elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; 8
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport; High Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Workload; Troubleshooting; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was PIC (Pilot in Command) and Pilot Flying. We were cleared to land and to expect to exit at Taxiway XX; approach and landing were normal; as I was approaching the high speed left turn onto Taxiway XX; the wind; which was out of the south and gusty; caused the aircraft to veer left; I attempted to correct with full right rudder and right brake; which was ineffective.  I realized we were committed to going through the lights; went through/around them; then just as quickly back thru them onto XX taxiway. We taxied to the ramp and parked.While not minimizing my full responsibility for this event; I believe it's important to consider how this happened in order to mitigate any future occurrence. Contributing factors: 1. The gusty crosswind2. My inexperience with Aircraft X3. Excessive speed for the conditionsMitigation Strategies:1. Slow down; get to taxi speed more quickly.2. Understand the only connection to the nose wheel is the tiller and to guard/utilize it appropriately.




Synopsis: Captain reported loss of control while exiting runway at the high speed turnoff.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 0601-1200
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: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: UNICOM ZZZ
Second aircraft: PA-44 Seminole/Turbo Seminole
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: My student and I were practicing the Localizer DME RWY XX Approach into ZZZ. I had made 3 position reports on the CTAF frequency notifying airport traffic of our position on the approach; and what our intentions were. The winds were favoring Runway XY and that's what runway was in use at the time. I had planned to do a low approach over the top at circling approach minimum which [was] 1260 ft; and then enter the downwind for Runway XY; and I made that clear over the CTAF. The goal was to practice circling to land off an approach with my instrument student. A Piper Seminole had just departed the runway and I had that traffic in sight; and I was aware there was another aircraft that was behind the Seminole on final. Believing I had enough time; I had my student take off the hood; at which point the aircraft was under my control. As we passed over the top of the field in preparation to circle; I realized that there was only about 400 feet between me and the other aircraft which had been behind the Seminole (as noted via the Traffic information Service and visual observation). Rather than continue; my student and I departed the pattern and re-entered on the 45 for Runway XY without incident. ZZZ is among the top 4 busiest airports within the state; but is un-towered. The field is currently attempting to fund a control tower; which many people believe is much needed and critical to maintaining the safety at the airport. However; in order to prevent future occurrences; and until a tower is implemented; breaking off approaches and re-entering on the 45 when there are multiple aircraft in the pattern is probably safest.




Synopsis: Instructor pilot decided to break off approach due to close proximity of traffic at a non-towered airport airport.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: DA40 Diamond Star
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Exterior Pax/Crew Door
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Training / Qualification; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Takeoff Roll
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During takeoff roll; the rear hatch of the aircraft opened and blew off the aircraft. I heard a loud noise at that time; but was unaware as to the source of the noise. I immediately aborted takeoff; and notified the Tower of my intentions. I then noticed the rear hatch was no longer on the plane; and notified the Tower that there was FOD on the runway. I exited the active Runway (18L) at first chance and taxied back to the ramp. The plane was put in the hangar along with the hatch that was retrieved. The aircraft never left the ground. A pilot (me) and one passenger were on board. No one was injured; and there was no apparent structural damage to the aircraft.




Synopsis: A DA40's rear hatch opened and blew off on to the runway during the takeoff roll. The takeoff was rejected and aircraft returned to the FBO for maintenance.
Date: 201409
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was placing my luggage in the overhead bin; turned around and saw passengers boarding the aircraft. I was not notified boarding had begun; nor had ops checked to make sure we were ready. Ops should always check with the crew to ensure they are ready before boarding.




Synopsis: B737 Flight Attendant reports passengers boarding before she was ready and without any communication from the gate agent or operations.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Cleared for visual approach to Runway XXL at ZZZ; we were turned towards the marker and were high and fast. We were able to get configured and slowed by 500 feet; but below 500 we received a GPWS Terrain Warning. This prompted us to execute a go-around. We entered right traffic and did a visual approach to Runway XXL with an uneventful landing. After shut down at the gate; we received an Advisory Crew Message Report below 500 of vertical speed max -1456; vertical speed average -513. This is no doubt what caused the warning. As my eyes were outside at the time of the occurrence; I was not aware of the excessive vertical speed.


Second narrative: At 500 feet on final to Runway XXL; terrain warning went off. [We] went around and did another visual approach. After landing; [we] received a print out that we were 1400 FPM at 500 feet. We were slightly high and fast passing 1000 feet but was correcting. Neither one of us saw an excessive rate; but it was late; after being delayed.


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported an unstable approach accompanied by a GPWS Terrain Warning.
Date: 202012
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke; 9
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
Aircraft component: Tablet
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Exited Penetrated Airspace
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Airspace Structure; Software and Automation
Primary problem: Software and Automation

Narrative: VFR flight from ZZZ1 towards ZZZ2 and return with no specific route. Tablet GPS lost connection with autopilot and I lost situational awareness trying to get the GPS reconnected (using AVARE app). When I finally abandoned the effort and looked at the GPS I realized I was in ZZZ Class B airspace at approximately 3;200 MSL instead of below the 3;000 MSL floor as I usually am. Corrected altitude immediately and left the Class B; went home and landed.I should have had the GPS completely set up before departure and should also have stayed at my usual altitude of 2;500 MSL for local flights.  I really don't have an excuse for losing situational awareness. Problem was exacerbated by opening a 2nd app (Naviator) at which point I didn't know which app might have been trying to control the autopilot.  I will certainly not make that mistake again! Had not flown at all from 5 months so I am admittedly not as proficient as I would like to be. Will be correcting that situation shortly also!




Synopsis: GA pilot reported losing GPS connection on tablet resulting in a Class B airspace incursion.
Date: 202012
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Distraction; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: The aircraft listed entered my airspace without coordination.I previously reported dozens of airspace violations directly to management. Management has recently changed its stance; and they now view a violation of my airspace as a performance issue on my part. It is their stance I am to watch all surrounding sectors and prevent other controllers from failing to do their job. I will now be reporting these airspace violations here instead to preserve my career.Also worth noting; the Controller that violated my airspace was working their first session after XX days off of COVID leave; and was working a higher volume of traffic than they could handle with the rust of being off so long. Controller did not have a D-side or any other support. The supervisor was apparently unaware of the traffic volume; and I walked over to ask him to monitor Controller.Bring back the safety and reporting culture. A controller should not have to choose between complying with a mandatory reporting requirement or losing their job; especially when it isn't that controller failed to comply with regulations.




Synopsis: Center Controller reported multiple airspace violations resulting from hand-off issues with adjacent sector controllers.
Date: 201407
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZAB.ARTCC, NM
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZAB
ATC / advisory: Center ZAB
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: Aircraft was below terrain and MSAW [Minimum Safe Altitude Warning] never went off. If it had; I probably would have caught it.A ticket has been submitted [to maintenance].




Synopsis: ZAB Controller reports of an aircraft that was below the terrain and the MSAW [Minimum Safe Altitude Warning] doesn't alarm.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class C LGB
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Supervisor / CIC
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: Aircraft X released off LGB airport by Manhattan/Laker combined sector; training in progress.  I was working the Controller in Charge position; when the trainer working position advised me of a possible situation in progress.  I observed the trainee/trainer issuing a safety/traffic alert to the departing IFR aircraft and observed opposite direction traffic at co-altitude.  Once the situation had been resolved I felt the situation appeared to be a near midair collision and was unaware of traffic being issued by the tower.  I contacted LGB Tower to figure out if they had issued traffic and were doing anything to ensure separation.  The LGB Controller didn't seem to be aware there was even a situation and didn't seem to care that we and pilots in control of both aircraft had to take evasive action; after further communication with the departing aircraft we determined no traffic was issued to the IFR aircraft prior to transfer of communication despite the unsafe situation.  I have still not been made aware of any traffic issued to the other aircraft that LGB Tower was in communication with but it did appear that aircraft also took evasive action and turned hard south to avoid collision while our departing IFR aircraft turned north west.LGB Tower Control needs to maintain communication with both aircraft and issue and resolve any conflicts prior to transferring communications.  I feel the Tower Controller needs immediate remedial training and be explained duty priority; then be able to demonstrate this ability before being returned to active duty.




Synopsis: SCT TRACON Controller reported an unsafe situation with traffic off of LGB and traffic inbound to LGB.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZDV.ARTCC, CO
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZDV
ATC / advisory: Center ZDV
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
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
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We were assigned a descent to 10;000 FT. The First Officer dialed 10;000 FT in the altitude selector; and I verified the altitude while is finger was on the knob. I then read back the clearance to 10;000 FT to ATC. While descending through approximately 13;000 FT; ATC asked us to verify we were cleared to 14;500 FT. I said we were assigned 10;000. He issued a low altitude alert and instructed an immediate climb to 14;500 FT. The First Officer disengaged the autopilot and climbed to 14;500. We then re-engaged the autopilot and continued the descent and approach without incident. The GPWS never detected anything; and neither of us saw any amber terrain on the map; so I don't believe we were close to impacting any terrain. I have no way of knowing why the incorrect altitude was assigned. We knew we were still over somewhat mountainous terrain; so we could have asked him to verify that was a safe altitude.




Synopsis: An Air Carrier crew over mountainous terrain understood they were cleared to 10;000 FT; but while descending through 13;000 FT; ATC commanded a LOW ALTITUDE ALERT with an immediate climb to 14;500 FT. No EGPWS warning alerted.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: AWM.Airport, TN
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Jet/Long Ranger/206
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E AWM
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Rotorcraft; 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: While enroute to assigned base on a southwest heading; a crop duster popped up at my 12 o'clock. I was approximately 5 miles or so southwest of AWM. I don't know exactly the distance; but it was within 500 feet. At no time while enroute to base did myself or the nurse or paramedic see the crop-duster. Normally we will see them off to our left or right or in front of us. The way in which this one appear suddenly indicated to me that it must have come from behind our aircraft.When I saw the crop-duster; it was flying straight up in the air like they normally do after they have made a pass spraying chemicals. It appeared that it had come from either directly underneath us or perhaps to our left rear quarter area. Upon seeing the crop duster I turned to the south because the crop duster was drifting to the north. If the crop duster came from behind and/or underneath our aircraft; I don't know what I could have done to see him ahead of time. We always are on guard for crop dusters in our area because they frequent our flying areas. If this one was flying around during our pathway back to the base; we did not notice him like we normally notice the crop dusters. It is possible he could have taken off from behind us after we passed that area; or been behind some trees. We normally see the crop dusters well in advance. This is the first time in flying in crop dusting areas that this type incident has occurred. I think that even if I had been a few hundred feet higher we still would have encountered the crop duster as he was flying up; but I will make a point to fly even higher to lessen the chances of this occurring again. At the same time I think it is important for crop dusters to be more aware because if it had come from behind us he should have seen us; but at the same time I understand that they probably don't look up in the air as they are spraying. I believe that if I fly even higher and continue to be vigilant (as we always are to crop dusters in the area) I think this can reduce the chances of this occurring again.




Synopsis: Helicopter pilot reported an NMAC with a crop duster in the vicinity of AWM airport.