elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 1801-2400
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: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Reciprocating Engine Assembly
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After [a] maneuver practice [for] stalls at 4500 MSL [and with] power [at] Idle due to maneuver practice; [I] tried [to] increase power after [the] maneuver [but] it never went up to normal RPM. Cessna 172's normal RPM with full power setting is normally 2100-2400 RPM; but [the] aircraft [only had] 1000-1100 RPM with full throttle setting. Possible power; [or] engine; loss identified [so I] selected [the] best course of action: maintain best glide speed; find good landing field; go over [the] checklist.[I] finished [the] engine failure checklist [a] few times; checked all engine indicators; [but the] engine seemed [to] not come back. [I] set 7700 on [the] transponder [and] told TRACON about situation. With 4;500 MSL [in a] Cessna; there was no way to go [to the] nearest airport at that location. [I] set up for [an] emergency landing on [an] empty field; [and] pumped [the] throttle for [one] last chance. After losing 2;000 feet; [at] about 2;300 MSL; [or] 1;300 AGL; [the] power came back somehow. Told ATC for [a] diversion to ZZZ; [and] climbed as much as possible in case of second power loss. [I] made safe landing at ZZZ. 2 souls were on board; no one got injured; [and the] airplane landed safely on runway. Maintenance will inspect aircraft. The rental aircraft company claims that [the] plane has [had] [a] history [of] engine problems 2 times before.




Synopsis: C172 Flight Instructor reported a loss of engine power requiring a return to departure airport and a precautionary landing.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Vehicle Driver
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: I found this tug while setting up my gate after midnight. This is the third tug I have found in three months. This is the new tug in ZZZ. The seat bushings are breaking and is a major problem when the employee is buckled in to the seat; the seat will bend backwards and throw the employee from the frame of the tug and possibly get crushed by a cart during pulling. I think to help this problem all the new tugs that the company have purchased need to be recalled or all the bushings holding the seats be replaced before a major accident occurs.




Synopsis: A Ramp Agent reported some newly purchased ground tugs have faulty driver seat bushings which have failed. A driver may fall backward off a failed seat and into a towed cart's path.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Operator: Military
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure; Human Factors; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: These UAV missions are planned and handled erratically. Sometimes they involve Special Use Airspace; which is called up in advance - or not called up in advance. The flight plan usually shows a TAS of 130; however observed ground speeds correspond to approximately 190 KTAS while enroute. The 'missions' often involve non-RADAR operations in Class 'D' airspace; but frequently these facilities have no information on the flight. The fact that the operator has real-time knowledge of the position of the aircraft is of limited value if we have to use a commercial line to reach them; have responsibility to relay such information; and the line is busy.We have never had the 'lost link' procedure available at the sector. If these flights are to be handled as 'normal' operations; then off-airways routing in areas without RADAR or RCAG coverage are not acceptable where it harms our ability to move IFR traffic in and out of airports. TAS errors on the order of 50% are not acceptable. If they're not 'normal;' then the operator or missions desk needs to ensure that coordination with adjacent facilities is complete and timely. Sectors need concise; accurate information; including the lost link procedure. These operations have been allowed to deteriorate; with half-baked verbal briefings becoming the norm. This agency and others have historically conducted offshore law enforcement operations; with manned aircraft; under due regard - is that an option?




Synopsis: ARTCC Controller reported numerous issues with UAV aircraft mission control and coordination.
Date: 201407
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CUB.Airport, SC
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: thermal activity; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Object; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Ground Personnel
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airport; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On final approach; the airplane was not descending normally due to slight thermal activity. I reduced power about 200 RPM and about that time my passenger asked what the stall warning light was. I looked at the light; then looked at the airspeed indicator which was 78 mph. I then turned my attention back to the runway and saw that I had descended too low. I immediately applied power. About that time I felt the left gear strike something but it did not seem to be serious. I aborted the landing and went around the pattern. On landing; the  aircraft pulled to the left but with right rudder I was able to keep it straight on the runway and taxi to my hangar. I went to the terminal to get my passengers wife and was told that I had hit a high tension wire. As I see it; the cause was several things. The thermal activity decreased at the time my attention was distracted and the high tension wires were 38 feet high; one block from the airport; approximately 1/10 mile. I will fix the distraction problem by not having any conversation during takeoff and landing. The high tension wires should be located underground or at least have aviation balls on them.

Callback: Reporter states that the distance from the airport perimeter fence to the wires in question; is one tenth of a mile as measured with an automobile odometer. The left main gear tire contacted the wire; causing damage to the left scissor.



Synopsis: PA28 pilot reports contacting power lines with the left main gear during approach to an uncontrolled airport; due to thermal activity and distraction. A go-around is initiated with the aircraft pulling to the left on the ensuing landing.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: P50.TRACON, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E P50
ATC / advisory: TRACON P50
Aircraft component: Reciprocating Engine Assembly
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Diverted; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was in contact with Phoenix Approach for flight following. I was about 25 miles southwest of Sky Harbor and had reached my cruising altitude of 10;500 FT; and had leaned the mixture for this new altitude. About 30 seconds later; the engine began losing power. At first; I believed this to be due to over-leaning the engine; so I richened the mixture. This did not clear the issue; so I added full mixture and full power and still had intermittent power from the engine. I contacted Phoenix Approach to announce the engine issue and turned back to Mobile airport; which was just a couple of miles behind me. While troubleshooting the engine; I circled the airport as we descended to around 5;000 FT. At that point; full power returned to the engine. I continued to circle over Mobile airport until I was able to climb back up to 10;500 FT. After the engine power remained stable at full power for about 20 minutes; I requested a return to my departure airport and was cleared to go directly there and chose to remain at 10;500 FT for as long as possible; because while I believed the engine issue to be resolved; I wanted to have sufficient altitude to reach any airport just in case. I was cleared to descend through Bravo airspace and then handed off to my departure airport's Tower; and was able to land without incident. The engine made full power and appeared to have no problems after the point where power was restored. The fuel tanks had been topped off the night prior to the flight; and no water was seen when sampling the fuel on the day of the flight just prior to departure. It was a hot dry day; so water and carb ice were not suspected. I have since contacted my mechanic; and he is currently checking the engine and fuel system to see if any issue is seen.




Synopsis: C172 pilot experiences a rough running engine upon leveling off at 10;500 FT and leaning the engine for cruise. The reporter elects to spiral down over a nearby airport but when the engine returns to normal he decides to climb back up to 10;500 and return to the departure airport. This is accomplished successfully with no further engine troubles.
Date: 202110
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Aircraft component: Main Gear Wheel
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part; Procedure
Primary problem: Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part

Narrative: Just wanted to submit an informational report for other 737 pilots to be aware of. We arrived at the aircraft and I began my exterior inspection. When I got to the left main gear I found two different tires installed on the gear. One tire was the square shouldered max tire while the other was the rounded shoulder tire you see on the regular 737s. We contacted Maintenance and they confirmed that the tires are not interchangeable; which is what we figured since they have different max tire speeds and size/shape. An ELB entry was made and maintenance installed the correct tire. Rest of flight continued normally.




Synopsis: B737 First Officer reported discovering the wrong main tire and wheel assembly installed on their aircraft during pre-flight walk around. It was reported to Maintenance who replaced the tire with the correct NG tire.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Horizontal Stabilizer Control
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Descending into ZZZ on the arrival north transition. I believe we were in ALTS (???) mode at 6;000 ft; approximately 210 knots; autopilot ON when the stab trim clacker began to alert for what I'd estimate was 5-6 seconds. In my experience; this was an  unusual time and aircraft configuration for the trim clacker to sound; much less for the duration it sounded. I think both the Captain and I had the inclination to do the Stab Trim Runaway items and proceeded to do so. We ran the full Stab Trim Runaway from Immediate Action Items to QRH. During this process; I could see the Captain was having to hold significant pressure to maintain level flight so we requested a block altitude 5;000-6;000. We ultimately requested priority handling with ATC and decided the best action was to request vectors and go to ZZZ1 instead. We coordinated and communicated with dispatch; the flight attendants and passengers our intent to land at ZZZ. As we conducted the approach; through normal procedural habits and discipline; we extended the flaps beyond the QRH recommended flap 20 setting. Once we realized our mistake (the flaps were to be at 20 per the QRH); we simply retracted the flaps to 20 where they were supposed to be. This happened fairly early on the approach and didn't effect the stable approach criterion. Our decision not to reselect stabilizer trim after disconnecting was due to the QRH not directing us to do so. Also; the aircraft was in a flyable state; albeit more difficult than with a functioning autopilot and stabilizer trim.Uncommanded; excessive and undesirable stabilizer trim output for state of aircraft automation and configuration.




Synopsis: CRJ-700 First Officer reported a runaway stabilizer trim system; causing a diversion.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZLC.ARTCC, UT
Aircraft: Medium Transport; High Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZLC
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Both FMS MEL'd. [We] did not see NOTAM for BOI VOR to be out of service at arrival time. [We] departed no FMS/GPS using VOR navigation only. Didn't realize BOI VOR was out of service until over BKE VOR. [We were] unable to have reliable communication with Dispatch. [We] continued to BOI knowing VFR weather and radar vectors.


Second narrative: With only 45 minutes; we were given an aircraft swap into an airplane that had both FMS's on MEL. I looked through the weather packet quickly so we could talk about the unusual flight and how we were going to fly the flight. When making the switch over from IMB to BOI; I noticed that BOI wasn't coming in. It was at that time I took another look at the NOTAMs and noticed that BOI was out of service. I called my Dispatcher who due to SATCOM problems asked me to call him when I got on the ground. It was VFR and we had BOI in sight so we continued to make a landing in BOI. Not thoroughly going over NOTAMs.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reports being dispatched with both FMSs inoperative and discovering enroute that the VOR at their destination is also inoperative. Flight is able to continue in VMC with Radar vectors from ZLC.
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Caravan Undifferentiated
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: M-20 Series Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was talking to local pilot and was told of this event and how close it was. A Caravan was cleared for takeoff 35L IFR and issued a 320 heading by the Local Controller. A Mooney; VFR inbound to land 35L from the north; Local Control was talking to both aircraft; known traffic. The Caravan was told to stop his climb and he said as he lowered and leveled he saw the dirty underbelly of the Mooney go by right in front of him. He shouted out on frequency and it was really close. No traffic was issued. Another voice came on the Tower frequency and said we did not see him either. Tower had a VFR tag on the D-Brite and was talking to the VFR Mooney; known traffic. This Controller is extremely weak and should never have been certified in the first place. I have never in my career; seen someone this bad; get certified. The screening; certification and accountability process has to change or be enforced; requiring stiffer guidelines/standards be met and passed. There needs to be one standard across the board for everyone at each particular facility to achieve certification. This will help maintain the integrity and safety of the system and create a model work environment for all employees; allowing success all the way around. This is not always done; at times there are 2-3 standards depending on level of knowledge; friendliness; gender and how good you look or dress. Seriously; it is sad that our great profession is coming to this.




Synopsis: Tower Controller described a critical conflict event between an IFR departure and a VFR arrival with no exchange of traffic; both aircraft in contact with Local Control; the reporter noting the controller involved as extremely weak and the training program needing stiffer standards.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Champion Citabria 7ECA
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Tail Wheel
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Object; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was conducting a training flight which included some air work and full stall landing practice. After entering the pattern; I made the first landing and the student made the next 3 landings without any problems. All controls responded normally. On the fourth landing the student touched down to the right of the centerline but we were aligned parallel to the centerline. Once the wheels were on the ground; the stick came full back and next second the aircraft tail swung to the right. Left rudder was added to counter the right turning tendency but it had no effect. The tail eventually swung around and hit a landing light. There were no injuries and the aircraft sustained no damage. While taxiing the aircraft back to its tie down I had to steer the aircraft with the brakes. Back at the tie down I lifted the tail off the ground and found I could spin the tail wheel 360 degrees without the tail wheel locking in position to allow the rudder pedals to steer the aircraft on the ground. The tail wheel was disassembled and it was found that the locking cam was stuck in a position that would allow the tail wheel to freely caster in any direction it wanted. A nudge from behind the cam was enough to unstick it and allow the spring to push it into the position for locking. The manufacture of the tail wheel was contacted to explain the situation. Not trusting this type of tail wheel any more it has been replaced with a different type tail wheel. I feel if the tail wheel lock had engaged properly there would have been sufficient control to avoid a ground loop. I believe this incident does drive home the point to land on the centerline since it gives you the most buffer zone. If we had landed on the centerline we may have still ground looped but we might not have hit anything.




Synopsis: Citabria instructor pilot reports a ground loop during the students forth landing with the tail hitting a runway light. A defective tailwheel locking mechanism is discovered on post flight.