any concern they may have. We were given the all clear and taxied to the gate without incident and the passengers deplaned.I would suggest in this situation; stay calm and run the appropriate QRH.  We did so and the problem was rectified rather quickly. Make sure there is an environment where open communication flows freely so that everyone is on the same page.




Synopsis: Following an APU air start before landing; an EMB-145 APU Fire Warning alerted with the APU RPM hung at 55%; so an emergency was declared; the warning ceased when the QRH was completed and after landing no sign of a fire was found.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: APA.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D APA
ATC / advisory: Tower APA
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Chart Or Publication; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Take-off clearance referred to 'KOA Antenna'.  I saw antennas off the end of the runway; and thought they were the intended landmark.  Climbing straight out towards the antennas; the controller got upset that I wasn't 'remaining west of Parker Road'; so I initiated a turn to the left to try to remain west of Parker Road (a prominent highway); but this upset him more; so I turned right and flew southeast; west of Parker Road.  I later determined that the 'KOA Antenna' refers to a 672 foot AM radio tower located southwest of the town of Parker.  I was given a number; and I called the Tower upon landing. I was told 'no deviation would be filed'; and had a discussion about not accepting a clearance when I was unclear about the instructions.  This was my first time flying into Centennial Airport.  It was very busy. Take-away: Don't accept a clearance based on local landmarks when operating at an airport for the first time. The KOA tower is not charted on the TAC chart or the FLY chart; or the sectional. It is also not discussed in any web pages associated with APA. I had researched the destination; but was caught flat footed when they gave me the clearance; and assumed the antennas I was looking at were the intended landmark.  Bad assumption.




Synopsis: Single Private Pilot reported unable to find the tower location on charts referred to by the ATC controller.