elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BIL.Airport, MT
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Icing
Aircraft: Cessna Twin Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: Tower BIL
Aircraft component: Ice/Rain Protection System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Other Person
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate; In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: While flying back from an unsuccessful maintenance reposition flight [we] experienced severe icing.  It was not known the level of icing until we were on the ground.  The icing charts/forecast did not have severe or moderate icing forecast for our route of flight. We were IMC for almost the entire flight and did not begin to pick up any ice until roughly 30 miles from (destination). When we began to encounter icing all of the Anti-Icing equipment was already on and the boots had not been used yet. We noticed a line of white on the leading edge during descent and I decided to blow the boots on the base leg once it appeared to accumulate enough on the wing.  The boots inflated but the ice did not depart the leading edge of the wing.  Our thought was that it must not have been enough on the wing for it to have broken.  At this time we had not heard any ice being shed from the propellers. When I put the gear down on the ILS approach and moved the props forward it sounded as if a shotgun was being fired rapidly. That was the ice coming off the props and hitting the side of the nose.  We were in the clouds after putting the gear down for about 1000 more feet and landed normally. We knew we had ice on the airplane and I was planning on going right back out.  As we were parking; [another employee] was walking to his plane and waited for us to park; when he saw our wing and I saw his reaction; I knew that we had carried significantly more ice in than we thought. When I inspected the plane afterwards I decided to not go back out that evening.  The plane was re-positioned to the hangar and when maintenance saw it; started testing the anti/de-ice equipment.  They asked if we were going to write the plane up and I said no because we had indications that everything was working normally.




Synopsis: Cessna twin engine aircraft pilot reported accumulating significant ice during flight with a great deal present after landing.
Date: 201306
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ; Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Ignition Electrical Supply
Component problem: Improperly Operated; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Glider; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Time Pressure; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I departed with a student in a Cessna 172 with no issues.  After getting a frequency change approval from the departure airport; I was about to call the adjacent Air Force Base (AFB).  Before I managed to call the AFB; the engine made 2 short bursts of unusual noises.  I was concerned that the engine was going to quit; so I opted to turn around and go back to the departure airport.  I declared an emergency and landed downwind (straight in for Runway XR).  My reasoning for landing downwind is that if the engine really was going to quit; I didn't need to waste time entering the traffic pattern and risk losing an engine in the pattern.  Also; there is heavy flight training activity at the departure airport; which could delay getting on the ground.  My departure airport is infamous for flying wide patterns and having extended downwinds.  I believed this to be an unnecessary risk; and given these circumstances; I opted to err on the side of safety and declare an emergency.  We landed without incident.  Once on the ground; my student and I made a discovery as to the magnetos on the airplane.  When the magnetos are on 'both'; the key is not pointing directly to 'both.'  This was not identified during the pre-takeoff power run-up.  Furthermore; the parallax from the instructor's seat makes the key look like it is even more so in the 'both' position; when in fact; it is only running on one magneto.  The problem was identified as having the key in the incorrect position; and thus the engine was not running on both magnetos. This was confirmed with a run-up and test flight.  The declared emergency and straight in downwind landing was an act of good judgment to get the aircraft on the ground as quickly as possible in the event that something much worse occurred.




Synopsis: After a C172 engine made an unusual sound during climbout; so the instructor declared an emergency and returned to the departure airport where he found a single magneto selected although the key appeared to point to the both position.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: APA.Tower, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Other Flight School
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D APA
ATC / advisory: Tower APA
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight; Routine Inspection
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Another example of similar sounding call signs during a very busy time period with multiple VFR aircraft calling inbound. It took a few minutes to recognize the similar sounding call signs and one of the pilots was a student that I was providing additional care with. Fortunately nothing safety related happened during this session but it worries me to think that I could have turned [Aircraft] a direction for traffic and the other aircraft could have turned into traffic with the similar sounding call sign. We are expecting the similar sounding call signs and it still takes time to be able to process and recognize the situation when you have lots of other high priorities. Is there a way to waive the fee for a major flight school or assign an air taxi call sign? If the flight schools here had a call sign that had unique and different numbers then we wouldn't have such a big problem here. Similar sounding call signs are going to continue to be a problem here at our busy airport but this is a predictable problem that is preventable.




Synopsis: Tower Controller reported similar sounding call signs from a local flight school routinely cause confusion and increase workload.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: First Class passenger approached me while I was sitting on my jump seat right after 10;000 feet; changing into my in-flight shoes and passenger asked if he could be there for two minutes.As I looked down to finish putting on my shoes he dropped a prayer mat and started praying on the floor facing the sunrise with half of his body in my galley and half in the aisle.I wish I had immediately stopped putting my shoes on so I would have seen the mat in his arm.Passengers were mostly sleeping in first class and didn't notice him on the floor. As it turned out he was a pilot for [another airline]. Maybe this was a cultural thing but this brought fear to me and then the other flight attendants on my flight. He did not cause any other interruption and returned to his first class seat.I would suggest if a passenger is carrying a mat and wants to pray that they go to an empty row or to the rest room for privacy to pray. During this touchy time in society he could be in danger because of fear from passengers and flight attendants also could take this wrong and go in to full alert. Keep passengers away from galley in first class because of its proximity to cockpit.




Synopsis: Air carrier Flight Attendant reported concern when a passenger knelt on a mat in the aisle to pray during climb.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: MD-83
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Diverted; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Passengers and Flight Attendants (FAs) arrived a little late from inbound flight; once everyone was deplaned the Captain gave the Lead FA a briefing on the flight including the weather so we would leave them in their seats longer than normal.  After everyone was boarded and we pushed back; weather conditions made it impossible for taxi or takeoff.  Once finally in the air and clear of the weather which was approximately 19;000 feet MSL we chimed the FAs allowing them to start their service.  Climbing out there were the typical small bumps; but nothing out of the normal.  Once reaching our cruise altitude of 33;000 feet everything smoothed out even more; however we were still in IMC.  You could tell we were near the tops on how white and bright the clouds were.  ATC advised of convective activity in the next 30-40 miles 10-12 o'clock.  We saw some green on our radar and asked for a diversion to the right of course.  ATC then cleared us direct ZZZ when able; however we stayed on the heading to clear what we saw on the radar.  Almost right after this clearance by ATC; we encountered the severe turbulence.  It lasted for approximately 20 seconds and during that time we had a [plus or minus] 200 feet.  The autopilot disengaged and I proceeded to hand fly keeping the airplane attitude level and regain our altitude.  The Captain advised ATC of severe turbulence and when we were clear of the turbulence he reengaged the autopilot for me.  After that I took radios and flying while he assessed the situation in the back of the aircraft.  Informed me that a FA was hurt and we needed to divert; and I asked ATC for a heading [to a suitable alternate] while the Captain coordinated with dispatch and medical personnel to be ready for us when on the ground.  We made a safe approach and landing.  Once at gate area had the aft stairs lowered to assist the FA that was injured.  1) If radar is not showing any storms; however ATC says there are rain showers in area; let ATC know you do not show any showers and ask for them to point you in a good direction2) In IMC while rain showers has been advised by ATC ask FAs to sit down3) Have FAs not use galley carts.  Yes this would take more time; however if there would have been no galley cart; our FA would not have gotten injured as badly




Synopsis: A MD-83 First Officer reported diverting to an alternate after a flight attendant was injured in unexpected severe turbulence.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SR22
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Powerplant Lubrication System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We departed in our SR22T with sufficient oil in engine (POH states 6-8 Quarts; in engine 6.25 quarts). During the climb out at 5000 feet there was a slight RPM drop and soon thereafter the oil warning light came on. Oil pressure dropped and we decided to [advise ATC]; turn back where we landed without further incidence. On the ground we checked the aircraft and had only 2 quarts of oil on the ramp.The aircraft had a cylinder replaced under warranty at its annual in March and the break-in procedure has been followed. Before the annual the aircraft worked perfectly well. Something was wrong with the aircraft after the cylinder replacement; it used more oil than before. We had the aircraft checked a number of times at the repair station; including a flight with the mechanic. The aircraft performed well during that flight and after a slight adjustment of oil pressure by the repair station in March there was nothing speaking against the mission from in April. As a consequence of the oil pressure loss and the unplanned return in April we had the engine taken off the airplane and sent to the manufacturer for further inspection (Continental).

Callback: The reporter stated that he was not a mechanic; so he can only state what he was told. The reporter stated that the Oil Separator may have been damaged during an engine repair. The reporter also stated that there may have been some carbon that may have come loose from the engine and lodged under the spring that controls the oil pressure. It was noted that the external part of the belly of the airplane was saturated with oil. He only had 2 quarts when he landed. The reporter stated that Continental Motors had to completely rebuild the engine in order to make it serviceable.



Synopsis: SR22 pilot reported detecting a slight drop in RPM during climbout followed by an oil warning light and low oil pressure.
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Dash 8-400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Main Gear Tire
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Check Pilot; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Confusion; Training / Qualification; Time Pressure; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight; Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was performing IOE; the IOE Captain was the PF and has had 33 hours of OE. I requested Runway 31 for a visual approach. The IOE Captain got a little behind the aircraft on initial approach; but was stable by 1;000 FT on speed. As we approached for landing around 100 FT the IOE Captain's pitch became a little high and I called pitch; no correction I again called pitch and the IOE Captain reduced power and increased pitch instead of increasing power and lowering the nose. At this point (very close to the runway and a pitch attitude above 6 degrees) I had no choice; but to push the nose forward. Once feeling me push the nose of the aircraft forward the IOE Captain let go of the controls allowing the aircraft to contact the ground very hard! I took the controls and got the aircraft under control; at 60 KTS I gave the controls back to him and told him he had a blown nose tire and to exit the runway very slowly and to stop once clear. I contacted Maintenance Control and asked if we could taxi to the gate with 1 nose tire. Maintenance Control told me it was OK to taxi in on one tire; but to do so very slowly. The IOE Captain taxied the aircraft into the gate; where on post flight inspection I saw the blown tire. The IOE Captain never got off the aircraft to look and showed little concern for the aircraft. Maintenance came out to the aircraft and changed the tire. Neither Maintenance nor my self discovered the severity of the damage to the nose strut until it was brought to my attention with pictures today in a conversation with our fleet Manager. I truly feel had I not pushed the nose forward we would have struck the tail of the aircraft and caused much worse damage.I am sickened that an aircraft was damaged under my supervision; but stand by my decision. One call for a pitch correction then take the controls and correct the situation.




Synopsis: During an approach; a DHC 8-400 IOE Captain allowed the aircraft's pitch to get excessively high and after assistance from the Check Airman he released the yoke which caused a blown tire and nose strut damage during the hard landing.
Date: 201904
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MDSD.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm; Rain
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach; Descent
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Weather; Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We were descending from KERSO to SD350. The arrival starts above 16;000 feet at KERSO. The descent to SD350 is above 4;000 feet. However; to descend for the IFSD150; you must be at 4;000 feet at SD350. Looking at the chart; the minimum sector is 5;400 feet. We were IMC and avoiding thunderstorms and received a quick 'terrain' message. We stopped our descent; but [this] placed us high on the VNAV. We were above the VNAV path. When we broke out; it was unnerving to see how close to the terrain we were.

Callback: Reporter stated the airport involved was MDSD.



Synopsis: B737 Captain reported a terrain GPWS warning while flying the RNAV STAR KERSO 2G to MDSD airport.  Captain stated the crossing restriction at SD350 is 1;400 feet lower than the minimum sector altitude.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Our FBO at ZZZ airport has no face covering policy in effect for workers; visitors; pilots or passengers.My understanding is that all/most US 121 carriers require face coverings on board (with few or zero exemptions). This is likely to reduce virus transmission inside a shared HVAC space.Our FBO has had passengers with active; symptomatic COVID infections traveling without masks. I'd recommend the FAA require a temporary face covering policy inside all interior buildings which serve 121 and 135 crew and passengers. This should be a temporary federal mandate.Failure to have such a national policy could negatively impact the NAS (if pilots; ramp and fuel personnel have to quarantine at home due to unprotected workplace exposure.)




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain recommended the FAA require a temporary face covering policy inside all interior buildings which serve 121 and 135 crew and passengers.
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DFW.Tower, TX
Light: Night
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B DFW
ATC / advisory: Tower DFW
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Supervisor / CIC
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Local procedures allow for automatic jet departures off DFW to D10 departure radar positions with the exceptions of B744 (B747-400) and A343 (A340-300) type aircraft.  After obtaining a release; 10 miles in trail is required to be given with these 2 types of aircraft.   Aircraft X was cleared for take off and subsequently switched to departure.  Wake turbulence separation was applied and wake turbulence advisories issued.  The release for Aircraft X (A340-300) was not obtained from the departure position.The procedure to request a release from D10 for these type aircraft and to provide 10 miles in trail has been in the local order for several years.  Yet; no one knows why nor has an explanation to the procedure.  The procedure should be evaluated and discussed to assess its validity.




Synopsis: A DFW Front Line Manager (FLM) reports of a procedure that was not followed which led to a wake turbulence event and a procedural error involving a heavy aircraft. The FLM questions why this procedure is in place.