elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202012
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Hawker 4000
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Indicating and Warning - Flight & Navigation Systems
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
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: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Electrical issue MAU (Modular Avionics Unit) 2A fail; lost a lot of systems; notified ATC and diverted to ZZZ1. Textron called the issue an SEU (Single Event Upset) started at FL430; 8 min later around 13;000 feet; the majority of EICAS message fail lights when away; I did have for a few seconds a smell of electrical burn.


Second narrative: We had an electrical issue and we decided to divert to ZZZ that has maintenance for Hawker 4000. what my Captain told me that these situation had happen more than few times; they call it SEU (Single Event Upset).


Synopsis: After an MAU-2 failure; Flight Crew elected to divert and made a successful precautionary emergency landing.
Date: 201411
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Gate Agent / CSR
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance
Detector: Person Gate Agent / CSR
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was acting controlling agent. Customs & Border Protection (CBP) informed us they were taking off a pax who had lied to them about the amount of money he was transporting. We correctly conducted the required. I don't personally remove someone from the flight until they pass the gate threshold I don't remove them off to prevent any inconsistencies and they never exited the jetbridge area until well after I had left to go home. In the end the passenger was not removed from the manifest until the aircraft was inflight resulting in incorrect weights and counts- My possible failure was not informing my replacement that I had not removed the passenger yet as he was still in the secure jetbridge area being held by CBP when I went home. During that time we were also had a steady stream of passengers connecting; and with monitoring the needs of the flight attendants and preventing any further delays which complicated matters and possibly diluted the tasks left to complete.




Synopsis: Gate Agent describes his role in a passenger count error that results in an incorrect weight and balance calculation.
Date: 201410
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MDW.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation V/Ultra/Encore (C560)
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZAU
ATC / advisory: Center ZAU
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Following the ENDEE THREE arrival into MDW; we were given a clearance to Descend Via the ENDEE THREE except maintain 11000. Eleven thousand feet was set into the altitude alerter. Upon switching to Chicago approach control the transition to runway 31C via GAGGA was added to our Descend Via clearance with no mention of 'Except maintain 11000 FT. As we leveled off at 11000 the controller called to inquire if we were going to make the crossing restriction of MOORS at 10000 or below. We advised the controller that we had been previously restricted to 11;000. Descend Via clearances seem to work fine when used as published; however confusion can develop when they are modified. It may seem obvious in retrospect that the 'Except maintain 11000' was omitted from the second clearance; but a busy arrival is no place to be parsing the English language. A phrase such as 'Cancel the 11000 foot restriction' would go a long way to assuring clarity of communication.




Synopsis: After being issued a descend via the ENDEE 3 except maintain 11;000; a CE560 Captain is issued a Runway 31C transition via GAGGA by Approach. Without the altitude being mentioned or modified the Captain levels at 11;000 FT and is queried by ATC as to why.
Date: 201512
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: B747-400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Autoflight System
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were on a 25 mile downwind. We were at 170 KIAS; flaps 20; gear up; descending through 4000 feet for 3000 feet. We were given a turn to 090 for base leg. During the turn and descent; PF must have inadvertently hit the TOGA switches on the throttles. Airplane went into a 10-12 degree nose up attitude with Go-Around thrust. PF and PM announced the TOGA status; and PF attempted to disengage both autopilot and autothrottles. Autopilot disengaged normally; and PF pushed over as airplane reached ~4200 feet. Autothrottles did not disengage; so PF manually held them in idle in an attempt to control airspeed. PF announced 'autothrottles will not disengage'; so PM turned off the autothrottle switch on the MCP. As PF tried to level the aircraft at 3000 feet (at this time the aircraft had descended to ~2900 feet); the airspeed slowed to ~156 KIAS (the top of the yellow band) and the crew got a brief stick shaker. PF immediately recovered by advancing the throttles to full power; rolled wings level and climbing back to 3000 feet. Automation was restored; ATC cleared the crew for the approach approximately 25 miles from the field; and the rest of the flight continued uneventfully.


Second narrative: Aircraft did what it was commanded by FMC and automation modes engaged; but not what the crew was cleared to do or what crew wanted. Being heavy; configured; low and slow complicated crew communications as aircraft took time to recover pitch and power/speed. When PF called for A/T ON; I should have selected either ALT HLD or FLCH instead of VNAV (which had been our previously selected mode); which gave us bad F/D commands and a much higher commanded speed initially. PF did a good job of recovery hand flying aircraft when split automation did not do what was expected. Lesson learned: Don't hit TO/GA switches unless needed.


Synopsis: B747 flight crew reported receiving a stick shaker when they lost situational awareness while dealing with the inadvertent selection of TOGA mode while on approach.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: 8
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-46 Malibu/Malibu Mirage/Malibu Matrix
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Ground Excursion Runway; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On second leg of 825 NM flight; after a fuel stop; on IFR flight plan. Arrival airport AWOS was reporting 5;000 scattered; with a direct crosswind 11 gusting 15 KTS. Visibility was decreasing with dark clouds and airport in shadow. ATC held us at 3;000 FT until I saw the field and cancelled IFR. I was high but felt I could make the landing. Arriving over the runway the airplane floated in ground effect before touching down. I then realized that the runway was wet and could not get full braking action; and could not stop before running off the end into low overgrowth; sandy ground about 100 FT. No damage apparent and aircraft was pushed back onto runway.The late detection of the airport was a factor. I could have simplified the situation as I have done often in marginal or deteriorating conditions by requesting the ILS that I had dialed in but failed to use. I could have also done a 360 to lose altitude as I have done before. I should have considered the possibility of a wet runway based on the dark clouds in the area; but failed to register that until wheels were on the runway. I specifically rejected a go-around at that point because I had a full load of people and was not sure the airplane would climb before the runway ended and preferred a low speed overrun to a high speed crash. I do not often go into short fields and a lack of short field practice may have been another factor; though I was for some years based on just such an airport without any problems. Finally; the crosswind was another factor as I believe in using a higher approach speed in such conditions; which was not appropriate for this relatively short runway.




Synopsis: PA-46 pilot reported running off a wet runway when braking proved insufficient.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Climb
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Student and I were on an IFR flight plan and was cleared to depart. We pulled up to runway XX cleared base and final and entered runway. We powered in and accelerated. Airspeed came alive and we called it. Just around rotation speed we noticed a low wing [aircraft] moving at a good pace on [an intersecting] taxiway. Part of me was hoping he was going to stop. He didn't. At that time I knew we were committed and allowed student to rotate. I did command him to push forward right after rotation preventing him from pulling up aggressively into a power stall. As we crossed bravo taxiway on our runway XX he was directly below us with only 25 feet separation. As we climbed I calmly smirked on radio 'Oh look at the little plane on our runway'. Someone else on the field saw the situation and called out the runway incursion and will get the tail number. As we were about to switch over to approach that person in the plane finally announced on the radio 'I suppose I owe you an apology and a new pair of shorts.' We weren't amused.I feel that continuing the rotation was warranted as we had airspeed and the accurate stop at that point would have ended in collision. There was very little time to react to his crossing anytime earlier due to his forward speed. There was no radio calls by him nor stopping to check for traffic departing the runway. Zero situational awareness.Prevention could be better non towered training with communications; looking out. Especially with crossing runways and taxiways.




Synopsis: GA flight instructor reported a ground conflict on takeoff from a non-towered airport when an aircraft crossed unannounced.
Date: 201504
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CVG.Airport, KY
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Learjet 60
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B CVG
ATC / advisory: TRACON CVG
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: We were at 7000 feet MSL; approximately 4 nm from the approach end of CVG runway 18L on the downwind leg; and had just received a vector for left base and descent to 4000 in preparation for a visual approach to runway 18L. As I began the turn and descent; a red and black squarish vehicle appeared on our right; approximately 100 feet at our one to two o'clock (in the turn;) about 50 feet above us in the descending turn. It was southbound; so I did not get a long look; but I would guess it was a quadcopter.


Second narrative: I was the first officer on a flight to CVG. While being vectored on a left downwind for 18L at CVG the captain said 'tell air traffic control that a drone just passed our right wing. It was red and black'. I reported it to air traffic control. I personally did not see it. The TCAS did not activate and we took no evasive maneuvers and landed safely.


Synopsis: LJ60 Captain reports sighting a UAV at 5;000 feet while on downwind for Runway 18L at CVG.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZMP.ARTCC, MN
Aircraft: Learjet 45
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZMP
ATC / advisory: Center ZMP
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Company Policy
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A Learjet 45 checked onto my frequency at an interim altitude of FL410 with no prior coordination (filed altitude of FL430) and stated he was negative RVSM. I verified that he was negative RVSM and asked what his equipment suffix was. The pilot stated he was a /G. I asked if he filed his flight plan as a /G and he stated yes; he did file as a /G. I informed the Kansas City Center Controller of the situation and I climbed the aircraft to FL430 and changed his suffix to a /G. GA aircraft not filing the correct negative RVSM equipment suffix have been a very common problem within my workplace. I have filed several reports on the exact same problem. Even though this pilot told me he filed /G; I do not believe he filed the correct equipment suffix. The pilots that have been doing this do not notify any controller as they are climbing that they are negative RVSM until they check on frequency in level flight; then they notify that they are negative RVSM. Aircraft should be required to notify each controller they are in contact with; while climbing through RVSM airspace; that they are negative RVSM and this alone would be the easiest fix to add an extra layer of safety.




Synopsis: ZMP Controller voiced concern regarding the inaccurate 'suffix' filing by corporate type aircraft with regard to RVSM equipment.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: It was my 7th crosswind landing in 2 days. [First day]; I logged 3 landings. On that day; my last landing of the day was at ZZZ Runway XY. The winds were about 330 at 10 with gusts to 16.[Second day]; I departed ZZZ and headed to ZZZ1. I performed 3 touch and goes on RWY XX and headed back to ZZZ for a full stop landing. There was still a strong left crosswind. It was a stabilized right traffic approach to RWY XY at ZZZ. I was at about 60 knots crossing the threshold of RWY XY. I was holding left wing low into the left crosswind and right rudder to keep the plane along the centerline of the runway. I entered the flare and the mains touched down about 2 seconds after the stall horn started sounding. I held the nose off a couple of seconds as the plane slowed down with the throttle closed. Right when the nose wheel touched down; a gust quickly lifted the left wing. It caused me to swerve to the left. Then; it felt as though I was pushed from behind and the tail lifted; for an instant I thought the plane would flip over. I was able to regain control and continue the rollout. I was left of the centerline during the rollout after the recovery. I exited the runway at the next taxiway. I did not feel the prop hit the pavement. I thought I had a close call upset and had recovered; but I realized the prop hit when I shut the engine down at the hanger and saw the bent tips. I logged 1.5 hours during the flight.I discussed the incident with my flight instructor of over 30 years. He told me he had called the Tower after the incident and said there was a wind reversal around the time of my landing which may have changed the left crosswind into a left tailwind maybe contributing to the sensation of being pushed from behind; or at least; increased the severity of the angle of the crosswind. Contributing may be that Runway XZ/XA was closed at ZZZ.




Synopsis: Cessna 182T pilot reported a propstrike on the runway after landing during a windshift.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Tug Driver was wearing a mask due to COVID.  His mask made his communication to us very muffled and difficult to understand.   This is a safety concern.  We could understand the basic and expected commands.  Anything out of the ordinary would have been difficult; if not impossible; to understand.   Tug Drivers alone on a tug and outside should not be wearing a mask covering their mouth to enable clear communication with the cockpit.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported difficulty communicating with the tug driver during pushback because the tug driver was wearing a mask in compliance with COVID-19 procedures. Reporter suggested the mask was not necessary when the driver was alone in the tug.
Date: 201309
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Cessna 402/402C/B379 Businessliner/Utiliner
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Main Gear
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After I took off and put the gear up; the landing gear cube lights and HYD pressure light was out. I canceled IFR after having the field visually and started down. I leveled out at 1;100 feet and entered left traffic for [the runway]. I was cleared to land and I went to put the gear down. I noticed that the left main gear cube light was illuminated with the gear handle up and HYD pressure light out. I asked the Tower for an extended downwind and advised them of my abnormality. I consulted the QRH and put the gear down by blowing it with the nitro bottle. I heard a thump after pulling the T-Handle and had the Tower verify that they could see three gears. I tested the gear horn and was satisfied that the gear was down and a safe landing could be made. I made a successful landing and called Maintenance and Operations Center with the problem. No emergency was declared; and the passengers did not have any delay.




Synopsis: The pilot of a C402 observed an unexpected landing gear indication prior to the lowering of the gear. He consulted the flight manual; performed and alternate gear extension; and a successful landing.