elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Baron 58/58TC
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airport; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Near destination airport the left main gear indication light failed to illuminate. Contacted Center and notified them of the problem and diverted to ZZZ where services were available. Contacted TRACON and notified them of the gear problem and was provided vectors to the Runway XX which I programmed into the GNS 530 for situational awareness; cleared for the Visual Approach and handed off to the tower which stated cleared to land. On right base requested lights turned up on the runway and observed the continuous green light come up very bright. Observed different intersecting lights at about 1 o'clock. Overheard controller tell another aircraft that Runway XX was closed. I asked the controller if I was lined up correctly because my GNS 530 indicated I was left of Runway XX on short final and he said affirmative. I landed on the taxiway. The supervising controller called the next day and we discussed the taxiway landing and why it happened. Supervisor indicated that the controller was inexperienced and had inadvertently turned off the lights for Runway XX and turned up the taxiway lights then confirmed that I was lined up properly.




Synopsis: Pilot reported or inadvertently landing on a taxiway. The Controller had turned off the runway lights and turned up the taxiway lights only.
Date: 202109
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: STS.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D STS
ATC / advisory: Tower STS
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; No Specific Anomaly Occurred Unwanted Situation
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: Incorrect DME Frequency Charted. Incorrect DME frequency ILS 32.During the ILS 32 approach it was noted the DME information was not displayed even though the charted frequency 110.85 was tuned.  The approach was abandoned and we landed using the RNAV approach.  I asked Ground Control about the frequency and he responded that 110.85 was the charted frequency.  Another pilot came on and said the correct DME frequency was 116.15.  We tuned this and began receiving DME information with the STS ident displayed on the PFD.  The Jeppesen 11-1 chart was just updated reflecting the frequency change for DME reception due to the STS VOR being decommissioned. This needs to be clarified as soon as possible.Coordinate with STS Airport and Jeppesen to issue chart with correct frequency.  Relay current information to other crews via established communication channels.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported a DME frequency error published on STS Jeppesen chart.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: DTS.Airport, FL
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: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D DTS
ATC / advisory: TRACON VPS
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was on initial climb out from DTS airport when I got a TCAS TA Alert. I was cleared to 1600 ft. by the Tower and was leveling off at that altitude when I saw another aircraft on TCAS about 1 nm from me; 500 ft. above; and headed in my direction. The Tower didn't mention I would have traffic on the climb out. I had already switched to Eglin approach and before a could call them; they were calling me (probably because they knew about that other aircraft. I immediately told them I was on frequency; was turning right (I had been assigned runway heading); and asked who the traffic was. Eglin said I had altitude separation (even though; by this time there was only 400 ft. between me and the other aircraft; and the traffic was less than .5 nm from me) and said that Destin Tower should have told me about the traffic.




Synopsis: C525 pilot reported an airborne conflict during their initial climb that resulted in a TCAS TA.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ORD
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While the Captain was advancing the throttle to the detent position; the right engine failed and the ENG 2 OUT message appeared on the EICAS. All the indications were in the green range prior advancing the throttle. We had started engine 2 at the gate. We aborted the takeoff; completed the proper checklist and went back to the gate.




Synopsis: An E-145 Flight Crew rejected their takeoff and returned to the gate following the failure of the right engine as power was advanced at the start of their takeoff roll.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Pax Seat
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: As a Shop Steward on behalf of my membership; I would like to report a procedure that concerns bio-hazard on company Air Carrier aircraft. Last minute [cabin issue of passenger] seat cushions with pee; vomit; blood; whatever; as the [aircraft] cleaners find them; and put them on top of the seats to be changed; and then call Maintenance to change them [cushions]. At this point; the flight attendants say it's OK to board the passengers. Now; as Maintenance comes to change the seat cushions; people are boarding or possibly sitting on the seat cushion to be changed. Flight attendants refuse to stop boarding in most cases. So now; Maintenance is fighting passengers up and down the small aisle; brushing up against passenger's heads in the seats; with the pee and vomit stained seat cushion(s). We are told this is the practice here and that's that. We feel it is a bio-hazard against the passengers and flight attendants; or whoever is in the aisle; that gets brushed up against. This practice should be changed before we have a lawsuit against us for bio-hazard. As Maintenance; we feel responsible and passengers are upset at us as we try and remove the cushion(s). In some cases; the passenger puts the soiled seat cushion back in the seat and sits on it; now we have to ask them to stand; as we change it and they check their pants for being soiled. Not a very nice procedure just to get an on-time [departure] while the gate agent or flight attendant gets blamed for a delay. Physical health concerns.




Synopsis: A Line Mechanic reports about a bio-hazard concern involving the removal of contaminated passenger seat cushions that brush up against passengers and flight attendants during the boarding process as Maintenance tries to remove the seat cushions from the aircraft.
Date: 202006
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: The current schedule reduction and reserve staffing levels have increased the number of pilots who are non current or are within several days of non currency; due to landings.Most of my one day pairings have been with pilots who have not flown in over 75 days. The additional workload that this places on the other pilot is very high and at times unsafe. When flying 3-4; one day pairings in a row; the increase in fatigue and stress due to the required additional awareness and vigilance is unsustainable. This issue is not the fault of any pilot; but by the rules and operating environment we are currently in. Most of the reserves are proficient in procedures and systems knowledge; it is the approach and landing phase where their lack of proficiency is evident.I recommend that any pilot who has not flown in more than 75 days be required to fly the first leg with a line check airmen.




Synopsis: Pilot reported an increase in the number of pilots who are non current due to the current schedule reduction and reserve staffing levels.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Powerplant Lubrication System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During cruise at FL340 the right engine oil quantity went to zero. QRH 'Oil Press Low' check list was completed and at an idle pressure of 14 PSI the engine was shut down and the QRH was completed.An emergency was declared with ATC. Offset route [15 NM north of track] and drifted down to FL220. Clearance received to diversion airport with a block altitude of FL120-220. Requested Emergency Equipment and ILS; single engine approach and landing made; and taxied to the gate.


Second narrative: 10 minutes after Critical Point at FL340 loss of Number 2 Engine due to loss of oil Pressure. Displaced 15 NM north of track and descended to FL200B220 after receiving clearance via HF from ATC and declaring emergency. Diverted.


Synopsis: A Boeing 757 crew experienced an indication of loss of oil quantity followed by an indication of loss of oil pressure; and in accordance with QRH procedures; secured the engine. An emergency was declared; and the aircraft diverted and accomplished a single engine approach and landing.
Date: 202104
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Sea; Other ASEL & ASES
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Student Pilot training event. We had been operating the Piper PA-28-140 aircraft for approximately 45 minutes conducting airport pattern work. Upon lifting off for our seventh consecutive practice takeoff and landing (every other landing being a full stop taxi back); the plane engine sputtered (approximately 30 t0 50 feet AGL) I immediately called 'My airplane'.  Dropping the nose to establish a glide; I determined the airport fence at the end of the runway was able to be cleared; allowing a landing in the grassy area just off the airport. The engine suddenly surged to full power giving us a climb which I hoped for a potential 180 degree turn back to the airport. However; the burst of power was short lived and we were again left with few options; I aimed for the four-lane divided highway into the wind. Timing the traffic flow between the pickup truck headed east and the pickup truck headed west we could just fit between the second truck and a SUV in trail of the pickup truck.Aligning the glide path with the outside lane behind the pickup in the inner fast lane; called for a steep turn and a snap recovery to wings level. We went under the power lines across the east bound lanes of the highway; straightened our glide with the open lane (our landing spot) and touched down rolling to a stop avoiding the truck and the SUV.Shut down; all switches off; fuel selector to off; vacated the aircraft. With help; using the tow bar and helpful citizens; we relocated the aircraft off the highway into a parking area and called the county sheriff's office to report. Sirens blaring within a minute or so and fire; police; safety officers; EMT's arrived on the scene. I offered information but only to official personnel. We received an escort back east on the highway to relocate the aircraft in tow behind the maintenance hangar rescue vehicle.




Synopsis: PA-28 Instructor Pilot reported landing on a highway after experiencing engine failure shortly after takeoff.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: EAT.Airport, WA
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: CTAF EAT
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Fatigue; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airport; Chart Or Publication; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After landing Runway 30 at EAT; we cleared the runway via a right turn at A4. Then we made a left turn on taxiway A toward the terminal. We found ourselves at a 'dead end' with no way to continue to the terminal ramp from our position. Realizing there was limited space to turn around; we called out wing walkers from the station and they marshaled us while we turned around and exited the 'dead end.'The primary cause of this event is airport facility issues at EAT; specifically; the construction currently ongoing at EAT and how it is depicted on the Airport Info chart (plate 10-9). When viewing the chart; it depicts a width of Taxiway A alongside the construction (XXXXX's) that still provides access to the terminal ramp. This is NOT the case. Further; the chart depicts A as the same scale of width that is depicted by Taxiway A that runs the entire parallel from A5 to A1. This same scale of width is currently open from Taxiway A from A4 to A1.Further; Dispatch to Pilot communication also was a cause in this event. While Dispatch is trying to be helpful in including a note on the release; (it reads):'Be advised - NOTAM 02/042: Taxiway Closure between A4 and Terminal Apron requires back taxi on Runway when landing Runway 12.'I was landing Runway 30. Therefore; it caused me to disregard the NOTAM. My recommendation is to change the helpful note to read:'Taxiway A5 provides the only access to the Terminal (ref NOTAM 02/042).'Human Factors including....High workload (tail swap; short flight; brief RNP 30; reports of severe icing on approach and moderate turbulence enroute and approach)Fatigue (I generally fly morning trips and this was a night trip; last leg of 5; tail swap)Perceptual illusion (with taxiway A4 open and lit; is inviting to exit there rather than roll to A5; and the reflectors and flags along the construction invite a taxi towards the terminal and into the 'dead end'; as well as the depiction of the construction on the chart)...led to an insufficient attention to detail in the case of the pilot team reviewing the NOTAMs critically.




Synopsis: A Captain reported inadvertently entering a dead-end taxiway; commenting that the taxiway charting could be improved at EAT airport.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other landing roll
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Landing after a visual approach in good VFR weather conditions. Copilot was new to aircraft and after being trained; briefed and instructed to 'block the rudders' during the latter portion of the landing rollout he instead manipulated the rudders in an attempt to steer the aircraft; this action made reaching the brake pedals very difficult for the pilot. This combination of opposing rudder control and brake inputs induced a series of swerves that finally resulted in the aircraft stopping on the runway approximately 60 degrees off the runway heading. After the aircraft stopped the controls were locked and the aircraft was taxied off the runway. No aircraft damage was noted. No passengers were injured.




Synopsis: Multi-engine warbird Captain reported the flying First Officer lost directional control on the landing roll; probably related to improper rudder use.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: Mixed
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZDV
ATC / advisory: Center ZDV; TRACON D01
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Cleared for the CLASH 3 Arrival into DEN from Denver Center with an expectation to hold at CLASH. DEN revised arrival to NIIXX 2 and cleared us direct to NIIXX and cleared to descend VIA. Just prior to NIIXX; DEN switched us to Approach Control and upon checking in; Approach asked if we had a clearance to hold. We replied with a negative since DENVER center cleared us for the approach. Approach came back a minute later and gave us vectors to the North and then stated that the Center Controller had cleared us to descend through a holding stack. After approximately ten miles; we were cleared back to the west and vectored to intercept final for 35R.


Second narrative: While descending on the CLASH 3 Arrival into DEN; DEN Center gave us holding instructions to what I think was the CLASH intersection. Prior to arriving at the holding fix; ATC cancelled our holding instructions; gave us a new clearance to proceed direct to the NIIXX intersection; and then descend via the NIIXX 2 Arrival. We were then instructed to contact DEN Approach. When we checked in with DEN Approach; they asked us if we were not holding. We stated that DEN Center had given us the aforementioned clearance. DEN Approach then responded that DEN Center had just descended us through a stack of aircraft that had been holding. Nothing else was stated by ATC other than vectors around weather up to the final approach course where we were then handed off to Tower.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported while following ZDV center clearance; TRACON reported the descent was through holding pattern traffic.