elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201812
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B DEN
ATC / advisory: Tower DEN
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
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; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: On arrival into DEN; we were given a STAR to the RNAV 35R Approach with the radius turn. Our speed was controlled by ATC even after approach clearance. It was apparent the aircraft in front of us slowed early and ignored ATC speeds; as we had a closure on the aircraft in front. Our VNAV system and the 'required' autopilot on caused our speed changes to be much slower than if they were hand flown and this made the situation worse. The weather conditions were VMC; and we didn't have 3nm separation between the aircraft in front of us. We queried ATC and asked for a visual approach so we could adequately separate and comply with the approach procedures. They simply re-cleared us for the approach with no explanation. Tower was queried on the separation also and could not answer us. The landing was uneventful; but the limitations provided to us on the approach by both FM procedure and ATC; which were unnecessary in the conditions; combined to put us in a worse situation than if we had been given the freedom to maneuver. ATC training and execution at DEN is still inadequate to conduct these procedures; even in VMC conditions.


Second narrative: While executing the RNAV RNP Z 35R in DEN our separation with the aircraft ahead decreased to 2.5 nm. Wind was from the north at 30 kts and we were southbound prior to the AR segment and the aircraft ahead was on the AR segment (crosswind). We flew speeds as assigned from ATC starting at 210 kts and decreasing to 170kts. Requested the visual from ATC but was denied. The Captain asked ATC about the 2.5 mile separation and they provided minimal explanation as to why it was less than 3. The Captain was Pilot Flying and completed the approach in visual conditions with the aircraft ahead in sight at all times.


Synopsis: B737NG flight crew reported that while flying the RNAV RNP Z approach to 35R at DEN the separation to the traffic ahead decreased to 2.5 miles; but ATC seemed unconcerned when advised.
Date: 201904
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ORD
ATC / advisory: Tower ORD
Aircraft component: PFD
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Confusion; Human-Machine Interface; Workload; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other departure/gate arrival
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During takeoff roll at V1; we had an electrical anomaly that caused a failure of 4 displays / both navigation displays and all engine upper and lower displays/ continued takeoff and climb in the weather IFR to about 300 to 400 ft. AGL when all systems returned to normal.  No deviation from flight path or SOPS noted.  Also on taxis in at FRA with the right engine shut down approximately 20 ft. from stop point at gate; the same thing took place again. When Maintenance was contacted on SATCOM they noted a flight pops bulletin that describes the event fairly well.  I believe the timing of this anomaly is revenant in fact such as it happened right at V1 and approaching the parking spot.




Synopsis: B777 Captain reported at V1 and later at gate arrival; 2 navigation and all engine displays blanked and then returned.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
Aircraft component: Circuit Breaker / Fuse / Thermocouple
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We were operating a 767 freighter flight from ZZZ to ZZZ1 and were cleared for takeoff on Runway XXR. Upon reaching 400 ft. I called for Heading Select since that was our clearance. Shortly after this; the FO (First Officer) stated that he smelled smoked. At this point I turned and looked at him and I noticed a smoke/haze in the vicinity of the observer panel and lower circuit breaker panel. I then noticed the odor myself.The FO asked what I wanted to do and I stated that we needed to return to the airport. He passed the information on to the Tower Controller and stated our intentions. The Tower asked if we were [requesting priority handling] and I told the FO to tell them yes. The Tower then asked if we wanted to do a 180 and land [in the] opposite direction. As it was a gusty tailwind and the smoke was not that bad I decided on Runway XY. We just landed on Runway XY two hours earlier so we were familiar with it. We got close in vectors and made a successful landing and taxied to the gate.




Synopsis: B767-300 Captain reported smoke and fumes in the flight deck after takeoff and elected to return to departure airport.
Date: 201211
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Cessna 152
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While positioned at the end of runway hold line; prior to taking the runway; my instrument student and I verbally and visually cleared downwind; base and final legs prior to taking the runway. We saw a Cessna 172 on the downwind leg abeam the numbers; but no aircraft was seen on base or final. We taxied into position to hold for departure and complete the runway items. After we positioned on runway; a Cessna 152 without radios flew over head less than 50 feet above us and landed approximately 500 feet in front of us and taxied off the runway.  We reported the incident to the Chief Flight Instructor who indicated that he had heard of the incident. He reported that the Cessna 152 had seen us and was doing a power off short field landing. The Cessna 152 was high on the approach and to the left of the runway center line. This put the aircraft above our wing and out of our line of site which led to this incursion. The instructor and student elected not to execute a go-around!




Synopsis: C172 flight instructor reports visually clearing downwind; base; and final before taking the runway at an uncontrolled airport. While preparing to takeoff a C152 flies overhead and lands in front of the reporter; then taxies clear of the runway.
Date: 202012
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: Helicopter
Operator: Government
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Workload; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Landing Without Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Staffing
Primary problem: Staffing

Narrative: After landing when I requested that I be able to keep the same squawk for convenience as I was dropping two people off and continuing on VFR; the Tower Controller ask if I heard him calling us. I said no; due to Approach Controller keeping us on their frequency. As we are a helicopter and we are given clearances like 'landing at the ramp is at own risk' it can be confusing as to a clearance to land. I thought I was given a clearance to land. I'm not sure if it is due to COVID and staffing issues but it seems like I hear more ATC frequencies managed by one person; so this could have led to confusion during frequency changes.




Synopsis: Helicopter pilot reported a communication issue with ATC resulted in a landing without a clearance.  Pilot stated the Tower Controller was working multiple frequencies; which may have contributed to the event.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZNY.ARTCC, NY
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZNY
ATC / advisory: Center ZNY
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Time Pressure; Workload
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was the First Officer on this flight and the pilot not flying or PM (Pilot Monitoring). My duties were to make radio calls; and load FMS and Nav Aids; monitor the flying pilot and complete other non-flying pilot duties.There were several issues on this flight. Upon departure the Captain elected to change the destination prior to departure to Morristown so as not to have the ground stop to TEB affect this flight. I refiled a flight plan to MMU. The plan was to change the destination with Washington Center. The initial destination change was made with Washington Center; the destination now TEB. A clearance to descend via the Jaike3 arrival was issued by Washington Center. Subsequently the airspeed was allowed to increase to levels where the high speed clacker sounded and continued for approximately two minutes; after the speed was reduced below the clacker the descent continued; which put our aircraft above the altitudes on the arrival. We were also advised that a hold could be expected with the next sector.Later we were advised by New York Center there would be a 90 min hold for TEB; so we elected to go back to MMU; where we were given a heading and an altitude of 3000 feet. While on the radar vectors and descending to altitude of 3000 feet; we were advised that we could get into TEB. I; the non-flying pilot announced 'heads down' and began tuning the radios and reprograming the FMS back to TEB (the third change); the flying pilot turned to the new assigned heading but failed to level at the assigned altitude of 3000 feet. The aircraft descended to an altitude of 1900 feet before corrective action was taken. No call from NY was received and no TCAS advisories or GPWS warnings occurred. We made a climb back to the assigned altitude of 3000 feet.


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


Synopsis: Under a high workload situation; the pilot flying a G-IV descended through a cleared altitude and corrected back.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Local Control split between two positions; Local North (Runway 9L) and Local South (Runway 9R). I was working Local Control North with Aircraft X in the local traffic pattern on short final. As I looked down to organize my strip bay; Aircraft X keyed up on my frequency and stated he was going around due to traffic on the runway. Local south controller had issued takeoff instructions to Aircraft Y who mistakenly called holding short of 9R. Aircraft Y was actually holding short of 9L and taxied onto the runway for takeoff roll. I advised Local South of the situation and Aircraft Y was allowed to continue takeoff roll and subsequently depart. Aircraft X was given instructions to fly northbound to rejoin the downwind for 9L and landed safely without incident. Recommend increased awareness and communications between aircraft and controllers alike.




Synopsis: Tower Controller clears aircraft for takeoff thinking the aircraft was at Runway 9R when it was at Runway 9L. When the aircraft started to depart; a landing aircraft went around.
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Champion Citabria Undifferentiated
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Ground Excursion Runway; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Tailwheel aircraft swung to right after a normal three-point landing. Departed right side of paved runway at approximately 25 MPH. Pilot recovered back on to runway and cleared on the taxiway. Tower closed the airfield for 10 to 12 minutes. Airport operations checked runway for FOD and aircraft for damage. None found; aircraft taxied to parking.




Synopsis: After touchdown; a tail-wheel aircraft departed the right side of the runway. Pilot recovered back to the runway and cleared on a taxiway. Tower closed the airport for FOD inspection.  No FOD or aircraft damage found.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZAN.ARTCC, AK
Aircraft: Raptor (Lockheed)
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class A ZAN; Class D ZZZ; Class E ZAN
ATC / advisory: Center ZAN
Second aircraft: Raptor (Lockheed)
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: I was called to work sector 5 and 6 D; with no delay; to assist the R-side CPC with a military emergency situation. A flight of 3 F22's had been manually handed off to us from Anchorage Approach as an [priority]; low-fuel situation diverting to ZZZ due to low weather at [original destination]; at FL200 descending. Shortly after I took sector 5/6D; Approach called with another manual handoff of Aircraft X; a single F22; also a minimum fuel aircraft at FL200 diverting to ZZZ due to low weather. I was informed that Approach was also having communication issues with Aircraft X; but that they had previously stated that they had all other fighter traffic in sight. After maybe a minute; we were able to regain communications with Aircraft X; when they confirmed that they had [the flight of 3] in sight. All 4 aircraft were in close proximity to each other; and were issued to follow each other on a visual approach to ZZZ. I manually coordinated the [priority] situation and aircraft/approach information with ZZZ Tower before we shipped all aircraft to Tower frequency. Due to the poor weather; the fighters had to divert to ZZZ. Without enough fuel for a standard diversion; this caused a lot of panic and confusion at Anchorage Approach; which subsequently led to a lot of confusion on our part during the transfer of the flight plan and aircraft information. It is my opinion that the fighters should have returned from the practice airspace earlier or carried extra fuel to provide for enough time to handle a diversion more safely. There was no traffic in the ZZZ area at the time of this event; but it is a very busy IFR and VFR traffic area and if there had been any traffic I don't believe we could have successfully separated the fighters from other aircraft due to their haste and lack of communications.  I believe that the R-side working sector 5/6R at the time of this event handled the situation as well as possible given the circumstances.




Synopsis: ZAN controller reported accepting handoffs on 4 F22's and had to issue low fuel diverts.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 50
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Challenger 300
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Experienced vibration in aircraft; seats; yoke; and rudder controls. Vibration increased. Left Engine ITT and Oil Pressure increased. Engine 'VIB' light illuminated. Shut down and secured left engine.




Synopsis: CL300 Captain reported shutting down the left engine in flight after experiencing vibration and high engine ITT and oil pressure.
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Dash 8-300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Propeller Autofeather System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After setting climb power and completing the associated flow upon working the after takeoff checklist I noticed that the auto-feather selection button still had the amber 'Arm' light relit with the switch deselected during the after takeoff flow. The system re-armed the auto-feather and was notified that the aircraft has had a history of that happening. Contacted company and Maintenance made the decision for us to return to the departure airport to have maintenance work on the plane there and upon returning to the field the amber 'arm' indication extinguished itself.




Synopsis: A DHC-8-300 autofeather remained armed after takeoff with the switch was de-selected during the after takeoff flow; so the flight returned to the departure airport but the system deactivated prior to landing.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: GEG.Airport, WA
Aircraft: A300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Parked
ATC / advisory: Ground GEG
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Flight Data / Clearance Delivery; Ground
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: An Airbus questioned Ground Control/Flight Data on the Spokane Two Departure. The aircraft wanted to know what the 4;000 was for; and if he needed to level off at 4;000 or continue climbing. This happens a lot. I have recently questioned the wording and significance of 4;000 on the Spokane Two Departure. The Spokane Two Departure [needs to] be NOTAMed immediately clarifying that 4;000 is extraneous information; and the pilot should disregard it and continue to climb to FL120. Secondly; recommend changing the Spokane Two Departure in the next publication ASAP to read more clearly and get rid of 4;000; as this procedure has been out for over a year.




Synopsis: GEG Controller voiced concern regarding the published 4;000 altitude restriction on the Spokane Two Departure; noting ATC is expecting aircraft to climb to 12;000; the reporter recommending modifications to the SID chart.