elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Having not been airborne in a couple of months; I decided some instrument approach practice was a good idea in VMC. My initial plan was an RNAV approach at ZZZ. But a late airplane switch put me in an airplane with only ILS capability so I decided to do the ILS approach at ZZZ1. This put me in busy ZZZ2 airspace. While practicing an ILS approach to ZZZ1 under the hood; ZZZ2 Approach was very busy. I set up the radio for ZZZ1 Tower in the secondary and double checked it per the approach chart. When handed over to ZZZ1 Tower; I switched the frequency and called the Tower with my position. I then was very busy keeping the needles centered. The air was a bit bumpy and I had not been flying since the COVID-19 outbreak so was very busy and focused. I was doing an OK job with the navigation but didn't have much bandwidth for anything but the needles and pre-landing checks.When I didn't hear from Tower I thought it was odd but I was busy so just called for a low approach. After the go-around; I came back up on Approach frequency and the Controller said I had not contacted the Tower. I said I called them. Then I checked the frequency again. I had set .0X instead of .X. I had even checked it 3 times before the switch and again at the switch and didn't catch the error. The second error was not confirming contact with the Tower and confirming landing clearance. Since the Approach Controller was very busy I cancelled approach practice and did some VFR landing practice. I need practice and will take an instructor with me next flight.




Synopsis: Pilot reported being switched from Approach to Tower; but dialed incorrect frequency resulting in a go-around.
Date: 201403
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Other Preflight planning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Airport; Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We were once again pressed for time by the allotment of a 45 minute [show time] for an enroute segment of a trip; after a layover; to arrive at the airport; negotiate security; proceed to Operations to do the flight planning; and then to arrive at the airplane; push passengers out of the way who are already well into the boarding process; in order to get on the aircraft; do all the FAA and company mandated preflight duties; and be ready to push on time. We were not on time; as is often the case with this new planned time for enroute segments. It is not enough time to safely perform all the preflight duties required. This is pilot-pushing of the worst kind; pressing pilots to rush through their preflight planning; duties; aircraft set-ups; briefings; etc.; rather than complete a thoughtful; methodical; conscientious and thorough performance of these activities. The limited amount of time now allotted is unsafe; and creates a major threat prior to the airplane ever getting into the air. Missed switch positions? Rapid checklists? Shallow briefings? Confusion? Cutting corners? These are all part and parcel of an inadequate amount of time to execute preflight duties; and are happening on every flight segment of a trip; after a layover. Often during weekdays at major hubs after a driver has had to negotiate heavy traffic; there isn't even 45 minutes available upon arrival at the airport. In this case; we arrived at the curb with 30 minutes before push. Airline crew security line was shut down; so we had to proceed through normal security; and I arrived at the airplane after procuring the flight papers with about 10 minutes before push time. All the passengers were already boarded; and naturally we left about 12 minutes late.




Synopsis: B757 Captain believes that a 45 minute show time after a layover is not sufficient to adequately preflight the aircraft and depart on time.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: RPM/N1/N2/Etc Indication
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Time Pressure; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During the take-off roll or just after departing the surface of Runway XX; the engine began to not develop full power; RPM's were fluctuating between 2000 and 2200. The take-off roll was sluggish; but not excessive. Upon noting the decreased engine performance; decision was made to abort the take-off and land on the remaining surface. We advised ATC. The subsequent descent and landing were un-eventful. Upon exiting the runway; I requested and was granted clearance for a high speed taxi on an adjacent taxi-way that was clear of traffic. I performed this high speed taxi at full power for a few seconds and noted similar indications; RPM's fluctuated between 2100 and 2300. Oil pressure; oil temperature; and cylinder head temperature were normal. Oil was observed at 10 quarts during the pre-flight. Pre-flight and run-up were completed with a few slight abnormalities.The engine start was difficult and priming was required. A normal start in this aircraft doesn't require priming beyond a couple pumps of the throttle. However; the primer plunger was needed to start the engine in this case. The weather was cool in the morning and the aircraft had not flown. During run-up; the carburetor heat check produced RPM's barely 100 lower than without carburetor heat. After run-up; the engine idled at a much higher RPM than usual (1000 vs. 650).

Callback: Reporter stated the propeller control cable slipped from mount.



Synopsis: C182 pilot reported that a partial loss of engine power on takeoff resulted in a precautionary landing.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: JLN.Airport, MO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower JLN
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Distraction; Confusion; Situational Awareness; Workload; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Airport; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: While taxiing on Taxiway E to Runway 31; I saw signage and verified the feature on the airport diagram as the ILS hold position. From the positioning of the other taxiway/runway hold position lines; I expected the hold position signage to be around the corner of the taxiway. I stopped the aircraft on the corner when no hold position signage was visually identified between the taxiway corner and Runway 13. I may have over-ran the hold position signage while checking the airport diagram to verify the ILS hold; aircraft instruments or watching for the traffic in the pattern since I do not remember passing one feature (signage) prior to rounding the corner. The aircraft was stopped in a position; more or less; in line with the taxiway where it was no hazard to aircraft in the pattern or on the runway. ATC waved off the aircraft in the pattern that had turned on final per policy. ATC reported the stopped aircraft was in-line with the church across the highway which verifies the location on the corner at the end of the taxiway. Contributing factors [were]: pilot performance; failure to see signage most likely due to other piloting related tasks; i.e.; checking airport diagrams; instrument scans; and visual ID of traffic in pattern -- distraction. Corrective action: better scanning technique [and] familiarity with airport quirks (non-standard items). Pilot performance: good judgment in stopping aircraft in a safe location after identification that the hold position line was not where it was expected to be in the standard configuration. Contributing factor: Taxiway/runway hold position and signage not in a standardized (expected) location compared to other runways/taxiways. Corrective action: Maintain standardized taxi/runway configurations as much as possible. Publish non-standard configurations in facility directories/publications.




Synopsis: A pilot reported a runway incursion at JLN Runway 31 after failing to recognize the runway critical hold line because of the line's distance from the runway approach end.
Date: 202107
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Autopilot
Component problem: Improperly Operated; Malfunctioning
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
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Software and Automation; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: I was the Pilot Flying on the ZZZZZ 1 Arrival into ZZZ. ZZZ TRACON asked us what approach we wanted to [Runway] XXR into ZZZ. We requested the RNAV visual to [Runway] XXR. We were cleared to 7;000 feet and cleared to intercept the final approach course for [Runway] XXR after ZZZZZ. We thought we were cleared for the approach so we set the next altitude of 4;000 feet in past ZZZZZ.  After crossing ZZZZZ the aircraft started descending to 4;000 feet. ZZZ TRACON informed us of a Low Altitude Alert and had us climb to 7;000 feet; then he Immediately cleared us for the visual. Told us to take down the phone number for possible pilot deviation.


Second narrative: Both our first time to ZZZ.  We were cleared to intercept final segment. We said to each other; 'ZZZZZ is IAF;' and then we determined it was the final course we were supposed to intercept.  We should have asked ATC to repeat; but we put 4;000 feet in the autopilot; as in VNAV; to continue published approach; but 7;000 feet was still our clearance limit.  On the published segment it continued down; inside ZZZZZ; below 7;000 feet.  ATC queried us at 6;000 feet and told us to climb.  We had the field in sight and ATC then cleared us immediately for the visual.I was so focused on terrain and being in VNAV. As Pilot Monitoring; I should have questioned the clearance and any confusion we had. I am sure what we heard; thought we heard and what ATC said were all different.


Synopsis: B737-700 flight cew reported a low altitude alert and initiated a Go Around at an airport that both crew members were flying into for the first time.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SR20
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Parked
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
Aircraft component: Rudder Control System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi; Pre-flight
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Flight controls malfunction. During preflight was advised by another instructor that Aircraft X had this problem few days ago. While taxiing out of the parking spot we proceed to verify the rudders and brake system and immediately notice that something was wrong. When rudders was applied the control yoke moved by itself completely to the same direction of the rudder pressure. I tried to move the yoke manually but if you keep the pressure on rudders the joke became stuck. I tried several times to both directions and every time rudder pressure existed the control yoke was stuck.




Synopsis: Instructor reported rudder and ailerons were binding and cross controlling and were found during preflight after being informed by another instructor of this problem occurring previously on the aircraft.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operating under: Part 91
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X ground looped as he attempted to depart Runway XX. I saw Aircraft X taxi onto Runway XX; but I did not see Aircraft X ground loop as I was continuing to scan down the runway along the departure path. After Ground Control advised Aircraft X was off of Runway XX on the south side; I advised all aircraft to go around. I then started sequencing all aircraft in the pattern to make a full stop landing on Runway XY or to depart the pattern.As I continued to clear aircraft to land; the CIC (Supervisor) advised me the field was now closed. Therefore; I had to advise aircraft that had previously called me inbound that they had to exit the airspace as the field was now closed. I wasn't expecting the field closure; and I am not sure if I was expected to have all of the aircraft exit ZZZ airspace. There has not been time today to confirm what the expectation was as far as aircraft in the pattern and / or inbound.Ground loops can be accidents if perhaps an aircraft has a prop strike or ends up with significant damage. However; please clarify if the expectation is to close the field even for ground loops that may not necessarily result in significant damage.




Synopsis: Local Controller reported an aircraft ground loop led to an airport closure.
Date: 202006
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Company Policy; Human Factors; Staffing; Procedure
Primary problem: Staffing

Narrative: Inbound voice calls coming from aircraft SATCOM systems ring to several dedicated inbound extensions. These lines are divided up among several international desks so that one extension will ring at its assigned desk by default. While these are the default settings; any Dispatcher can modify their phone's settings to make any number of the extensions ring to that phone. These modifications will be restored to the default anytime the phone is logged out.While working the charter desk; I set up my phone to monitor all of the inbound SATCOM lines. Throughout the shift I noticed multiple inbound calls ringing with nobody picking them up. Each time I would pick up the call and transfer it to the appropriate Dispatcher.The reason the calls were going unanswered was that no other dispatchers were monitoring these extensions. Many of the desks that have been closed due to COVID-19 are desks that normally monitor a SATCOM line. I advised the Chief Dispatcher that the SATCOM lines need to be reallocated to the desks that remain open so that they can be continuously monitored. He advised me that this would have to be done by a Person X via coordination with the phone support specialists. The chief advised Person X that this needs to be done. In the meantime we have no official procedure to monitor these phone lines. I continue to monitor the lines during my shift and advise others to do the same.The Chief Dispatcher did advise me that when calls go unanswered; they eventually forward to the Chief desk. While this is a good fallback option; it causes unneeded delay for crews that could be calling with urgent needs.




Synopsis: Dispatcher reported problems with the SATCOM lines going unanswered due to COVID-19 staffing levels.
Date: 202104
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Recip Eng
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Distraction; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Exited Penetrated Airspace
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Picked up newly acquired aircraft at ZZZ1 [Airport]. Filed an IFR flight plan to ZZZ2 [Airport]. Prior to departure I tried the ZZZ Approach frequency on the ground to activate my flight plan. There was no response (probably no GCO). On departure I called ZZZ Approach to activate flight plan. ZZZ [Approach] advised they had no flight plan on file; I requested in-air filing. ZZZ [Approach] notified [me] they were understaffed due to COVID and couldn't help. Advised contact with ZZZ1 Approach. ZZZ1 Approach said they couldn't provide services and instructed me to remain clear of Class Bravo. I misread the new-to-me GPS and entered Class B airspace. I was monitoring XYX.Z; ZZZ1 [Approach] called; vectored me out of Class B and advised ATC phone number to call.There were several contributors to the incursion but ultimately it was avoidable by taking different action when my flight plan was not available - landing and re-filing. Contributing factors included (1) unavailable flight plan; (2) familiarity with the equipment on board this aircraft; and (3) pilot's expectation of receiving a clearance in unfamiliar airspace (95%+ flights are conducted under an IFR plan ).




Synopsis: GA pilot reported not being able to activate an IFR Flight plan due to ATC not having it on file.  An adjacent ATC facility could not provide help either.  Pilot also reported entering Class Bravo airspace unintentionally after misreading the aircraft's new GPS system.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Fuel System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown
Contributing factors: Human Factors; MEL; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I received a call for an MEL regarding a 'fuel heat on' annunciation. The Mechanic was trying to reset an indication that came on at the gate as reported by the crew. I thought what was being described was an indication issue and suggested the fuel heat annunciation MEL which did not require Dispatch. Upon reviewing the log entry on my screen I called to see if the Mechanic had verified that the valve was operating because the MEL would have to be changed and the valve wired closed if the valve inoperative. The MEL has no 'M' (Maintenance) procedures for checking this only 'O' (Operational) procedures for alternate temperature indicating. The aircraft was later released for flight and suffered a diversion and in flight shut down due to high oil temperature.




Synopsis: Air carrier Maintenance Mechanic reported issuing an incorrect MEL to aircraft.