elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201709
Location: OAK.Airport, CA
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground OAK
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Crew planned for a departure from Runway 29; the temporary runway; formerly Taxiway Whiskey; from Taxiway Uniform to expedite departure. The performance software directed a flaps 10 takeoff with normal bleed configuration. We completed the Before Taxi Checklist and were directed to taxi to Runway 30 at Uniform; which was a standard clearance for an expedited departure prior to the advent of temporary Runway 29. The FO repeated 'Company Flight XXX; taxi to Runway 30 at Uniform' and I said 'taxi to Runway 30 at Uniform.'This series of COMM errors led to a taxi expectation bias. I; from habit; continued rolling down Uniform at approximately 20 knots. There was no traffic on final for Runway 29. I called for the Before Takeoff Checklist and slowed down to approximately 10 knots to complete the checklist. I did not notice a definitive hold short line at Taxiway Uniform prior to Runway 29. Just as we completed the checklist; my FO said; 'Whoa; whoa; did we just cross the hold short line for 29?'We had; indeed; as it is not well marked with signs; wig-wags or a line; and my old habit pattern was to taxi to Runway 30 at Uniform; looking for those familiar markings. By now our speed was about two knots. Before we could say anything to Tower; Tower cleared us for takeoff at Runway 29; but the runway incursion had already occurred. I lined up the aircraft with a slow turn to line up on centerline and we proceeded to takeoff. There was strong expectation bias given the COMM between ATC and between Crew Members. That; and a lack of strong hold short markings for Runway 29 at Uniform; led to this runway incursion.The temporary Runway 29 in OAK needs better signage and markings to help prevent this incident. The hold short line for Runway 29 at Uniform must be more visible to prevent future occurrences. This is a non-standard runway configuration; and as such; it will be a hazard whilst construction on Runway 30 continues.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported a runway incursion at OAK airport on the temporary Runway 29 due signage issues.
Date: 202004
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB-505 / Phenom 300
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Aeroplane Flight Control
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Captain; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon takeoff; experienced unusually strong flight control resistance and difficulty maintaining pitch. Unable to maintain altitude. Suspected flight control malfunction or trim malfunction. Upon engaging Auto Pilot; saw AP TRIM warning CAS message and disabled AP. [Advised ATC] because I was unable to maintain altitude and returned to the airport. Landed safely.




Synopsis: EMB-505 Single Pilot reported flight control malfunction on takeoff resulting loss of pitch control; resulting in a return to departure airport.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Staffing; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: I'm currently a line holder on the afternoon shift. Today due to the Company's inability to appropriately staff the office I was scheduled to work the first hour on Desk X and then move to the ATC Coordinator Position when another afternoon shift Dispatcher arrives an hour after me. When I accept the shift on Desk X I have approximately 6 releases due in the first hour of the shift. At this time I am also signing into the applications on the desk in order to maintain situational awareness and begin my shift briefing. Due to the Company not being able to adequately staff the office and thus having me move to the ATC Coordinator position after the first hour this does not give me sufficient time to comply with FAR 121.599 prior to having to accomplish these releases before I am expected to complete a shift turnover to the oncoming Dispatcher. This situation also sets both dispatchers up to fail as I don't feel I was adequately self-briefed to provide a comprehensive shift turnover to the incoming Dispatcher. At the time there was significant weather impact at a Mid West airport with thunderstorms. When the afternoon shift Dispatcher arrived I had not been able to complete the releases on the worksheet in the one hour which now puts this Dispatcher behind on the workload when they assume operational control of the shift.




Synopsis: A Dispatcher reported that Company policy has their Dispatch Center under staffed and unable to complete the FAR dispatch duties particularly at shift change and brief times.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Small Transport
Aircraft component: Air/Ground Communication
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: After following two other landing aircraft in the traffic pattern I completed an uneventful; full stop landing on runway 14. I then taxied via the parallel taxiway back to the departure end of runway 14 for another take-off. Holding short of the runway I completed my pre takeoff checklist; visually cleared the area and announced my intentions to depart runway 14 on the CTAF at this non-towered airport. After hearing no other local traffic; and clearing the area once again; I taxied onto the active runway 14 and began a routine takeoff.  During climb out I saw another aircraft crossing in front of me; from right to left; in a climb which had apparently departed runway 7 at the same time. I passed behind and below the departing aircraft. No evasive action was taken by either aircraft and horizontal distance was at least 500 feet. Neither aircraft heard the other's radio calls and; knowing the operator of the other aircraft; I suspect that we may have inadvertently blocked each other's transmissions by transmitting at the same time. Another factor is that the departure ends of these two runways are not visible to each other on the ground and; possibly; 2-way radio communications may have also been impaired due to obstacles (Trees; buildings; vehicles; etc.) between us. At the time of the occurrence wind direction was about 10 from 170 with visibility unrestricted and scattered clouds around 3;000 feet. My flashing beacon and landing light were on.Suggestions for avoiding future situations like this would be for aircraft conducting cross-wind operations to make multiple calls (e.g. taxiing to the x-wind runway; departing the x-wind runway; etc.); encourage operators to avoid using x-wind/non-favored runways and; perhaps; to have the airport operator/FAA conduct some ground tests to see if adequate radio reception is always possible on the ground between the various departure ends of the different runways.




Synopsis: A pilot departed CTAF Runway 14 after making the required communications and had an encounter with a light twin which departed crossing Runway 7. Both pilots stated the required communications were made.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZME.ARTCC, TN
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Icing; Cloudy
Aircraft: PA-34-200 Seneca I
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZME
ATC / advisory: Center ZME
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Aircraft X was IFR from ZZZ. The aircraft had just passed the ZZZ1 airport when I noticed that the aircraft had descended from its initial altitude of 4000 ft. to 3600 ft. and had continued to descend to 3400 ft. I issued a low altitude alert to the aircraft and advised that the aircraft climb to 4000 ft. The pilot then told me that he was heading back to ZZZ. I asked the pilot for the reason for the change in destination and he told me that he was icing up and he did not want to climb back into the clouds where he picked up ice. The aircraft continued to fluctuate in altitude. I advised him that my minimum safe altitude was 3700 ft. The aircraft eventually leveled off at 4000 ft. and went back to ZZZ.




Synopsis: Memphis Center Controller reported an aircraft that descended below the Minimum Safe Altitude due to icing.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 402/402C/B379 Businessliner/Utiliner
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Rudder
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Instructor; Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Trainee
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: After landing; the pilot flying taxied off the runway and proceeded to taxi straight down to the departure end of the runway. Out of nowhere; the airplane suddenly started to turn to the right. The student commented to me that 'I can't straighten out the nose.' I said 'I have the controls.' The student released the controls and I tried to get the airplane back on the taxiway center line; but at this point the right rudder was deflected full right. The airplane was on the grass. Then; I felt the nose dip down and collapse. The prop struck the ground and that's when we shut down both engines before any further damage. We then proceeded to secure and exit the airplane.


Second narrative: During the taxi [with] both engines [at] idle; suddenly the plane started turning to the right. I pushed the left rudder but the plane kept turning. I told the instructor that I can't control the plane. He took the control and also didn't manage to stop the turn. The plane turned to the grass and then the nose gear collapsed and the propellers struck the ground. We shut down both engines; secured the plane; and exited.


Synopsis: C402B instructor and student pilot reported a loss of directional control during taxi that resulted in nose gear collapse and a prop strike.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B787-900
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower LAX
Second aircraft: B747 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: We landed (B-787-9) behind a 747 on LAX Runway 24R. They cleared at Taxiway AA and were told to hold short of RWY 24L at AA. We had briefed a plan to clear at AA also. As we landed and were rolling out; I was not sure; visually; if we rolled out to the end; since the area between the two runways was occupied; if our wingtip would clear the 747's tail. As it was we slowed to a taxi speed before AA; and about that time the Tower cleared them to cross 24L and then cleared us to follow them and cross 24L also. The reason I am filling out this report is to ask for some guidance as to whether these taxiways and runways have been measured to assure clearance for landing aircraft when a wide body is holding between the Runways; 24L and 24R on Taxiway AA. The previous week; I landed our B-787 and cleared Runway 24R at AA. Behind us; on final; was an A-380 'Super'; While we were holding short on AA of Runway 24L; with that A-380 cleared to land behind us and told to roll to the end; BB; the Tower called us and asked us to move up as close to the hold line as possible; I guess we were ten feet from that point. At that point; being at an angle; and not being able to see the runway behind us; I thought; wow; I hope that A-380 can clear our tail. It did and I could see them roll to the end. That was a 787 holding with an A-380 landing least week. This week it was a 747 holding and our 787 landing. Both times; I had no assurance that the landing aircraft could clear the tail of the aircraft holding between the runways at AA. That is what I am requesting from the [report] submission. The wing span of an A-380 is about 261 feet; so; if they were able to roll out past us the previous week; I guess our 787's wingspan of less than 200 feet would not have been an issue for the 747 holding; but; in that brief instant; I was not sure. I really don't like not being sure of something when I am flying an airplane. That is why I am asking for some measurements or engineering documentation; possibly done during the preparations made to ready LAX airport to handle the A-380's; to assure me that any heavy or super aircraft holding between the Runway 24's on Taxiway AA would have guaranteed clearance from another heavy or super landing on 24R.




Synopsis: 787 Captain reported upon landing at LAX that the holding area on TWY AA was occupied and was concerned their wingtip would not clear the tail of a 747 on AA; if they had to roll to the end.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
Aircraft component: APU
Component problem: Failed
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: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: MEL; Company Policy; Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: The APU had been written up a half dozen times prior to my trip ZZZ-ZZZ1. The ZZZ station guide clearly states that the APU must be operational. However; maintenance control with dispatch in tow scheduled this plane to operate in Middle East theater. I was not thoroughly briefed by maintenance with all the APU issues prior to departure. The start in ZZZ exposed a very hard electrical transfer that knocked off the APU generator. I questioned the issue with maintenance. Temperatures that day at ZZZ reached 46 degrees C while we were on the ramp. The APU failed 3 times. The ground power unit provided by the organization was useless and there where no other GPU available. Passengers had to sit in the dark plane with no air while we attempted to restore power to the airplane. ACARS comms do not reflect complete communication with dispatch. We were very very lucky to get one engine started.




Synopsis: Captain reported APU MEL issues caused operational issues during ground operations in overseas areas with excessive high temperatures.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: P50.TRACON, AZ
Aircraft: Small Transport
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Skydiving
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class B PHX
ATC / advisory: TRACON P50
Second aircraft: Large Transport
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Traffic Management
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working the TMC position. The arrival coordinator position was also combined to me and I was handling those duties during this period. I spoke with a coordinator for Aircraft X via telephone. During this time we discussed his request for a parachute simulation just east of PHX. My understanding was this was going to be a simulation run with three passes dropping streamers. I advised due to departure traffic there may be a delay for his requested time but felt confident I could work out this request within our facility and PHX Tower. Aircraft X was airborne around the coordinated time. We held the Aircraft X aircraft for approximately 30 minutes due to departure traffic off of PHX. I coordinated with the PHX TMC to stop departures to allow for Aircraft X to make his run. Aircraft X advised our controller he would only need one run which worked out better for both P50 and PHX. After departures were stopped Aircraft X started his run. Once over the target Aircraft X advised his run was complete and would RTB [Return To Base]. Once Aircraft X was no longer in the departure corridor I released departures at PHX. Shortly after this; Aircraft Y started his roll and climb out. Tower called and advised Aircraft Y was making an immediate right turn to avoid parachute jumpers just east of Phoenix. I acknowledged this and advised the south departure controller. I also advised the FLM at this time. These jumps should be coordinated well in advance. Going forward I will need to verify that there are or are not jumpers during coordination.




Synopsis: P50 TMC describes a situation where an aircraft is supposed to make three runs over a target; then when airborne changes its plan and drops skydivers unknown to ATC. Departing traffic has to deviate around falling skydivers.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citationjet (C525/C526) - CJ I / II / III / IV
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: [We were] on an IFR flight; while in descent from 34000 ft to 31000 ft; the right engine (copilots side) rolled back to cut off. The manufacturers checklist was consulted; procedures followed and right engine was successfully restarted. The flight proceeded to destination with no other amoralities. Maintenance has been consulted and is assessing the issue.


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


Synopsis: Cessna Citation flight crew reported they had an engine roll back to cut off during descent.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Three hour delay out of ZZZ-ZZZ1 due to navigation satellite issues. ATC cleared the flight Direct ZZZ1. A turn was made toward what we thought was ZZZ1 but discovered a discrepancy between MFD Map and VOR signal. Flying in green needles we were working at figuring out the issue. At that time ATC queried our heading and assigned us vectors to ZZZ1. Vectors were requested the remainder of the flight. Training for proper operation of avionics when GPS INOP.




Synopsis: CRJ-700 pilot reported navigation satellite issues.