elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DTW.Airport, MI
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Icing; Snow; Windshear; 1
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower DTW
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: DTW ATCT controllers stopped issuing 'RNAV to' takeoff clearances about a month ago. Instead; they are now providing a tower-assigned heading with all takeoff clearances; including to aircraft who are filed on the new RNAV SIDs out of DTW. DTW ATCT has decided to communicate this on the digital ATIS with a vague remark 'ROTG NOT IN EFFECT.' Almost nobody understands what this means at first glance; unless they ask. According to FAA Order 7340.2; ROTG means 'rotating;' which is not the intended use here. It would be nice if DTW ATCT would just spell out 'RNAV OFF THE GROUND NOT IN EFFECT' or better yet; to change that to 'EXPECT TOWER ASSIGNED HEADING' on the departure ATIS. The term 'RNAV off the ground' is not really well-known to most pilots. If they want to use the ROTG abbreviation; it would be nice to get it added to the aforementioned order.




Synopsis: Air carrier pilot reported confusion at DTW when the acronym ROTG was used in the ATIS.
Date: 202003
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DAL.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B DFW
ATC / advisory: TRACON D10
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: During arrival into the terminal area we were level at 5;000 feet. I saw on the TCAS traffic approaching us opposite direction 500 to 400 feet below I was looking to acquire it visually then it became yellow on the TCAS then it turned into an RA which directed me to maintain vertical speed. I disconnected the auto pilot climbed about 100 feet then saw the traffic pass just to my left and below then the TCAS said clear of conflict and I returned down to 5;000 feet and reengaged auto pilot. The First Officer was Pilot Monitoring and he immediately notified ATC of our response to an RA and our slight altitude deviation and also our return to our assigned altitude when clear of the conflict this was inside Class Bravo airspace there was no traffic advisory given by ATC.




Synopsis: An Air Carrier pilot reported ATC failed to advise them of traffic 400 to 500 feet below them and they responded to an RA for the traffic.
Date: 201510
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Galley Furnishing
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On descent the A Flight Attendant reported an acrid/electrical smell in the forward galley area. I instructed her to pull the galley circuit breakers; and I turned off the galley power on the flight deck. The odor seemed to subside/stabilize shortly after the flight attendant first reported it. An [ATC was advised] as a precaution; and we received vectors for a visual approach. This was opposite flow; and saved us several minutes.The fire crew met the aircraft for inspection. They said everything appeared normal. We proceeded to the gate without further incident. The fire crew followed us as a precaution. On arrival at the gate I checked the forward galley area; and only noticed a slight acrid odor. The fire crew gave us the all clear; and all passengers deplaned normally. Dispatch; Maintenance; and Operations were notified.It appeared a transformer was cracked behind the galley power control panel; nothing to prevent that. All crew performed/communicated well. We continued to reassess the situation all the way [to destination].




Synopsis: B737-700 Captain reported he was advised by a Flight Attendant of an electrical smell in the galley area. Power was cut off to the galley and a safe landing ensued.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 50
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-18/19 Super Cub
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I landed and on roll-out a gust from the left that I failed to anticipate or properly correct for sent the aircraft heading for the dirt on the left side of the runway. I tried to correct to the right using rudder and right brake. This resulted in a slow ground loop to the right. No damage was done and as the engine was still running I taxied off the runway and back to my hangar. The aircraft showed no signs of damage. An IA will do a thorough inspection later this week.I think a momentary lack of attention on my part during the landing phase in a tail wheel aircraft allowed side drift on touchdown causing the unstable roll out and subsequent ground loop. In addition; I was landing in the three point attitude and feel a wheel landing would have been more appropriate under the circumstances.




Synopsis: PA-18 pilot reported experiencing a ground loop after landing in gusty wind conditions.
Date: 202110
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Approaching ZZZ; we experienced an EGT FAIL on the #1 engine with erratic engine indications. We notified ATC of Aircraft status; gave soul count of XXX; fuel [remaining]; CFR (crash fire rescue equipment) to meet aircraft upon landing; and our desire to land on longer runway of XXL.  Flight Attendants were fully briefed on the situation. QRH pertaining to ENG FAIL complied with. First Officer (FO) maintained control of aircraft while Captain completed all checklists; briefings; and ATC coordination. At approximately 6;500 ft. MSL; all checklists were complete and appropriate data entered. Captain took control of the aircraft; as PF; to perform the single-engine approach and landing. Aircraft landed normally.  CFR circled aircraft to ensure all was well. Passengers briefed. Brake cooling module was performed. We waited the required XX minutes for cooling. Aircraft parked at the gate with normal Passenger deplanement. Captain met with ZZZ Maintenance. Captain performed a full Flight Attendant de-briefing.  Captain then called the ZZZ1 Chief Pilot on call; Maintenance; Supervisor; and Dispatch. Captain further met with the ZZZ Chief Pilot to complete debriefing. No further incident ensued.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported an EGT fail on the #1 engine and other erratic engine indications during approach. The flight continued to a single-engine approach and landing; with normal passenger deplanement.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: A80.TRACON, GA
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E A80
ATC / advisory: TRACON A80
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We were being vectored to final for Runway 10 in ATL. There was a lot of traffic and ATC pointed out the traffic we were to follow and asked us to report him in sight. We were never cleared to join final. As I was looking for the traffic; the First Officer stated that we needed to join final. I told him to query the Controller but there was too much radio congestion. Instead of risking creating conflicts with other traffic on other runways; we decided to join final without a specific clearance. The Approach Controller then issued a Visual Approach to 10. The Tower Controller asked us to slow down in that we had an overtake speed with reference to the preceding traffic. There were no further incidents. I do not believe there ever was a separation issue.When asked to find preceding traffic; I lost SA (Situational Awareness) as I tried to find the traffic. I am thankful for the First Officer who made me aware of the fact that we needed to join final. In the future; I will insure not to fixate on one specific task.


Second narrative: While being vectored for the Localizer to Runway 10 we were assigned a heading and altitude. As we began to fly through the Localizer I realized we weren't cleared to join. I knew this was a mistake and urged the Captain to join anyway. He began to join. While in the turn I queried ATC; who confirmed 'join the Localizer.' Had I not said something we would have continued on our heading and very likely created a conflict on one of the parallel runways. We did not do that; and we continued to a safe landing. I am not sure if ATC missed the call to join or we never heard it. Either way there was some confusion.


Synopsis: B737 Flight Crew reported being vectored for a visual approach to Runway 10 at ATL but never cleared for the approach. Upon localizer intercept the crew initiated a turn on their own as the clearance could not quickly be confirmed.
Date: 201705
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Golden Eagle 421
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Aircraft component: Normal Brake System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Ground Excursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Before the plane was started; brakes and lines were inspected fully. Before start; brakes were applied and engine start was done with full brakes. When I first started taxiing the aircraft from the general aviation terminal; brakes were used to reposition the plane from parking to the taxiway effectively. [Later I] started applying brakes and noticed there was no brake pressure on either left or right brake. Did notice that the right engine low hydraulic pump light had come on. Engines were at idle. The plane veered to the right and the right main wheel left the taxiway surface. Tried using differential thrust from the right engine to raise the wheel back to the taxiway. The right main was not coming back to the taxiway surface. I kept the plane controlled using power as to not strike a propeller into a taxi light. Once clearing the propellers from striking a taxi light I tried again to bring the plane back to the taxi area using power from the right engine. The plane did make it back to the taxiway and the left main came onto the surface without an issue; still having no brakes. Once I realized there were still no brakes; I closed throttles; mixtures; and secured plane and then called the Tower asking for assistance.


Second narrative: Everything was fine on taxi. As we approached the departure end of [the] runway; the Right Hydraulic Low annunciator light illuminated. As soon as it did; we began to brake but there were no brakes at all. Immediately I informed the copilot that there were no brakes on the left side and he immediately depressed his brake pedals to find that there were no brakes on that side as well. Could not get directional control with rudder pedals. Engines were at idle. Right main gear left taxiway and entered grass. Immediately we veered to right and all wheels left taxiway into grass. Copilot attempted to steer back onto taxiway using differential power but grass was saturated from rain and was unable to do so. We did get left main and nose back to the pavement but right main got stuck in mud.


Synopsis: C421 pilots reported complete brake failure during taxi that resulted in a taxiway excursion.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: RJJJ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B787 Dreamliner Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During cruise when the First Officer (FO) and I returned from our 1st break; we were informed by the Relief Pilot he discovered a conflict in our flight plan regarding the 180 minute ETP. The Flight plan states ETP/SUITABLE ENROUTE ALTERNATE DATA MEETS 180 MINUTE AREA OF OPERATIONS RULE. However further down in this section it indicates ENG OUT TIME FRM ETP XB01. This is 1 minute over the 180 minute rule.During our break the Relief Pilot contacted dispatch to rectified the problem. After several attempts dispatch sent a message 'IF THIS MAKES YOU MORE COMFORTABLE I ADD PKC... YOU ARE GOOD WITH THE ORG BUT AMND RLS TO ADD PKC TO ETP's'. This gave us an ETP time of XA29.The last message from dispatch was 'YOU WERE LEGAL TO BEGIN WITH... NEXT TIME DISCUSS IT BEFORE YOU DEPART'. Not what I was expecting to hear from dispatch. I'm not sure if I was legal to begin with. I did call dispatch before I left operations regarding fuel and our plan weight of 503042. No mention from dispatch about this conflict.I missed this conflict going over the flight plan. This will not happen again; now that its been brought to my attention that an error like this can happen. KUDOS to our Relief Pilot who caught the error. It apparently had happened to him once before causing a cancellation. We are getting conflicting information on the flight plan and this should be corrected.




Synopsis: B787 Captain is informed upon returning from break that the 180 minute ETP is actually one minute over 180 minutes and dispatch is contacted. Dispatch disagrees with the crews assessment but chooses an alternate within the 180 minute rule flight time.
Date: 201909
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working Gate XX and wanted to start loading flight XXXX. I noticed the outbound bags were near the loader; so I pushed and positioned the cart near the belt. After loading the flight; the Pilot told me that my cart bent the wick. I walked to the wing and noticed the rubber tip of my car bent the static wick. I then told my Lead; which called the Supervisor.




Synopsis: Ground crew member reported baggage cart contact; bent static wick of aircraft.
Date: 201812
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were cleared for the option number 2 behind another C172. King Air failed to contact Tower promptly at hand off from Center; claimed they were given the wrong frequency. We; myself and the student; didn't see the King Air when we turned final. Would have been at our 3 o'clock.As aircraft on the runway in front of us missed Taxiway; Tower instructed us to go around. After we initiated the go around we were instructed to stay low as King Air was behind/above us. We never saw the King Air until we were cleared to climb up to pattern altitude and the King Air had landed after making a left turn to base and final.Observer on the ground estimated clearance less than 100 feet.




Synopsis: Flight instructor reported they took evasive action to avoid mid air collision while on go-around.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: GFK.Tower, ND
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Airspace: Class D GFK
ATC / advisory: Tower GFK
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight; Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X initially called from the NW with just his callsign and nothing else. I told him to enter left downwind for Runway 35L; [and] say type landing. He responded '35L; [type aircraft].'I watched him the best I could; but it appeared he was entering the downwind. I had just asked for a local assist. Local 2 already had a local assist. The traffic volume was extremely high.[Four minutes later]; Aircraft X was opposite direction over the top of [RWY] 35L.I told him to turn west immediately and that he was over the runway. No readback; but he turned west.I then told him to turn south into the downwind. No readback; but he turned south.I sequenced him and cleared him to land. He read back; 'Traffic in sight' and nothing else.I then had to tell him to turn base. No readback; but he turned base.[Two minutes later] I told him to 'Turn right A4; contact Ground 124.57.' He responded 'A4.'This pilot should not be in an airplane. He was opposite direction over a runway in a completely saturated airspace. He does not understand how radio communication and read backs are supposed to work. I was not in position at the time; but when he was ready to leave the airport; he taxied to the runway without talking to ATC because the guy who filled his airplane with fuel said he 'was good to go.'This pilot is an accident waiting to happen.




Synopsis: GFK Tower Controller reported an unsafe pilot; who in the reporter's mind; should not be flying.