elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202012
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: XNA.Tower, AR
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 C XNA
ATC / advisory: Tower XNA
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: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On [a] flight to XNA we were cleared for the visual traffic pattern to land Runway 16. The Captain as the pilot flying had properly briefed the visual approach; to include the obstacles in the vicinity and highest obstacle on the approach plate. On right base; the Captain turned autopilot off with flaps 3 and gear down. I announced visual contact/no factor on the highest obstacles out the right window - a set of towers. We continued to slow and configure for landing and maintain an altitude of more than 1;000 ft. AGL. We received a caution from the GPWS; followed by a PULL UP verbal command. The Captain took the appropriate actions and immediately increased the airplane's altitude. We were in daytime visual conditions; and in accordance with company policy; determined we were still in a safe position to stabilize and conduct a safe landing after clearing the obstacle. We finished the turn to final; configured the aircraft for flaps 5 landing; completed the before landing checklist; were fully stable by 1;000 ft. and in a safe position to land the aircraft. Upon landing; we debriefed the situation; reviewing the approach plate for any obstacles. At more than 1;000 ft. AGL and no visual contact with an obstacle; we were unsure why the GPWS gave us the PULL UP command; but agreed that it was the most appropriate and safest action to respond to the command as we didGPWS PULL UP verbal command resulted in appropriate action of increasing aircraft altitude.A visual traffic pattern is one of the most difficult approaches we fly. I would suggest additional training during initial and recurrent training on distances and altitudes for different types of visual traffic patterns. I will personally work to improve my awareness as the pilot flying to ensure 1;500 ft. AGL on downwind and the 3:1 descent path ratio throughout the visual traffic pattern. I will review my flying skills to ensure I am flying this way as well. While I believe we took the appropriate action both during the event and after in the debrief; I will use this as a learning experience to ensure I am always a safe and skilled pilot.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported receiving a GPWS 'Pull Up' warning on a visual approach to XNA.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: PHL.Airport, PA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp PHL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: As the captain taxing the aircraft; I had to yield to a speeding catering truck. The truck looked freshly painted; Eastbound on the outer road parallel to taxi-way 'Juliet'; accelerated to a speed I would estimate at 60 m.p.h. seemingly in an attempt to out-speed my aircraft approaching the roadway and lined up with gate. This acceleration began near ramp spot '4' as my aircraft was taxing across ramp spot '7' with aircraft lights on. Again; noticing the accelerating truck; I slowed the aircraft to nearly a stop to avoid any impact with the truck.The truck driver seemed to notice my aircraft taxiing after clearing runway 27R on high speed taxiway K-4; decided to accelerate to a very high speed; and ultimately succeeded in beating the aircraft as the truck traveled on the outer roadway heading Eastbound. It was very clear the driver was intending on 'beating' the aircraft... not obeying the full 'Stop' points on the roadway either. The ground crew was in position for aircraft receipt; however; not stopping vehicular traffic such as the catering truck on the outer roadway and not sure if this is their responsibility. A call to our operations tower was made once the aircraft was safely parked at the gate and a description of the scenario and the truck were given. Thank you to our OPS Tower team for following up in an attempt to locate the driver of catering truck.Consider reminding and briefing all crews driving vehicles on the ramp to yield to aircraft. What is being missed from my experiences is adherence to the rule that a moving aircraft always has the 'right-of-way'...we should all know this and operate in full compliance. Not so much because it is the rule but much more so because of the potential consequences of injury to people and to our capitol. Consider a zero tolerance policy for unyielding company vehicles; involve our vendors and contract workers as well. As a pilot; that operates flights in and out of PHL; the incidence of unyielding vehicles to aircraft and therefore potential for personal injury and damage to equipment is expanding and occurring more and more often. Personal injury to people and damage to very expensive capitol such as our aircraft is preventable. Safety is synonymous with preventing personal injury as well as protecting revenue.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reports slowing down to avoid hitting a speeding catering truck; while approaching his gate in PHL.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SEA.Airport, WA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Widebody Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B SEA
ATC / advisory: Tower SEA
Second aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: At 3000 feet on approach to 16L at SEA received TA with a 737 on approach to 16R. At 2000 feet received an RA. Executed RA 'descend' mode. 'Clear of conflict' at 1400 feet. Landing uneventful. After the event I called the Seattle Tower and asked why we received an RA. The Seattle Tower said this is quite common on VFR days because the runways are so close together. The Tower said they would check with their Approach Radar and find out why they put both airplanes so close together. [Suggest] better separation of aircraft on VFR days.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported receiving an RA on approach to SEA Runway 16L from a 737 on approach to Runway 16R.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Aircraft: B747-400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Speedbrake/Spoiler
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Part of Number 6 spoiler departed Aircraft X at some point between ZZZ and ZZZZ. Some damage to L/H inboard fore flap; spoiler beyond repair. Discovered upon walk around inspection after landing ZZZZ. Aircraft X went A.O.G.




Synopsis: Maintenance Technician discovered part of spoiler missing on B747-400 during post flight inspection.
Date: 201402
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Human-Machine Interface; Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While being vectored to final; ATC gave us an intercept heading with clearance to intercept the localizer course. The PF (Pilot Flying) instructed me to arm the localizer. I responded that we needed to be in NAV before arming the localizer because of the strong overshooting winds (42 knots at 4;000 FT MSL). PF selected NAV and then I armed the localizer for him as he commanded a clean up item for the FMS. I saw that NAV/LOC had both armed and went heads down to clean up the FMS. After cleaning up the FMS; I looked up to see the airplane starting a left-hand turn away from the runway and immediately instructed the PF to turn back towards the runway. I also glanced at the PFD and noticed we were now in heading mode (no NAV or LOC armed/selected). The result was an overshoot of the final approach course. I instructed him to be aggressive in getting back over to final as we received a follow-on intercept heading from ATC. I saw no conflicts on the TCAS. Selecting NAV and then LOC was indeed needed; but the FMS needed to be cleaned up prior to selecting these modes. By selecting them first and then cleaning up the FMS; I may have inadvertently put us in heading. Also; the FO needed to monitor our lateral mode and be ready for any reversions or changes to that mode. When the plane attempts to do something we don't want it to do; the PF needs to turn the autopilot off immediately and put the airplane in the correct position.As PM; I should have instructed the PF to begin his turn to final instead of going heads down to clean up the FMS or instructing him which modes to select; then debrief later. FMS clean up should take place well before the intercept to final and as PF; I should have been more aggressive in making that happen earlier. Anytime I see a strong overshooting wind to parallel runways; I instruct the PF to select NAV then LOC for the intercept. I will always instruct them to do it now for every intercept; regardless of winds or runway configuration.




Synopsis: MD11 flight crew overshot the LOC course due to strong crosswind and FMS being in heading mode.
Date: 201403
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: FNT.Airport, MI
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E FNT
ATC / advisory: TRACON FNT
Aircraft component: Navigation Database
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: ATC cleared us to cross QUBEE at 11;000. We selected 11;000 in the window and FMC and let VNAV descend on profile. Around 18;000 we switched to Approach who gave us 7;000; which we put in the window and deleted the 11;000 in FMC. We then descended in Level Change as a bit high for visual profile. Approaching QUBEE; it was the last point in the FMC under XXXFNT01 profile; the Captain had the First Officer ask for heading out of QUBEE. Approach responded direct FNT which agreed with the flight plan. We added that point; verbalized; verified; and monitored LNAV to FNT. Rest of flight was uneventful.As far as we were concerned; all altitudes were complied with and as we asked two to three miles before QUBEE. We flew correct route to FNT. Tower wanted us to call regarding QUBEE. We called Flight Operations; who talked with ATC; who agreed no altitude violation occurred. [They need to [m]ake sure Approach states 'comply with previous restriction' if they want 11;000 [at QUBEE].


Second narrative: The last fix on the [company stored] route is QUBEE. When we were close to QUBEE; we asked for a heading since there was a discontinuity after that fix. ATC instructed us to go direct FNT. After we landed; they gave us a number to call. We actually flew the intended route and went direct FNT after QUBEE so there wasn't a deviation. ATC said that several crews had asked the similar question and they just wanted to clear up what our crews were expected to do once over QUBEE.


Synopsis: Confusion reigned between ATC and the flight crew of a B737NG with respect to both track and altitude as the flight approached its destination. An FMC stored company route which ended at a fix prior to the destination airport was cited as a contributing factor.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: HPN.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Baron 55/Cochise
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D HPN
ATC / advisory: Tower HPN
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Object; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On final approach to Runway 29. Hit top of trees approximately 1/8 mile short of landing threshold. There is no VASI or other glide slope guidance to a displaced threshold runway. Minor damage to r/h wing and landing light.




Synopsis: BE55 pilot reports hitting trees during a night visual approach to Runway 29 at HPN. Runway has a 1300 foot displaced threshold and no PAPI or REIL lights.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DCA.Airport, DC
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground DCA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Pushed from Gate 39 to spot 6/7. Pushed into area where there was a large rut in asphalt. Could not power out with normal thrust and also had airplane and crew behind me. Called Operations/Ground for help on whether aircraft was in rut or stuck brake. Ground crew came to jet and said I was in rut; rut is well known in this ramp area by Operations/ground crew/ATC. Ground crew returned to gate to coordinate tow. ATC/Ground coordinated aircraft behind me to return to gate and cleared area behind me so I could increase power to get out of rut. Managed to get out of the rut with extra thrust. Told Operations we wouldn't need tow and then discovered communications door was not closed. Taxied off taxiway and Operations coordinated crew to come out and close door. 45 minutes from push to takeoff because of all the above issues.Suggest annotations in Company pages of Jeppesen about rut. Suggest training for push crews and ATC of where to place aircraft to avoid rut. If possible; repair the rut! Discourage use of extra power to get out of rut... My biggest concern. This is where I see someone and/or equipment getting hurt/damaged.




Synopsis: B737 Captain Pilot reported being stuck in a large rut in the asphalt which required extra thrust to get out of.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZDV.ARTCC, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class A ZDV; Class B DEN; Class E ZDV
ATC / advisory: Center ZDV; TRACON D01; Tower DEN
Aircraft component: ADS-B (Automatic Dependent Surveillance - Broadcast)
Component problem: Failed
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: Distraction; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Aircraft; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: According to ATC 5G interference is causing GPS and ADS-B anomalies around DEN.  We lost GPS-L; GPS-R; and had an XPNDR FAIL light immediately after takeoff.  GPS-L returned and XPNDER FAIL extinguished after passing FL250 at 90 nautical miles east of DEN.  GPS-R returned after passing FL260 at 103 nautical miles east of DEN.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported interference on the ADS-B and GPS while departing Denver. Reportedly; ATC advised the crew of 5G interference in the area.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: JVY.Airport, IN
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class G JVY
ATC / advisory: CTAF JVY
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Takeoff
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Doing a touch and go in Aircraft X on Runway 36 with student; was about to rotate when Aircraft Y touched down about 200 ft behind. Multiple aircraft witnessed it. No collision occurred. Pilot of Aircraft Y ignored radio calls from other pilots after landing.




Synopsis: C-172 Flight Instructor reported noticing another aircraft landing on same runway 200 ft behind.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Corporate
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
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The mission was a short flight. Aircraft was level at 3;000 feet after initial climb when clearance was received to climb to 5;000 feet.  I thought I heard 9;000 feet and both of us failed to confirm with each other due to short communication from person in jump seat.  I began a rather aggressive climb to exit the turbulence and detected command bars moving downward as I passed 5;100 feet.  I reduced power and returned to assigned altitude while verifying clearance.  Aircraft reached 5;450 feet.  Total time above 5;000 was approximately 8-10 seconds.  No communication from ATC or action required.Due to COVID-19 slowdown I had not flown in 4 weeks and my last flight before that was 5 weeks before that.  Clearly flight discipline suffered from lack of recent experience and teamwork.  I allowed a distraction to prevent me from completing an altitude readback with PNF and neither one of us performed the '1;000 feet to go' call prior to reaching assigned altitude.




Synopsis: Corporate Captain reported an altitude deviation during climb and cited lack of flying as a contributing factor.