elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202002
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: D01.TRACON, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B DEN
ATC / advisory: TRACON D01
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
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: While on final to Runway 16L we received a traffic alert quickly followed by a traffic RA. I was hand flying; on LOC and on glideslope just outside of the LEETS FAF. We descended below glide path due to the RA and once clear of conflict we returned back on glide path. I was able to see the Aircraft X which caused the RA. The aircraft was on visual to Runway 16R and came within about 300 ft. of ours. From what I could see Aircraft X may have overshot the final to Runway 16R which likely caused the RA. We told Tower and continued on to a normal landing.


Second narrative: Approaching WAHUU; just about 3miles from the fix; Approach gave us a heading of 220 expedite descent to 8000 ft. and intercept LOC Runway 16L. Passing through 9000 ft. we called the rwy and were cleared to 7000 ft. hdg 200 cleared visual Runway 16L. The FO (First Officer) armed the Approach mode and LOC and Glide Slope was 1.5 dots high when we received a traffic alert. It was yellow and off our right wing and behind us. The FO had the traffic in sight looking at the 4-5 position of our acft. Just outside of Leets at about 7500-7800 ft. we go the RA; 'Descend Descend.' He was hand flying and complied with the RA. I switched to tower and told them we were responding to an RA with traffic in sight. I never saw the TCAS get less then 300 ft. above and to the right. The FO felt he may have overshot a little. By the time we were over LEETS the RA was over. Normal approach and landing was accomplished. It is the noteworthy that conflict acft landed on Runway 16R and was taxiing on WB at a high rate of speed and cleared WB to F before we made it to CS. He landed behind us on Runway 16R and we landed on Runway 16L and he arrived at WB and F before we arrived at F and CS.


Synopsis: B757 flight crew reported an NMAC occurred with a commercial aircraft on approach to DEN.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization Control System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Workload; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On previous flight; ATC was intermittently receiving our transponder. We followed checklists but still did not continuously work. Our autothrottle also would not stay engaged. On descent; we got a low idle light; do not use speed brake and the cabin pressure seemed not to be working properly. We wrote it up and the mechanic worked on it for a couple of hours. He could not find a problem so the Company and Mechanic signed it off as could not duplicate. On departure; ATC advised us again that they were not receiving our transponder. Our autothrottle also was not working. We attempted to get hold of company in the departure airport and finally reached Dispatch through ACARS on level off FL310. Dispatch re-released us. We took a turn and then proceeded to get a cabin warning horn. We were losing pressurization. We started a descent; notified ATC and put on our oxygen masks. The Captain was able to stop and control the cabin in manual mode. The Captain pulled out the QRC and ran the depressurization checklist and emergency descent checklist. We continued down to 13;000. We notified the flight attendants of our incident and made sure that the masks did not drop in the back and that no one was injured in the descent. They confirmed that everyone was fine and that the masks did not drop. The cabin didn't get any higher than approximately 10;500 FT. We were already dispatched to a nearby airport; so we continued on with no further incidents. The mechanic and Maintenance Control were unable to diagnose the problem prior to departure.




Synopsis: A B737-400 pressurization control malfunctioned causing the Cabin Altitude Alert to sound so an emergency was declared and the flight diverted. The autothrottles and transponders were also malfunctioning.
Date: 201605
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZID.ARTCC, IN
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Balloon
Mission: Other Weather
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZID
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: There was a weather balloon launched earlier in the day and when I got back on position it had started its descent. We did not have any reliable data for where this weather balloon was except for what the supervisor was telling us from the computer which was tracking it via GPS. We had one aircraft that got a visual on it for a short period of time but couldn't maintain sight of it so the aircraft started to maneuver to avoid the area where the balloon was last seen. The aircraft that reported seeing it indicated he thought it was about the same altitude at FL380 while the supervisor information was showing that the balloon was at FL300. I was working the RSH sector and the balloon was last reported right above all of the ORD inbounds that I had at FL280. I made numerous calls as to where the balloon was last sighted and what the last known altitude was but I had no valid information as to where this balloon was in relation to the airplanes in my sector. This has to be one of the most unsafe things that I have witnessed. For there to be an unmanned balloon going to almost FL1000 and then back to the ground right through a major stream of aircraft and a busy airway without the ability to see it or give traffic information made me feel helpless when advising these aircraft about the hazard that was flying in front of them. It felt like I was trying to tell the aircraft how to find the needle in a haystack hoping that they didn't get their finger pricked while they were looking only the finger prick would have been an aircraft hitting a 12lb object on a balloon. I would recommend that any balloon that is going to go into the Class A airspace has to have an operating transponder so that we can track where it is and provide accurate information to the aircraft that are in our sectors. Without an operating transponder they are not allowed to launch the balloon period.




Synopsis: ZID Controller reported of a weather balloon that was not equipped to show where its location was. Controller reported aircraft saw the balloon and reported it to him. Controller thought this was an unsafe practice.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 35
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Landing Gear
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other landing roll
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: This incident occurred after landing; and early in the takeoff roll of a touch and go. I retracted the landing gear instead of the flaps; causing a prop strike and partial landing gear collapse. No injury.  The main cause was my choice to perform a touch and go; rather than a full stop landing. Two contributing factors were:  1. Taxi back for that runway requires crossing the parallel and then a long taxi to the ramp and back. That made a touch and go more desirable; even though I prefer full stops. 2. Tower had cleared me for the option. Then I offered to make a full stop after hearing the Tower tell a helicopter to hold until I finished my pattern work. On short final the Tower said the helicopter was no longer a factor and asked if I would like the option.  I made a late decision to make a touch and go.  It is a painful lesson: for complex aircraft; always make full stop landings.




Synopsis: BE35 pilot reported accidentally retracting the landing gear on the runway during a touch and go that resulted in a prop strike and partial landing gear collapse.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Flap/Slat Control System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: The leading edge devices on the starboard side extended at FL340. The cruise mach was .78 and about 270 KIAS. The throttle began to retard to slow to 230 KIAS. We followed the ETOPS procedures taking a 45 degree heading to the north to offset the track by 15 miles. We declared an emergency and coordinated a descent to FL200. At FL200 we executed the QRH procedures which did not resolve the problem. We returned to our departure airport where the Captain made a successful overweight landing. On landing the speed brakes (ground spoilers) were extended manually since they did not deploy. During both the preflight walk around and the post flight check the devices appeared normal on the ground.


Second narrative: No additional information was provided in the secondary narrative.


Synopsis: The flight crew of a B737-800 declared an emergency and returned to their departure airport when the right side leading edge devices extended at FL340.
Date: 201812
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: [Company] inadvertently scheduled B767 aircraft to operate to ZZZ. [Company] discovered that the [Ops Specs] only granted authorization for the B767 to use this airport as an alternate. [Company] later applied for and received [Ops Spec] authorization to convert ZZZ from an alternate only designation to a regular airport.




Synopsis: B767 First Officer reported landing at an airport not authorized in company Ops Specs.
Date: 201409
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SNA.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class C SNA
ATC / advisory: Tower SNA
Second aircraft: Helicopter
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Student
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: As I was approaching from the northeast; the tower controller told me to expect left traffic for runway 19L. She then told me to turn directly toward the numbers and cleared me to land on 19L. Following ATC instructions; I preceded to go direct to the 15 degree final established at the Airport (Parallel runway issue). Upon encountering strong convective turbulence prior to flare; I elected to go around. After notifying ATC of my intentions; the controller told me to begin an early crosswind and downwind turn. I acknowledged. At the same time of my go around declaration; a helicopter was cleared for a direct takeoff from an FBO on the airport. He had informed ATC he was departing to the southwest (directly away from me) which is why I presumed they were instructing me to begin an early left turnout. However; he began to fly directly toward my climbing aircraft. Seeing this ahead; I took evasive action in order to evade the craft. Using nearly full deflection of the elevator I proceeded below the helicopter. Just as I was flying below him; ATC issued a traffic alert for the helicopter who had violated his takeoff clearance. I then told ATC that I 'would extend my crosswind for the traffic because he was way too close.' The nervous ATC controller told me that I could do what I needed; and that when I was ready; I was cleared to land on runway 19L again. By the time I was wings up base to final; there was a new controller on frequency. I landed and taxied back to my parking spot; with an insane solo cross country story. I believe this incident occurred due not only to the helicopter pilot's error of departing in the wrong direction; but the controller's error in not realizing that a go-around was possible for my landing aircraft.




Synopsis: An unanticipated go-around due to turbulence by a student pilot on final to Runway 19L (now 20L) at SNA; combined with a takeoff clearance to a helicopter departing from a downfield FBO; resulted in an NMAC as the student dove abruptly to avoid the helicopter.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 15
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-34-200T Turbo Seneca II
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Propeller Pitch Change Mechanism
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Check Pilot; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: The following event took place while I was conducting an ATP AMEL checkride as Designated Pilot Examiner. While executing a circle to land maneuver; the applicant and myself felt what appeared to be the loss of the left engine. The left engine RPM gage indicated a (low RPM) of approximately 1400. Additionally; a windmilling propeller condition existed as observed by severe drag and the necessity to set the aircraft controls for a zero side slip. The propeller was non responsive when the lever was moved forward and aft above the feathered position. The decision was made to feather that engine and land. Although we were at a non-towered airport; we [let everyone know our situation] over CTAF and landed single engine without incident. I suspect the propeller governor failed creating this [problem] although the cause has not yet been determined by maintenance.


Second narrative: On the circling portion of an instrument approach in a Piper Seneca II; I experienced a lack of thrust and uncommanded yaw to the left. I noticed that the RPM on the left engine had decreased and was not responding to throttle movements. The pilot not flying was a FAA examiner and I told him that something was wrong with the left engine. Between the two of us we determined that there was indeed a problem with the left engine and needed to feather the left propeller in order to gain single engine climb performance. After successfully feathering the left propeller we were able to continue the circling portion of the approach and landed uneventfully.


Synopsis: During an ATP AMEL checkride in a PA-34-200T; the pilot experienced an actual engine malfunction; so he feathered the engine and landed successfully.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: 5C1.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PC-12
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: CTAF 5C1
Second aircraft: SR22
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Pilatus taxied from parking while monitoring CTAF to get an indication of the traffic in the area. Approximate taxi time was 3 minutes. Pilatus pilot only heard a Piper Cub on CTAF. The Cub was announcing traffic legs for Runway 17 and landed without incident. About the time the Cub was clearing the active runway; Pilatus was ready for takeoff. Pilatus announced intentions to take off; checked the final approach for Runway 17 for traffic; and about 20 seconds later taxied onto the active runway. A Cirrus who had not made any prior CTAF announcements (for the last 3 minutes at least); advises that he is going around (presumably unexpectedly). Pilatus holds position on the runway until Cirrus turns crosswind leg. Pilatus then departs without incident and Cirrus lands without incident.To prevent a recurrence of an unexpected go around; I recommend the following:- All aircraft announce each traffic leg in the pattern or if entering a 5 mile final; make an announcement every 2 miles. - If another aircraft announces takeoff intentions which could cause a potential conflict; make a CTAF announcement immediately of the potential conflict. - Before taking the active runway; perform a through scan of the runway final and base legs.




Synopsis: PC12 pilot taxied out listening to the CTAF without hearing any conflicting traffic; then announces his departure. Approximately 20 seconds later he takes the runway and a SR22 on final announces a go-around.
Date: 202106
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: RV-7
Operator: Personal
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: UNICOM ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Engine failed on takeoff and climbout at about 300 to 400 feet; busy trying to get a restart; switch fuel tanks; backup fuel pump; ignition; carb heat; mixture; throttle; all to no avail; just had to land straight ahead. Confirmed after towing back to hanger that fuel and controls all have continuity; aircraft had been filled with 25 gallons 100LL at ZZZ; 10 in port tank 15 in starboard tank. 21 gallons each tank; confirmed fuel in carb bowl; no ignition. Commercial EFII aircraft ignition system.




Synopsis: RV-7 pilot reported experiencing engine failure immediately after takeoff and landing on airport property.
Date: 201605
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: N87.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 9
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class E WRI
ATC / advisory: CTAF N87
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I had picked up an IFR clearance and requested to depart VFR - approved by McGuire Approach. I took off VFR and halfway down the runway there was a truck parked on the centerline on the middle of the runway. It could have been horrific had I not been airborne. There was a NOTAM AD AIRPORT ALL SURFACE WORK IN PROGRESS SPRAYING DAILY XA:00-XF:00. [How] in the world would a pilot know that there would be a truck parked on the runway?




Synopsis: Shortly after takeoff at N87; a GA pilot reported seeing a truck parked on the active runway that was not visible at the beginning of the takeoff roll. Reporter cited a NOTAM that allegedly did not have enough information on the truck's activities.