elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: DA20-C1 Eclipse
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During climb; engine began to run rough. Immediate level off. Engine roughness disappeared; engine ran normally. Continued flight. While adjusting mixture control; observed oil pressure begin to drop rapidly from approximately 55-60 PSI to approximately 20 PSI; then pressure returned to 55-60 PSI. Decided to proceed direct [to an alternate]. Approximately 8 miles [out] I tuned the communication transceiver to tower frequency and realized there were other aircraft operating in the traffic pattern. Requested priority for landing due to oil pressure issue. Tower controller gave immediate clearance as requested. As the approach to the airport continued; observed oil pressure drop from 55-60 PSI to approximately 40 PSI twice more. Landing was uneventful. Tower had; on their own initiative; called on-field Crash-Fire-Rescue and advised them of our situation. They were standing by near the touchdown point. Later; maintenance inspected the aircraft and the engine and did not observe any deficiencies.




Synopsis: DA-20 flight instructor reported diverting to an alternate after observing a drop in oil pressure.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Human-Machine Interface; Time Pressure; Training / Qualification; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Equipment / Tooling; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At 6000 ft on the ZZZZZ arrival into ZZZ; we were cleared direct ZZZ1. SOP was followed by the PM (Pilot Monitoring) moving ZZZ1 to top line. A magenta line appeared and an execution light. I verified. ZZZ1 was executed with LNAV. The plane started the turn direct. About half way through the turn; the plane rolled out and began a turn right reversing course. I turned the autopilot off and turned left towards ZZZ1. I then looked at the FO's (First Officer's) FMC (Flight Management Computer) because he noticed the error as well and was trying to correct the FMC. There was no magenta line but ZZZ1 had disappeared. The FO was trying to insert ZZZ1 back in the box and the FMC would not accept ZZZ1. There was a moment of confusion on my part where the entire 80 degree turn to ZZZ1 was delayed due to the confusion. Approach re-cleared us to ZZZ1 wondering why we had not completed the turn timely being vectored for the approach. There was a high workload with me hand flying trying to figure out what was going on; turning and descending while trying to verify a possible mechanical problem. I asked the FO to re-engage my autopilot but it would not come on. We reset our flight directors then tried to turn on either autopilot and neither would engage. I asked him if we had an electrical issue or if there were any overhead lights on. We did a recall of the master caution system and no mechanical issues were noted. Both FMCs seemed to be working normally. I had some concern if we had a navigational issue and would be able to shoot an ILS but we verified we looked good for an approach. I wrote up the problem on the ground and briefed the outgoing crew and spoke with Maintenance. All in all; Approach had to call us again to complete the turn to ZZZ1 which was delayed due to the above. I do not believe there was any loss of separation.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported an anomaly with the Flight Management Computer during approach.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Landing
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Jammed rudder pedals; aborted take-off and went off runway. Does not meet part 830. Do not wear shoes that can jam rudder pedals.




Synopsis: A GA pilot reported his feet became stuck in the rudder pedals causing a runway excursion during takeoff.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZID.ARTCC, IN
Light: Night
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ambulance
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZID
ATC / advisory: Center ZID
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
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
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X checked on my freq with routing over jst and the bunts arrival I believe. I immediately gave him direct PHL. The pilot acknowledged the clearance and thanked me for the direct. I flashed Aircraft X to ZDC sector W03. A few minutes later ZDC called and said Aircraft X could not go direct PHL. I advised the ZDC controller of the priority of the Aircraft X and where they fell on the list. I asked how many emergencies and aircraft on emergency war orders he had in front of the Aircraft X. His reply was to say;' we're going to go with plan b. I'm going to give you routing for the Aircraft X and you're gonna issue it.' My reply was;' no I am not.' At this point I gave my operating initial and hung up. The Aircraft X was still flashing to W03. I notified the FLM of the situation. The FLM made a comment that this was a replay of yesterday. I have no idea what that meant. I was not present for the referenced situation. The FLM came over to the d-side keyboard; stopped the hand off on the Aircraft X and amended the flight plan from direct KPHL to BUKYY.PAATS2.KPHL. The FLM then re-initiated the hand off with ZDC. ZDC took the hand off. I asked the FLM why I was being ordered to violate the 7110.65. I did not receive [an] answer to that question. The only response was; 'if you don't you'll have to spin him.' I advised the FLM that ZDC had taken the hand off. No other direction was given. I advised the Aircraft X that I was given orders contrary to the 7110.65 and I issued the routing as directed by the FLM. I then apologized and shipped him to ZDC.Either the Aircraft X has priority or it does not. Which is it? Resequence the priority list or adhere to it. All of us. How long before I am ordered to issue an emergency aircraft routing? In the future to avoid this declaration of an emergency for the pilot seems the only reasonable alternative.




Synopsis: A ZID Controller reported a heading deviation incident that resulted from an improper handoff.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Speed All Types; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Maintenance action required for that aircraft and company maintenance was notified. [Smoke in the flight deck].

Callback: Reporter stated intermittent fume/smoke occurred on approach. Requested priority handling and completed an uneventful landing.

Second narrative: No way of avoiding the situation. [Fume/smoke event.]


Synopsis: A319 flight crew reported fume/smoke event during approach.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZNY.ARTCC, NY
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZNY
ATC / advisory: Center ZNY
Second aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: ATOP Sectors 87/89 combined. Multiple aircraft were giving estimates that were not in conformance; and were verified by the Controller. Upon further investigation; including reports from aircraft about the winds; I learned that the winds were over 200 KTS off at altitude in the system. This corrupts the aircraft's profiles and results in separation being lost. Due to this huge error in the system; I believe two airplanes may have lost separation. The problem is that when I advised FLM of the situation; he/she took no action. Instead he/she advised me that they would be fixed on the next update; several hours away. This is unacceptable. I figured out that by manually entering the winds; they would be changed on the hour update or so it seemed. After changing winds in the system; the system then alerted me to another pair of aircraft that were together; as the one aircraft's profile was incorrect due to the gross error in winds in the system. My change in the wind data resulted in the display of the conflict and subsequent resolution. This is a serious safety issue when we depend on the winds to be accurate to ensure aircraft profiles are up to date. This combined with estimates from pilots are the only assurances we have of separation. If an error is discovered with the winds; they must be fixed! I believe that the controller and FLM workforce is not trained to fix the winds or even understand them. I recommend further training on the system for all controllers and FLM's in regard to wind data.




Synopsis: ZNY Controller described a probable loss of separation event when accurate wind data was not entered into the system creating the potential for separation errors; the reporter suggesting increased training in this area.
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: HWD.Tower, CA
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke; 6
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class C OAK
ATC / advisory: Tower OAK
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We requested transition through HWD on our way to OAK. We were told 'northwest transition approved; fly 1300 ft.' We noted a jet taking the field 28L just below and to our right. Our course of flight was set to cross the field towards the end of the 28L. About midfield Tower told us to descend 1300 ft.; he was showing us at 1400 ft. The jet lifted off just after this call and began its climb out. I instructed my student to turn left to avoid crossing over the runway as we appeared to be on course to collide with the jet's straight out departure.Seconds after my instruction; Tower told us to 'cross overhead midfield. Cross overhead.' We complied however it was questionable to do so considering how close we passed with the jet. I think Tower should have had us fly parallel to the field and allowed the jet adequate space to take off and then had us cross. After landing we discussed the event and what we would have done differently. Upon seeing the jet take the runway; we would have contacted Tower to verify our position; identify the jet taking the runway and ask exactly where Tower wanted us to cross the field with relation to the jet taking off.




Synopsis: Light aircraft Flight Instructor pilot an NMAC with a commercial jet departing OAK.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: HSD.Airport, OK
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: M-20 M Bravo
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class E HSD
ATC / advisory: CTAF HSD
Second aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Flew to HSD direct; had flight following approaching HSD told OKC approach has airport in sight; asked if any traffic ahead told me a target 5 miles north of HSD; discontinued flight following ; got on [CTAF] 122.7 and said intentions; right base to 17 and final to 17 full stop. [Another] aircraft; a piper arrow fixed gear [I] believe said they saw me; I did not see them and [they] flew right in front of me as I was turning final; same altitude and 300 feet from me; to me a close call; the piper continued on and proceeded to do touch and goes; I believe in training. They saw me and should have gone behind not in front.




Synopsis: An M20M pilot suffered an NMAC at a non-towered airport with a fixed gear Piper which turned final in front of him.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: J3 Cub
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Cessna Aircraft Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Turning onto the 45 for left downwind for Runway XX; I lost sight of a Cessna turning downwind and the Cessna took evasive action (dive) to avoid collision.  I crossed mid-field at aprox 2;500 feet MSL; 1;000 feet above PA. I was a bit higher because I knew there was traffic in the pattern.  Crossing mid-field; I had the traffic in sight that was climbing departing [Runway] XX. After crossing the downwind; I began my descent; extending further than I would normally before turning to the 45 to allow for spacing; as the Cessna had now announced they were crosswind. Thinking I provided enough space I began my turn to the right; while still descending; to the 45 to join the downwind. At the same time; the ADSB display on my ipad flickered and I lost traffic reporting. I also got a bit of the setting sun in my eyes. About when I reached 90 degrees to the runway; a different voice in the Cessna; what sounded like an instructor; indicated that they were about at my 11 o'clock and diving to avoid. I saw them; retarded my throttle; halted my turn; and radioed I had them in sight.  The situation was caused by losing sight of the Cessna due to the sun; the descending turn with wing down towards the other traffic; and the distraction of losing the ADSB display. Contributing was the fact that; since I started flying the Cub and planning power off landings; I find myself flying a pattern that has tighter downwind (laterally closer) than most Cessnas I'm in the pattern with (no commentary; I swear). What I thought of as extending before turning didn't put me as far out from the downwind the Cessna was flying as I thought it would.  To prevent a reoccurrence I could have waited to begin the turn until completing the descent; stopped turning when I was parallel to the runway and had re-established visual contact with the other traffic (or received radio verification of their location); and anticipated the Cessna's downwind was likely to be laterally further from the field than what I would choose myself.




Synopsis: J-3 Piper Super Cub pilot reported an NMAC event during landing pattern entry with departure traffic in crosswind turn.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SR20
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I took off in a Cirrus SR-20. On climb out at 450 feet CHT (Cylinder Head Temperature) #1 shot up into the red with a temperature of 500 degrees Fahrenheit. I lowered the nose and reduced power to attempt to cool the engine down. After 30 seconds the CHT temperature started decreasing and went into the green. ATC issued a low altitude alert and asked about the slow climb rate. At the time all instruments were reading normal so I then slowly added some power and started a climb at 500ft/m. Approximately 45 secs later CHT was reading 500 degrees Fahrenheit again. I then asked to return to [departure airport]. At this time I also noticed a burning smell in the cockpit. I kept power level around 50% to maintain 700ft and proceeded to land.Suggestions: If I was in this situation again I would have immediately asked to return the first time a CHT read in the red.




Synopsis: Cirrus SR20 pilot reported returning to departure airport after experiencing high cylinder head temperature. While subsequently attempting to cool the engine; ATC issued a low altitude alert.
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZDV.ARTCC, CO
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZDV
ATC / advisory: Center ZDV
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I received a position relief briefing that Aircraft X was non radar at 8;000 feet and was going to report the Denver Approach boundary.  I was also briefed on two aircraft deviating for weather that were in conflict with each other.  The first thing I did after taking the sector was to turn the traffic conflict.  It was a shallow convergence and required two turns totaling 30 degrees and constant monitoring. I also had some other coordination to do for an aircraft that was wrong for direction.  I couldn't remember if the previous controller had mentioned it in the briefing or whether or not it had been coordinated so it added to my workload.  At some point during this time Aircraft X's data block began flashing an MSAW (Minimum Safe Altitude Warning) alert.  He was heading into an area with a higher Minimum IFR Altitude (MIA) of 9;000 feet.  For some reason I dismissed the alert.  I had previously been aware of the higher MIA but it didn't click pertaining to this aircraft. Even though I saw the words MSAW I think I instead assumed that the data block was flashing in coast track because he was still non-radar.  The alert flashed for a long time before I finally realized what was going on. I climbed him to 9;000 feet and as he came back in radar he was in the higher MIA area still climbing out of 8;500 feet.I can't think of any recommendations.




Synopsis: A Denver Center (ZDV) Controller reports of an IFR aircraft that was non radar at the time and was expecting it. Minutes later the data block started flashing on the aircraft indicating a MSAW. The controller dismissed the alert before realizing what was going on. Eventually; the controller climbs the aircraft to a safe altitude.