elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: FDK.Airport, MD
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 6
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground FDK
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Landed and dropped off passenger. After getting ATIS code called Ground and got clearance to taxi. I thought the active runway was the one I had landed on before dropping off my passenger; but it had changed. I thought the Controller's instructions were to 'Taxi across the Runway to 23.' Instead he may have said 'taxi across Runway 23.' The Ground Controller told me I had taxied across the active runway. Not all the taxiways are labeled correctly.




Synopsis: A pilot misunderstood ATC instructions and taxied across an active FDK runway.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: MD-83
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Other Go Around
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On final approach; with an expected touch down of 5;500 LBS of fuel; we were instructed to go around because of an airport emergency. On the go around we informed Tower of our low fuel situation and subsequently declared a low fuel emergency. We touched down with 3;400 LBS. After some delay (because of the airport emergency); we arrived at the gate with 2;700 LBS of fuel.


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


Synopsis: An MD-80 arriving at its destination with minimum fuel was directed to go-around due to an airport emergency. They declared a fuel emergency and received appropriate special handling; arriving at the gate with fuel remaining of 2;700 LBS.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: PSP.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D PSP
ATC / advisory: Tower PSP
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion; Time Pressure
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During our approach into PSP we were cleared for the visual so the Captain went direct to the fix JISOP; situating us so that we were on base and would turn to final over that waypoint. Crossing altitude for that fix was 2;900 and we were in VNAV and LNAV. As we approached JISOP we set touchdown elevation as we were altitude protected in the box. As we turning from base to final we heard 'Caution terrain. Caution terrain.' At that point we noticed we were about 2;700 feet. The Captain leveled off; finished turning to final; and once clear of terrain continued the decent and landing with no incident.


Second narrative: During approach we were cleared for the visual approach. We were cleared to the fix JISOP on the RNAV RNP 31L. Crossing altitude was 2;900 MSL or above. We were in VNAV & LNAV. As we approached JISOP we set touchdown elevation as we had altitude protection in the FMC. We were just about to make a 90 degree turn to final from JISOP. The aircraft had lost VNAV and continued a shallow decent below 2;900 feet. As we both noticed about the same time we were at 2;700 feet in the turn to final; 200 feet below JISOP. At the same time we got a terrain warning. We leveled off; made the turn to final and landed without incident. It was day VFR and we knew exactly where we were in relationship to the terrain.


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported receiving a GPWS terrain warning as they descended below a crossing altitude while in VFR conditions.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Recip Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Weather; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working an Approach sector and cleared Aircraft X for the ILS approach. I noticed the Tower departed Aircraft Y. Aircraft Y should have contacted me on departure control on a 150 heading from the Tower. I noticed the pilot still had not called me 2 miles southeast of the airport and started to turn westbound. I monitored the Tower to see what was going on and heard Aircraft Y tell the tower his gear would not go up. I asked the tower controller if they wanted me to break Aircraft X off of the approach and he said no. I told the Tower I would provide extra room between Aircraft X and the next arrival in case they needed it.I switched Aircraft X to the Tower and told them to prepare for a go around because the Tower was dealing with a possible emergency. I saw Aircraft Y turn base with Aircraft X on a 6 mile final and then turned up the final heading right toward Aircraft X. When the two aircraft were about 3 miles apart and heading directly at each other I called the tower and told them to turn Aircraft Y to heading 270 now because the wind was pushing them right into Aircraft X. As Aircraft Y started the turn west bound the collision alert started going off. The two aircraft got approximately 1.5 miles from each other and 100 feet with a 350 knot closure rate. If I did not tell the tower to turn Aircraft Y I do not think they would have turned them on their own.I believe this was a performance issue and the controller needs training in unusual situations. This is not the first time the controller has had an issue with unusual situations. Management is aware of the first event. The controller is certified as a Controller in Charge in the Tower and is in training on Approach Control.




Synopsis: A TRACON Controller reported observing an aircraft in distress turning final becoming in conflict with another aircraft that was inbound on a strait in.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-23-250 Aztec
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Main Gear
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon landing the left gear failed (broke) and gear folded backwards into the wing and flap. Upon checking the aircraft logs; I found the Pitot/Static system was out of date by approximately 1 year.




Synopsis: PA23 pilot reports a left main landing gear failure after touch down causing damage to the wing and flap.  It was later discovered that the pitot static system check was a year out of date.
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B747-400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Flap Control (Trailing & Leading Edge)
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On the takeoff roll at 70 KIAS the takeoff warning horn sounded with an EICAS FLAPS Primary advisory. We aborted the takeoff; but RTO did not engage. The Tower was notified of the abort. A PA was made to remain seated. We taxied back to the gate and the flight was later canceled.




Synopsis: A B747-400 flight crew aborted their takeoff below 80 KIAS when they received a takeoff configuration warning accompanied by a 'Flaps Primary' EICAS message.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Procedure; Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: After push back I received an ACARS message displaying the name of a different Captain. I stopped the push and contacted the Dispatcher to find out what was going on. The Dispatcher responded right away and advised not to move until this condition was corrected. I responded immediately confirming with him that I would not move until this issue was resolved. A few minutes later I received the new corrected flight release and we were able to continue.Upon arrival in ZZZ I had a voicemail from Crew Tracking to contact them if I had received this message. My phone was off and in my bag as directed by the FOM and I never received this message until my arrival in ZZZ.I think for future events it is imperative for Crew Tracking to make positive contact with a crew in the event of a change to their published sequence. I don't know what the answer is; but we all have to be on the same page to conduct a safe and efficient operation.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain reported communication issue with company personnel in regard to scheduling and flight release.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Powerplant Lubrication System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We were flying an airplane that had just been serviced on the ground with 8 quarts of oil. It was serviced to 22 quarts of oil on the ground due to low oil quantity. En route oil quantity steadily decreased to 10 quarts. We were in contact with Maintenance Control and Dispatch; and ATC and decided to divert. We declared an emergency and landed in [the divert airport] without further incident.


Second narrative: Number 1 Engine oil quantity steadily decreased from 14 quarts to 10 quarts at FL350. After coordination with Maintenance Control; Dispatch; and ATC; we diverted.


Synopsis: The pilots of a A320 observed the Number 1 Engine oil quantity decreasing so they elected to divert where a successful landing was performed.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SEA.Airport, WA
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower SEA
Second aircraft: B737-800
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Cleared onto the RWY to hold; asked by tower if we had preceding aircraft (just took off) in sight; (same type aircraft). We replied we did and were given a takeoff clearance. On climbout; we experienced the preceding aircraft's wake turbulence; full aileron deflection; we shallowed out our turn and climb rate but speed went well above 250 knots below 10K. Can't remember if pilot flying clicked off the autothrottles; I mentioned watch your speed but he was slow to correct. ATC 'never' said anything as we got switched to Center from departure.We should have delayed our takeoff roll and/or asked ATC for a RWY heading after takeoff to extend our ground track beyond the preceding aircraft's turn point.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain reported encountering wake turbulence from preceding aircraft on takeoff from SEA.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: PDX.Airport, OR
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZSE
ATC / advisory: Center ZSE
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: ATC gave us a descent clearance to FL290. We captured the profile and then were held at FL290 until we were high on profile. We were then given a clearance to FL240 and then handed off to the next Controller. The FO was descending at 300 knots to recapture the descent profile when the Controller gave us a descend via clearance. A few minutes later we were asked our speed; which was 300 knots and slowing.This seems to be a very common issue.  Held high and then given a descend via clearance. I should have advised ATC we were high instead of being fast and trying to return to profile. We both missed the 280 knot note. They should be in large bold red type instead in a small box in the corner of the arrival plate.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported that charting notations into PDX do not clearly notate speed restrictions.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Weather elements / visibility: Clear
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Weather; Human Factors; Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: I am concerned because the dispatch releases are built hours before our flight and the WX can change. It seems at the time the Flight Release was built it did not require an alternate and none was listed. When we pulled the release with the current WX it did require an alternate. The dispatcher and I did not notice the need for an alternate which concerns me. We are trying to check everyone's job--maintenance etc... and our own job of flying the airplane safely. Distractions can certainly cause us to miss what someone else is supposed to have done. In flight I checked the alternate WX and requested an alternate. We had enough fuel for the SBN alternate per our FMS data. However; a major concern for me was that when I requested performance data--fuel burn etc.--from ORD to SBN the flight plan software 'locked up' (dispatcher's words) and was not able to provide us the data.I initially looked at the release and saw there was not an alternate listed. We as the flight crew got distracted with looking at MEL/CDL's to make sure they were correct. We had to do an air start and missed the fact that with the current TAF we needed an alternate for our destination. I noticed in cruise after rechecking the WX that we required an alternate. I checked the WX for MKE and SBN. I then sent an ACARS to dispatch to add the ALT of SBN. Per my FMS I met the ALT FUEL requirements.Let all the Pilots know that the release may not be correct for ALT WX because they are built (hours) before the flight. However; when the release is pulled it has the latest WX. Check the release for correct Landing and Alternate Minimums. What concerns me is that we have to do everyone's job again. The dispatcher should be monitoring the WX to make the appropriate changes to the Release before we as pilots have to. My other major concern is that flight planning software was not able to get flight performance data for the ALT...This issue needs to be addressed immediately.




Synopsis: The Captain; while enroute to ORD; discovered that he had departed without a required alternate airport. Dispatch was unable to provide him with additional required information.
Date: 202011
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We checked in and the agent let us onto the airplane. I asked if the plane had been cleaned and sprayed and he said he didn't know. I asked if he would check for us due to COVID protection and the company's cleaning procedures. He came back down and told us that; no it had not. He said ZZZ only has 4 sprayers and they are all broken so there is no spraying of disinfectant. I feel this is a safety issue not just for flight attendants; but also passengers. We make mandatory announcements telling passengers that our planes are cleaned after every flight and we spray disinfectant and that is not the case. How long and how many planes are not being done in ZZZ? At a time when COVID is at an all time high I feel this needs to be addressed.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported concern regarding the station's lack of aircraft sanitizing procedures.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During the turn in ZZZ; the Ops Agent informed me of HAZMAT onboard and gave me the copies of the NOTAC. I signed both copies and returned one to the Ops Agent. I forgot to call Dispatch and amend my Release to indicate HAZMAT onboard before I departed ZZZ. En route to ZZZ1; I realized my mistake and sent an ACARS message to Dispatch to inform them that I had HAZMAT onboard. Dispatch responded and we did a pen and ink change to amend the Release to show the remark - HAZMAT on Flight-Refer to NOTAC.


Second narrative: During boarding; the Captain was notified of HAZMAT aboard the aircraft and given the appropriate NOTAC forms from our Ops Agent. I was briefed on the HAZMAT and reviewed the signed NOTAC form. My expectation bias and fatigue likely contributed to not backing up the Captain contacting Dispatch to get the appropriate 'HAZMAT  of flight - Refer to NOTAC' pen and ink amendment on the Dispatch Release prior to takeoff. The Captain recognized the error en route and coordinated with Dispatch to correct the issue.


Synopsis: B737-800 flight crew reported the Final Flight Release was not amended to indicate Hazmat onboard prior to departure. The flight release error was due to a communications breakdown between flight crew and Dispatch.