elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201403
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Chart Or Publication; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: The First Officer was flying the aircraft on the...arrival into [destination]. Shortly after beginning initial descent (passing through approximately FL300); MFD 2 failed and went completely blank. A smell of burning (not exactly an electrical fire smell but definitely not normal) was noticed by Captain and First Officer. There was no visible smoke. First Officer continued to operate the aircraft while Captain consulted the QRH. There was insufficient guidance for this exact issue in the QRH; so the Captain pulled the MFD 2 circuit breaker; at which time the burning smell began to dissipate. The Captain did not declare an emergency; but did request direct [to destination] from Air Traffic Control and an immediate descent. As we progressed closer to [destination]; we coordinated; what was essentially; an extended left base for Runway 8L. Since the Captain had better situational awareness from his side (better visual of airport; and functioning MFD) the flight crew exchanged controls and the Captain performed the final approach and landing. Although an emergency was not declared; Air Traffic Control interpreted this situation as an emergency; giving the flight crew priority handling and dispatching Airport Fire Fighters. Several fire trucks were waiting on the parallel taxiway. The landing was uneventful; and the flight crew taxied the aircraft to the scheduled arrival gate; while the fire trucks followed the aircraft. Practice with failed displays in the simulator would be helpful. We practice using reversionary mode only briefly; but that is mainly for a failed PFD or EICAS. It would help with situational awareness and cockpit instrument scan to practice with a failed MFD.




Synopsis: EMB145 flight crew experienced loss of MFD #2 on arrival and noted burning odor. Odor dissipated after MFD #2 circuit breaker was pulled; ATC provided expedited handling; and Crew landed without incident.
Date: 202109
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
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: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: On taxi in at ZZZ was told to taxi to gate via Taxiway XX; XY...While on Taxiway XX; Aircraft Y turned onto Taxiway XX immediately in front of us. Had to apply abrupt braking to come to a stop. ATC said 'thank you Aircraft X'. We asked if we were supposed to give way. He said that he thought Aircraft Y would not be a factor. Obviously Aircraft Y was. Aircraft Y had been told to taxi; but neither of us was told to give way to the other.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported hard braking to avoid a collision with a taxiing aircraft.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Cloudy
Light: Night
Aircraft: B787-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Departed ZZZZ on SID. Left engine failed dramatically while climbing through about 8;000 feet. Occurred about 25 miles north of ZZZZ; just past waypoint; at approximately [time]. Requested priority handling with ATC with intention to return to ZZZZ. Initiated steady descent. Completed Non-Normal and Normal Checklists. Completed landing assessment and setup for RNP2 Runway XXL approach. Notified Dispatch of left engine failure and ZZZZ return. Captain briefed flight attendants and made passenger PA. Confirmed with Tower priority status; emergency equipment standing by; and requested observation report upon landing. Captain flew single engine approach in IMC to a very smooth landing at 330;000 lbs gross weight. Not an overweight landing.Followed by emergency equipment to hardstand. Coordinated with ZZZZ Operations for passenger accommodation and maintenance support. Outstanding support from ZZZZ station personnel. Cabin crew should be highly commended for their professionalism; dedication; and situational awareness throughout the entire event.After the failure analysis of this engine is complete; I would sincerely appreciate any update you are allowed to release. Thank you for your consideration.




Synopsis: B737 First Officer reported experiencing an engine failure during climbout resulting in a return to the departure airport.
Date: 202002
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: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Gate Agent / CSR; Person Other Person
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Customer said the batteries in the wheels could not be removed; had the customer remove the wheels and stowed in the closet.  After researching the wheels; yes; they can and need to be removed; but even the Dangerous Goods support line did not know this.




Synopsis: Ground Personnel reported Lithium Ion battery powered wheelchair was transported in cabin instead of detaching batteries and transported in cargo.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1201-1800
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
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Cirrus Aircraft Undifferentiated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: My student and I were departing to a training area about 10 NM southeast of the ZZZ airport to a cruising altitude of 5;500 ft MSL to practice PPL[Private Pilot License] maneuvers per 61.107. We requested a right downwind departure holding short of Runway 34; which was approved. We then departed and as we were turning our crosswind leg; there was Aircraft Y behind us who also requested a right downwind departure; which was also approved. However; the Tower advised Aircraft Y of our presence in the traffic pattern departing on the same leg. Since we were just turning downwind as he began his takeoff roll; we had the traffic in sight. We continued our climb through the downwind leg and when we were abeam the runway numbers; we began our turn out toward the southeast with an approximate heading of 120. At this point; I no longer had Aircraft Y traffic in sight as he was behind us and we were beginning our turn to the training area with an expectation that he would be behind us. However; not long after we began our turn; as we were climbing through about 2;400 ft MSL; Aircraft Y barely missed us on his climb out below us as I believe he made a wider pattern. He responded to this near miss on the Tower frequency by saying; 'That was close!' He then came back on the Tower frequency to tell Tower that he had a near miss with us and the Tower advised him that he had already warned him of the traffic in the pattern departing on the same leg; and Aircraft Y replied that he never had us in sight. We continued to our training area with no further contact with this pilot as he continued southbound.




Synopsis: Cessna flight instructor reported loss of situational awareness caused a Near Mid Air Collision.
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: DC-8 Undifferentiated or Other Model
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: Flight Engineer / Second Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Number 3 engine fire warning and bell at FL320. Completed appropriate procedures; declared emergency; diverted to a nearby airport and landed without incident.


Second narrative: [No substantive additional information was provided in the Secondary Narrative.]


Synopsis: A DC-8 flight crew completed the appropriate procedures; declared and emergency and diverted upon receipt of a number 3 fire engine warning.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Workload; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Hot temperatures and thunderstorms in ZZZ2 required us to have a very quick flight from ZZZ-ZZZ1 for a fuel stop. We were cleared to the initial approach fix for the RNAV XX. As we approached the fix I realized that the vertical NAV was still thinking we were climbing to a higher altitude (an issue with TOC and TOD). I asked the PM to reload the approach and try and fix the issue. As we got closer; ZZZ approach asked if we had the field? We said we did and they cleared us for the visual approach to [Runway] XX. Not having a clear glide path I clicked off the guidance and automation and proceeded to fly the visual approach. We were still high and I pitched down to get back on the slope; we were then alerted to an aural obstacle caution message. For the dock cranes along the approach path. I added power and climbed back up. We were well clear of the obstacles and back on vertical path we continued the visual to land Runway XX with no further incident. The flight was only 10 minutes long. We were task saturated and while I tried to slow down and configure early; it was not enough and I should have delayed starting the approach. We discussed and decided that we needed to spend more time on the ground in ZZZ briefing and setting up everything we can for the quick flight to ZZZ1. Including briefing the full approach and getting landing numbers before we take off. So that we are not task saturated. I felt pressured to accept the visual approach when I should have asked for delay vectors. And lastly we should have gone around when we got the obstacle warning; that would have been the safest option at that point.




Synopsis: EMB-175 Captain reported getting an aural obstacle alert while descending on visual approach. The flight crew climbed back up to altitude and continued the approach to landing. Reporter cited a short flight and task saturation contributed to accepting the visual approach before being ready.
Date: 202010
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LVK.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Calm wind; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D LVK
ATC / advisory: Tower LVK
Second aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Student
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Aircraft Y landed prior to student pilot landing. Student experienced wake turbulence while touching down. ATC had not advised student pilot of wake turbulence separation.




Synopsis: Student pilot reported encountering wake turbulence at touchdown from the preceding small turbojet aircraft.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LUF.Airport, AZ
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: DJI Phantom 4 Pro
Operator: Commercial Operator (UAS)
Operating under: Part 107
Flight plan: None
Mission: Surveying / Mapping (UAS)
Flight phase: Hovering (UAS)
Second aircraft: Fighter
Reporter organization: Commercial Operator (UAS)
Reporter function: Person Manipulating Controls (UAS); Remote PIC (UAS)
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Remote Pilot (UAS)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification; Confusion
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person UAS Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was on a mapping mission for a housing development at this [location]. As I was beginning to take the photographs and was hovering at 400 ft. AGL I noticed a fighter jet performing a banked turn just beyond my UAV. I am not sure whether it knew I was flying there or not. It showed up on my photo so I knew it had to be pretty close. Based on my sectional chart I did not believe I was in Lake AFB SATR (Special Air Traffic Rules). I immediately descended and landed my aircraft to avoid any other conflict in the area.




Synopsis: Remote pilot was flying a UAS 100 ft. below a charted Alert Area when a fast moving military jet was flying the same vicinity. The remote pilot recognized the conflict and landed the UAS to avoid collision.
Date: 201704
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: JYO.Airport, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E JYO
ATC / advisory: CTAF JYO
Second aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airport; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A jet passed approximately 200 feet below my aircraft when I turned from left base to final in the traffic pattern at JYO. I had entered the pattern on the upwind and announced my position on CTAF throughout the pattern. The jet announced that he was on a straight-in approach at 10 miles and 5 miles out; and then ATC contacted him on JYO CTAF to ask him to switch back to his assigned squawk code until he landed. I do not recall hearing another call on his position until he asked why I had turned final when he was on final. Once I saw him underneath me; I executed a go-around and turned to the right of the runway at approximately 400 ft AGL.Root Cause: I was not familiar with the jet's airspeed; and did not see him on his non-standard; straight-in final approach as I turned from my standard; left pattern; base to final. I was expecting him to still be at least 2 miles away based on the last position call I received; and my incorrect anticipation of a lower airspeed from his aircraft. At the same time; the jet pilot assumed that I knew how fast he was going to get there; and because he was on the ILS for runway 17; that the other pilots in the pattern would make room for him landing. Neither one of us coordinated with the other aircraft to deconflict until he passed underneath me. From my side; there was no coordination because I thought he was no factor; and he would land after I did.Corrective Actions: Coordinate between pilots directly; rather than making position calls and assuming the other pilot heard the transmission and is going to do what you expect them to.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported a near miss on final to runway 17 at JYO with a turbojet aircraft.
Date: 201812
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action; General Work Refused
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Received 1 piece of mail with DG labels for Lithium Ion Battery and Cargo Aircraft only label adhered to box. Mail was rejected back to the Post Office.




Synopsis: Airline cargo agent reported returning USPS Dangerous Goods mail parcel due to incomplete hazmat documentation.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: GSO.Airport, NC
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: As we were doing our final compliance check; we started to be pushed back and the door was still open. Never gave any indication that the cabin was secure.  I was working first class and a passenger commented about it to me. This was a huge security issue that our pilots made. Captain then asked are we secure and told him no. The other Flight Attendant was still doing her compliance check and so after said yes we are secure.Pilots made a huge mistake that could have been a huge security issue. It was a FAR violation. My reaction is that people need more training.




Synopsis: Flight attendant reported that the flight crew and ground crew began pushback without verifying that the doors were closed; resulting in a safety and FAR violation.
Date: 201812
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: AFO.Airport, WY
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Clear; 10
Aircraft: Vans Aircraft Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class E AFO
ATC / advisory: CTAF AFO
Second aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; 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: I completed my run-up at the departure end of Runway 34 at AFO; verified visually that there was no traffic in the pattern; and announced on the CTAF (122.8); 'Afton Traffic; [Aircraft X] departing 34; Afton'. I had not heard any calls on the CTAF of traffic in the area. I taxied onto [Runway] 34 and began the take-off roll when a twin turboprop aircraft flew directly over my aircraft at an estimated height of 150-200 ft. I applied brakes and watched the turboprop execute a missed approach. The turboprop executed a left crosswind turn to 34; then a turn to a left 34 downwind after which I resumed my take-off. There was no CTAF communication from the turboprop (that evidently was executing a straight-in approach to 34) either prior to the approach; during the missed approach or the crosswind; downwind; base; or final legs of the turboprop landing after the potential conflict. Lack of communication from the turboprop as to its position and intent for landing at AFO contributed to the potential conflict as did its apparent use of a straight-in approach to Runway 34. Potential events like this could be prevented by communication on the CTAF; landing aircraft executing a standard approach pattern rather than a straight-in approach; and by the pilot of departing aircraft double checking for traffic on final prior to taxing onto the active runway.




Synopsis: Vans RV pilot reported a twin turboprop aircraft overflew them resulting in evasive action maneuver.