elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DFW.Tower, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb; Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B DFW
ATC / advisory: Tower DFW
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A normal takeoff clearance was received. After airborne Tower cleared us direct to FEZTR. At about 6;000 ft. Tower handed us off to Departure. Departure assigned us a heading stating; 'you're way off course.' The Captain; as Pilot Monitoring; replied that Tower gave us direct FEZTR. Eventually Departure cleared us to another fix down line and own nav on course. The Tower gave us a late handoff and told us to go direct to FEZTR. After the confusing check on with Departure Control we both agreed that it was odd to be cleared to a down line fix by Tower. And it was odd that Tower kept us on frequency so long. And it was odd that Departure knew nothing about it. We had a rider in the jumpseat listening in and we all agreed that we heard the clearance to FEZTR. We could have asked Tower for a handoff sooner. We could have questioned Tower's instruction to go direct FEZTR; but we thought Tower and Departure control were jointly monitoring/coordinating our progress reference some other traffic. On check in with Departure Control; we said we were climbing via the departure; but it would have been more clear to highlight the non standard situation by stating we were proceeding direct FEZTR per Tower's direction.


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


Synopsis: Air Carrier flight crew reported Tower issued a clearance to a fix and Departure Control did not know about it.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Windshear
Light: Night
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Troubleshooting
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Other Person
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: A Hung Start on ENG #1 was detected in ECAM display. During second start attempt a Hot Start and EGT over-limit showed on ECAM display. At the same time radio calls from adjacent aircraft reported fire coming from ENG #1. Reports about fire were confirmed more than once by radio from witnesses. Situation was reported to Ramp Control; ARFF (Airport Rescue Fire Fighting) was requested. Captain called for 'Engine Fire on the ground checklist'. Checklist was performed by First Officer; fire was suppressed and confirmed from outside personnel. ARFF personnel did not arrived to our aircraft when requested. Once situation was under control; the plane was towed back to the gate.


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


Synopsis: Flight crew reported a second hung start and accompanying engine fire while attempting to restart the #1 engine. The flight crew shut down the engine and the fire was suppressed by ground personnel.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation X (C750)
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic Main System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Evacuated; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After takeoff upon retracting gear; we received an AMBER A side HYD LEVEL LOW message. Upon selecting HYD synoptics noted that the HYD Quantity in the A side had dropped to 11%. We continued our climb on the RNAV Departure ran the checklist at a safe altitude; and opted to make an emergency return to ZZZ. We alerted ATC of the condition; requests and advised the passengers of the situation. We completed the checklist setup for a landing to runway XXR and advised the tower that we would like emergency equipment standing by. Following landing and application of emergency brakes we stopped the aircraft and advised the tower that we would need to be towed from the runway upon opening the cabin door we observed smoke coming from the left main gear area and evacuated the passengers to the edge of the runway. In coordination with the fire department on site we secured the aircraft and insured there was no fire. The passengers were picked up by a van and returned to [the FBO]. The aircraft was towed from the runway to [the FBO] with no further incident.




Synopsis: C750 First Officer reported loss of hydraulic fluid after takeoff that resulted in a return to the field and smoke from the landing gear area.
Date: 202001
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: RDD.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Light: Night
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Security
Detector: Person Other Person
Result: General Police / Security Involved
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: We filed from ZZZ to RDD because of inclement weather and low ceilings. Because we were planning on stopping to eat at a restaurant in the terminal we requested parking; but were told to park at the GA ramp and walk to the terminal. Once we arrived we found the there was no way in and nobody was around so we called for guidance. The person was very helpful and after exhausting our combined ideas the person relayed to security that we needed help and to let us into the building. However; our reception by security was that of a security threat and we were immediately questioned about our intentions. We were also asked if we had seen the signs indicating that it was a restricted area. The signs would have been effective if they were lit but because it was night time and overcast we did not see them until the guard pointed them out. Our licenses and aircraft were photographed and we were told that what we did was equivalent to 'running across the runway at San Francisco airport.' Ultimately; we made it clear that we would not have entered such an area if we had known. Since this has happened; I've learned about other pilots that have accidentally gone into such an area and am realizing that what happened with us is a recurring issue. I believe that improving the lighting for the signs at RDD would help remedy this. Additionally; it may be helpful to identify restricted areas on the airfield diagrams.




Synopsis: Pilot reported inadvertently walking into a restricted area while attempting to cross the ramp at RDD airport. Pilot also reported that signage was not lit and therefore not visible prior to entering the area.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DCA.Airport, DC
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B DCA
ATC / advisory: Tower DCA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We were cleared for visual approach at FERGI intersection to Runway 19 at DCA. At start of approach all parameters on profile; however; after completing landing configuration by GREYZ intersection; I chose to go outside to utilize visual cues to follow the river to the runway vice crosschecking the LNAV/VNAV information. Undershooting crosswind from the left also compounded line-up to undershoot from the northwest. Momentary obstacle alert and simultaneous low altitude alert from Tower resulted in immediate correction of approach navigational/line-up deviation resulting in uneventful landing. At no time was situational awareness comprised.Better understanding and choice of LNAV/VNAV Approach choices to be programmed into the FMC. I should have chosen to utilize RNAV (RNP) Runway 19 Approach which would have allowed me to couple aircraft to autopilot.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported that they chose to utilize visual cues to crosscheck the LNAV/VNAV information; as a result they received an obstacle alert and a low altitude alert.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Other Load Planner
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: After flight was airborne for two hours; Load Planning was notified of incorrect weight manifested for a [loading document item].  Weights were invalidated to correct known weight error. After the correction was made in the [document]; due to cargo system constraints the commodity's new weight was corrected in their operating system but wasn't able to transfer into [the computer system].  Cargo help desk was reached and requested to forward the airway bill for known pallet weight.  Loading documents were finalized and new weights sent generating a change of 8;340 lbs. representing 1.74% change from the original takeoff weight.




Synopsis: Air carrier Load Planner reporting receiving an 8;340 lbs revision (1.74% of TOGW) after the affected flight had been airborne for two hours.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower SFO
Second aircraft: B737-500
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: An A320 was cleared for take off with traffic about 2 3/4 miles on final. The aircraft took forever to start their roll. With a 15 KT headwind; I used 1 1/2 miles as a cutoff with some movement and clearance acknowledged. The A320 still was not accelerating; when I cancelled their take off clearance. As such; it was at this time; the aircraft was powering up and then down as they acknowledged the aborted departure. Of note; the aircraft was bound for one place; and the next departure in sequence was same company; same model; going to another. The performance of the next departure roll was incredibly different. Both rotated at about the same take off distance. This is mind boggling when observed; and definitely a safety hazard for an airport with intersecting runways. These pilots need to be performing more similar in this situation; as it is undoubtedly an inconsistency in flying technique. It is unacceptable that this occurs; as this has involved unsafe aborted departures; and unfair go around's for arrivals.




Synopsis: SFO Controller voiced concern regarding the very different same company pilot techniques during takeoff's; the reporter noting performance within the same airline should be more consistent.
Date: 202112
Location: EWR.Airport, NJ
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi; Parked
Second aircraft: Medium Transport; High Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: EWR had a ramp supervisor file a safety report about bringing in an Aircraft X aircraft into gate CXXX. The concern was that there is no stop mark for the Aircraft X painted on the gate lead in line; and that because the profile of the Aircraft X is different than the Aircraft Y it could create a safety concern. The Aircraft X has a wingspan that is 9 feet greater than that of Aircraft Y. This puts the wingtips closer to (and perhaps outside of) the designated painted safety zone clearance line. Over the previous week several Aircraft X planes were parked at the gate; fortunately without incident.When questioned; the ramp supervisor said it's a situation that everybody seems to be aware of but nobody seems eager to correct.




Synopsis: Ground Personal reported the aircraft parked in this ramp location are parked too close together. The agent states there is no stop mark on the ground for the larger sized aircraft.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Student
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Ground Excursion Runway; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was flying solo and was practicing landings on Runway 27. As I made the first landing; after touch down; the aircraft veered to the left and went off the paved area; across a taxiway and onto the dirt in between the taxiway and the ramp where it came to a complete stop and was shut down. The aircraft was later pushed back onto the taxiway and taxied back to the ramp. No injury was made to myself. The aircraft was inspected by Maintenance who determined that no damage had been made. No damage was done to any signage or equipment on the airfield. The latest METAR report that was issued while I was standing at the run-up area prior to departure reported the winds to be 240/8. The previous METAR stated 280/6. After I touched down I experienced the aircraft oscillating around the yaw axis and that these oscillations progressed as I was rolling. I decided to initiate the takeoff potion of the touch and go and retracted the flaps and applied power. As power was applied; the aircraft veered left and I decided to abort the takeoff. During the deceleration the aircraft went across the parallel taxiway and stopped in between the taxiway and the ramp area. After the aircraft had come to a complete stop; ATC asked me if I was alright over the radio and if I required any assistance. I reported everything was alright and declined any assistance and said that I would contact my school. ATC advised me to shut down the engine. I was thereafter approached by persons who had witnessed what happened; these people asked me if I was alright and helped me push the aircraft back onto the taxiway. I then started the engine and taxied back to my school where I parked the aircraft and had Maintenance take a look at it. No damage was found.




Synopsis: C172 student pilot reports losing control during a touch and go landing resulting in a runway excursion but no apparent damage to the aircraft.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation Excel (C560XL)
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Elevator Trim System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Weather
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After cruising at FL380 with an oat of -33 C; we started a descent and observed an AP TRIM MIS COMP annunciator along with a Master Caution. Upon running the Abnormal Checklist we discovered the elevator trim to be frozen; would not move in either direction electrically or manually; so our speed was reduced to about 250 KTS to achieve a neutral trim setting in the descent. It wasn't until about 8;000 FT with an OAT of +5 C that the elevator trim became unstuck. The only thing we could not comply with was an increased assigned speed by ATC. We landed uneventfully.

Callback: The reporter stated that the aircraft's maintenance log indicated the trim actuators were replaced but he and his First Officer suspected ice someplace in the system. His suspicion is based on his having heard of this happening before and because of the fact that the trim returned to normal with warming temperatures during descent. He and his First Officer had flown this aircraft on several short flights the previous day but had not flown above the mid FL200's. Also the aircraft had not been exposed to precipitation and the daylight ground temperatures in the flight areas were in the mid 60's.



Synopsis: A CE-560XL AP TRIM MIS COMP and Master Caution alerted as the descent was begun from FL380 with a -33 OAT so the aircraft was slowed to descend and at about 8;000 FT with a +5 OAT the trim began normal operation so the crew suspected icing somewhere in the trim system.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: D01.TRACON, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B DEN
ATC / advisory: TRACON D01
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction
Second reporter function: Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Turning downwind at FFFAT both GPS went out. Turning a 9 mile base; the 'Transponder Fail' light illuminated. This was a known problem happening to all aircraft according to Denver Approach.


Second narrative: While descending through 14;000 feet into DEN; approximately 3NM North of the DEN airport; we lost both the L and R GPS signals. We also received an amber TERR FAIL message on both ND's. Reported signal loss to DEN approach.  They responded 'We have had many reports today of GPS signals out'.  The L and R GPS signals restored 5 min after landing and upon taxing into the gate.Upon departure from DEN; while climbing through 3;000 feet; lost both L and R GPS signals.   Reported signal loss to DEN departure.  They responded 'We have had many reports today of intermittent GPS signal loss.'  Shortly after the L and R GPS signal loss we also received a 'XPDR FAIL' light on the  Transponder.  Operation of GPS signals and Transponder returned to normal while climbing through 26;000 feet.Determine if GPS outage was related to 5G activation; Note: while in the DEN airport; personal cell phone displayed 5G WB was in use.


Synopsis: Flight crew reported both GPS and transponder failed on approach and departure into and out of DEN.