elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: HPN.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Gulfstream Jet Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B LGA
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On BOUNO4 arrival traveling westbound on track Bridgeport (BDR) to ALIXX intersection; I spotted a small black drone roughly 500 ft directly above us roughly 2 miles east of ALIXX intersection. It appeared to moving slowly eastbound. I reported it to the New York Tracon. They notified the aircraft behind us who was also on the BOUNO4 arrival.




Synopsis: Gulfstream pilot reported; while on initial approach; sighting a drone 500 feet above the aircraft.
Date: 201412
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SEA.Tower, WA
Light: Night
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B SEA
ATC / advisory: Tower SEA
Second aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working local east for about 23 minutes when I was asked to train on the position.  I gave a position relief briefing to the trainee and moved out of the way.  We were landing runways 34L and 34C aircraft were coming in on visual approaches.  Did not notice Aircraft X was tagged for a ILS to 34L behind Aircraft Y also landing runway 34L.Local East is located in the NW corner of the tower cab.  You have Local Assist; and Ground to the left of Local East; with a counter to the right.  When training you have to be behind the trainee and to their right.  The layout of the equipment makes it hard to see the bottom part of the STARS Scope.  With the Trainee just taking over and setting the position up to their pref sets the data tags were blocked so I could not observe them.  Also due to the other aircraft coming in on visual I assumed Aircraft X was also on one and not concerned about the collapsing behind Aircraft Y.  (I found out later that Aircraft X was in fact on a Visual Approach).  I would change the position layout of Local East so that the instructors have a better view of the STARS scope.  The procedures with approach control needs to be change currently if aircraft are tagged on a visual apch we are to assume the have the preceding aircraft or wake turbulence aircraft in sight and are providing their own separation.




Synopsis: SEA Tower Controller describes a situation where he does not know that the second aircraft is maintaining visual separation from the preceding aircraft.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Light Haze; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Skydiving
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was the pilot in command of Aircraft X climbing out of ZZZ carrying four passengers up to 13;000 ft. MSL for tandem jumps. Approximately three miles west of the field; at an altitude of 4;200 ft.; a tandem instructor and I spotted a yellow; high wing; single engine aircraft approaching from our 2-3 o'clock at the same altitude and on an intersecting course; less than 1;000 ft. horizontally from our aircraft. I immediately banked the aircraft to the left and began a descent in order to avoid a collision. The yellow high tail in question did not appear on our ADSB-in receiver and air traffic control never gave us a call regarding that aircraft; suggesting that the aircraft was not ADSB equipped or had its ADSB equipment turned off.




Synopsis: Pilot reported a airborne conflict with another aircraft.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: 70
Aircraft: BAe 125 Series 1000 (Hawker Horizon)
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During climb the crew experienced left engine roll-back to idle. A message came up; indicating that the left engine was at idle with no thrust available. Crew decided to turn towards [a nearby airport]; declared emergency and landed safely.




Synopsis: RA-4000 Captain reported left engine rolled back to idle during climb and was non-responsive. Crew declared an emergency and diverted to nearest suitable airport.
Date: 202008
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: MCP
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During crew change; crew cleaned MCP with sanitizer wipes. 'MAY' have bumped ALT Knob on MCP. No changes made or observed on MCP. Message sent to ZZZZ Center via CPDLC: MCP touched. Center sent message questioning crew. Crew explained what may have happened. Center understood and explained no deviations were noted but they have been having these issues lately and their engineers were wondering what could be the cause. They are cleaning their equipment as we are due to COVID-19.


Second narrative: [At] FL400 during crew change received message from ZZZZ Center on CPDLC CONFIRM LEVEL FL400. Crew accepted and confirmed FL400 CPDLC as well as voice that there was no change. Just prior to this message during crew change the crew was cleaning their relief station. There could have been an inadvertent activation of the ALT knob during cleaning MCP panel with wipes that resulted in a CPDLC deviation message. There was no sign or indication on the MCP or FLT instruments of such a deviation; and aircraft maintained its assigned ALT of FL400. The crew relayed the information to ATC and they reported that this same type of issue has happened before with the MCP deviation alert; but crew verifying no deviation.ATC replied that engineering is collecting data for this issue. In good humor; they said their keyboards have never been cleaner since the COVID-19.


Synopsis: Air carrier Captain and First Officer reported that while sanitizing the MCP during crew change; the ALT knob may have been inadvertently bumped.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: SA-227 AC Metro III
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Second reporter function: Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I took Aircraft X from ZZZ to reposition to ZZZ1 for the PM cargo run. During taxi; I didn't notice any issues. On my takeoff roll; I couldn't get the left torque gauge past 40%; so I aborted the takeoff. I taxied to the south run up area and brought the throttles up at the same time and did not experience the same issue so I decided to take off. After takeoff; I was equalizing my torques and noticed that the left power lever was controlling the right torque gauge and the right lever was controlling the left gauge. I immediately returned to ZZZ and taxied to the maintenance hangar where the problem was fixed in 5 minutes and I continued my trip to ZZZ1 after verifying the gauges were indicating properly.  Pay closer attention on startup and when taking the props off the locks although sometimes the torque doesn't move enough to notice. Maintenance can also verify separately on their run-ups that each engine is operating normally.


Second narrative: The torque gauges on my aircraft were swapped so the left throttle was controlling the right torque gauge. I was at ZZZ; so I taxied down and maintenance came out and swapped the gauges to the correct side. I didn't write this up because the issue was resolved and it didn't cross my mind that it needed to be written up.


Synopsis: SA-227AC flight crew discovered engine torque gauges were wired incorrectly.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Cooling Fan; any cooling fan
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During cruise at FL350 we heard a noise and then [noticed] a burning odor in the cockpit and also in the cabin according  to the flight attendants. Because the odor persisted and it was strong we diverted to [an alternate airport]. Descending and running the Smoke/Avionics/Fumes check list we got Avionics Vent ECAM message. Eventually the odor dissipated and we landed safely.Maintenance told us that they found the Avionics Vent Fan failed.




Synopsis: A321 pilot reported diverting to an alternate airport after noticing a burning odor.
Date: 201704
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SEA.Tower, WA
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: Cloudy
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B SEA
ATC / advisory: Tower SEA
Second aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: It was an overcast day with ceilings too low to do pilot to pilot Visual Separation; but I could still see aircraft some ways out to achieve Tower Visual Separation. Departed Aircraft X (A321) and then next in line departed Aircraft Y with what would normally be plenty of space to achieve 3 miles of separation. Aircraft X's speed on departure was not uncommonly slow immediately off the departure end; but then did not accelerate at all which is not typical. They stayed constant at about 170 knots.When Aircraft Y tagged up I saw that there was not going to be 3 miles of separation immediately; but still had some room to achieve Tower Visual Separation. So I was still thinking Aircraft X should be speeding up at any moment and that 3 miles of separation would develop before I lost Visual. I held on to Aircraft Y and was going to wait for required separation to develop. I then pretty quickly realized that Aircraft X was showing no signs of speeding up and decided to cap Aircraft Y's altitude. At the time Aircraft Y was showing either 2400 feet or 2500 feet and I instructed them to maintain 3000 feet. In response Aircraft Y said that he would descend to 3000 feet as he was actually at 3300 feet at the time. I observed its Mode C was indicating him at 2500 feet. At that point my Local Assist asked if I was going to leave them at 3000 feet and ship them to departure. I said yes and he called over to coordinate it. During the attempt to coordinate the departure controller was combative; unprofessional; and completely unhelpful and made no attempt to maybe help resolve the situation. After coordination had been made I shipped Aircraft Y to departure.




Synopsis: SEA Local Controller reported an A321 climbed at a slower than normal and expected airspeed resulting in the subsequent departure overtaking the A321.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SEE.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D SEE
ATC / advisory: CTAF SEE
Second aircraft: Duchess 76
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
When detected: Other takeoff
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The Control Tower had just closed less than 5 minutes before this event happened. I was performing a short approach for a touch and go on Runway 27L and right as I touched down and began my take off roll; a Duchess; taxied across 27L at D2. I had to increase back pressure to take off to ensure I did not hit him. Would not have been able to stop before the taxiway if I hadn't have taken off. I informed the Duchess pilot that I was landing and he apologized and stated he didn't see me approaching the runway.




Synopsis: C172 pilot reported another aircraft taxied across the runway during touch and go.
Date: 202006
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B787 Dreamliner Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Noted planned dangerous goods form; verbalized; 'we cannot pushback without final dangerous goods form'. At push back glanced down and saw a dangerous goods form. I did not note it was planned. Pushed back prior to revising dangerous goods final form. Received same prior to taxi.




Synopsis: B-787 Captain reported receiving unrevised Dangerous Goods form prior to taxi.
Date: 202111
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: While flying from ZZZ to ZZZ1 used the water landmark that has been there for years. On this day because of the bad drought; I became confused momentarily and used the wrong landmark for my turn. I looked at my GPS and noticed that I was off course. I corrected immediately and tried to contact ZZZ approach and did not receive an answer. I continued on flight to ZZZ1.

Callback: Reporter confirmed they tried to make contact with the controlling agency of the airspace and were unable to make radio contact due to congestion.



Synopsis: C172 pilot was flying navigating with visual landmarks. The drought left a prominent water source bare and the pilot learned they were off course; but eventually continued to their destination.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MMPR.Airport, FO
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling; Human Factors; Chart Or Publication; Company Policy; Airspace Structure; Aircraft; Airport
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Known terrain at MMPR directly under an arrival and also near a departure is higher than what is in our database. Database shows 4;300 feet but the mountain is actually 4;642 feet MSL. Arrival and departure altitudes appear to be correct for TERPZ purposes; but a stray crew in trouble would not know they needed to be above 4;700 feet based on the data being too low in our database. They would be judging against 4;300 feet on the aircraft scope. Point in question is PVR 360/14. West of MUVBA by about four miles. It shows altitude on RNP Runway 22; VOR Runways 2 and 3 to 22. The problem is not with our Jepp FD-Pro charts; but with our database. The aircraft shows the peak in the correct location; just not the correct altitude. If the crew stays on Jepp FD-Pro it is ok; but the backup safety system not serving as designed. This is one of our chances to prove our data lines up; but in this case it fails. The error is relatively minor in this case; but it is worrisome. How many other points are incorrect this way and perhaps the magnitude is different. The database owner should rectify this [elevation] problem. Who owns the data? Who fixes the data? Who assures us the amount of data could be different from reality? What risk is the pilot assuming? What risk is the company assuming? The company needs to push more information so we can choose correctly.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported the terrain height for a mountain near MMPR is incorrect on aircraft display due to a software error.
Date: 201209
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: MD-82
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: AC Generator/Alternator
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: En route; FL330; left generator OFF light illuminated; AC CROSSTIE lockout light illuminated. Loss of autopilot; autothrottles; and transponder FAIL. Center queried about loss of transponder. Captain declared emergency condition. [We] eventually descended to FL270 to exit RVSM airspace. Left generator would not reset. Complied with QRH and used APU Generator to power left bus. Resumed normal flight and ended our emergency status. [We] continued to our destination for normal landing. [We] pulled CVR Circuit Breaker in compliance with QRH Emergency/Abnormal procedure.


Second narrative: Cancelled the emergency with ATC and continued flight to the filed destination.


Synopsis: A MD-82 left generator failure at cruise opened the AC CROSSTIE LOCKOUT causing the left bus to drop off so the APU was started and put on the bus. With systems normal; the emergency was canceled.