elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201403
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Flap Control (Trailing & Leading Edge)
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Distraction; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Bird / Animal
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action; General Evacuated
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: I was the pilot flying. On climbout at 1;200 FT we struck at least three large birds probably black vultures. One hit the fuselage near me; one went into the RH engine causing excessive EGT 1050 and high vibration; [and] I am not sure what happened to the last one. I was very startled and didn't immediately start doing the memory items. The Captain started to do them so I decided to transfer control of the airplane to him and assumed the role of pilot not flying. With the verification of the Relief Pilot we secured the RH engine. The Captain commanded the Engine Securing Checklist so I handed my QRH to the Relief Pilot and asked him to do it while I coordinated a return to our departure airport with ATC and built; bugged and briefed the approach. We flew a visual pattern back to the airport at 2;000 FT. The flaps were not responding normally so we left them at 5 and got a trailing edge disagree message. We used the alternate system to extend the flaps to 20 for landing. We landed configured correctly and on speed. Autobrakes were selected at 3. Deceleration wasn't satisfactory partly due to a deferred thrust reverser on the operating engine so the Captain used manual braking. After we cleared the runway the tires on the RH truck overheated and blew then started smoking. CFR told us we should get out of the airplane. We did the Evacuation Checklist and evacuated the airplane.




Synopsis: When a B767-300 was struck by as many as three large birds shortly after takeoff the right engine had to be shut down due to high EGT and vibration. As they returned for landing they learned the flap extend/retract mechanism had been damaged forcing a less than normal landing flap setting and high right side brake temperatures after roll out. CFR suggested they evacuate when the fuse plugs starting melting. The crew complied with their suggestion.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Nosewheel Steering
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Taxi to runway without issue. After cleared for takeoff; I (Captain) applied flex power and aircraft began to drift toward left side of runway. Attempting to correct back to centerline while airspeed increasing using rudder only the aircraft's nosewheel began to skid and continued toward left side of runway. I then applied max brakes and max thrust reversers to avoid departing the runway. The aircraft came to a stop on the runway and was able to use nosewheel steering to taxi clear of the runway. Max speed attained was approximately 30 knots. Left wheel brakes peek temp after abort was 65 C and max temp on right brakes reached 110 C. At this point; not sure if both engines spooled eventually since my mindset was focused on departure turn to avoid restricted area.


Second narrative: At this time; we are not sure if both engines spooled evenly. Attention was momentarily on the FMAs then to outside the aircraft when the aircraft began to swerve.


Synopsis: A320 flight crew reported the aircraft nosewheel started to skid and aircraft veered towards left side of runway as they started the takeoff roll.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LGA.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B LGA
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Aircraft component: Radio Altimeter
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Distraction; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: We were being vectored for an ILS 13 into LGA. As we were being vectored at 2;000 FT MSL on a left downwind; the Captain's side radar altimeter was fluctuating. We then received the GPWS 'TERRAIN TERRAIN WOOP WOOP PULL UP' we executed the CFIT escape maneuver. We climbed to about 3;500 FT MSL. The warning stopped. I notified ATC of the warning and climb. They then cleared us back down to 2;000 FT MSL. The rest of the flight was uneventful. I am not sure if the radar altimeter was malfunctioning and that can cause that or if we truly were near the buildings over Manhattan. I never saw any red on the Terrain Display. But as we were on final I did notice that the high point was noted at 1;900 FT MSL. I wrote the GPWS up in maintenance book and Maintenance came out and tested it and found no problems. We proceeded on next flight with no warnings.


Second narrative: We were vector for left downwind for the ILS 13; at altitude of 2;000 FT at speed of 180 KTS; IMC conditions when we got the GPWS with the 'TERRAIN TERRAIN PULL UP.' I disengaged the auto pilot and climbed to about 3;500 FT or 3;000 FT. One let the Controller know of what happened. We got back to 2;000 FT and proceed for the approach.


Synopsis: An Air Carrier crew flying IMC at 2;000 FT MSL on a left downwind to a LGA Runway 13 ILS executed the escape maneuver to 3;500 FT MSL after the EGPWS alerted 'TERRAIN PULL UP.'
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 140 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Talon (T38)
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: During initial climb out and crosswind turn from Runway XX we received a TA 'Traffic' alert and then an almost immediate RA 'descend descend' alert. Since we were very low to the ground in our initial takeoff climb I was unable to descend so I stopped the climb and continued our left turn. Immediately out our left window and slightly higher than us was a USAF T-38 fighter trainer entering a left breaking turn. After leveling the aircraft we received the RA 'clear of conflict' and I stopped the turn in the assigned takeoff direction of 280. Shortly after we were given a climb by ATC to our cruise altitude of 9;000 ft. We did not encounter any further incident.High volume of USAF training aircraft at that airport. Given a takeoff clearance while a training aircraft was entering its 'overhead break' maneuver. We were given a takeoff clearance to make an early turn to heading 280 (which we did).Do not clear an aircraft to takeoff until airborne traffic is well clear of the airport.


Second narrative: Upon initial climb after takeoff; we received a TA and then an RA and immediately followed RA. Upon looking out the window; spotted a fighter jet within proximity of the aircraft.Corrective action was taken per the RA and flight continued as normal. Aircraft was cleared for takeoff and climb out within too close of proximity of other aircraft in traffic patternDo not clear aircraft for takeoff when other aircraft will be in too close proximity


Synopsis: EMB-140 flight crew reported responding to a TCAS Resolution Advisory during climb triggered by a military fighter.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZOA.ARTCC, CA
Aircraft: McDonnell Douglas Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: Center ZOA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Time Pressure
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On an unpressurized flight between SMF-ZZZ at cruise altitude 10;000 FT; crew got a TA on an aircraft below them and climbing. At approximately 4 miles ATC gave them a traffic alert at the same time they got an RA with a climb command. As the flight was climbing First Officer spotted the other aircraft coming right at them and First Officer said 'Turn Left.' Captain rolled aircraft into a 34-45 degree left bank as the Controller was advising them to turn right which they could not comply with. Both aircraft were climbing with a constant separation of 100 FT. The First Officer; watching the other aircraft; said; 'Descend Descend!' Captain lowered the nose and the other aircraft passed Aircraft X at a close range. (Aircraft X climbed to approximately 11;300 FT before descending back to 10;000 FT and on course.It appears both aircraft were near the borders of two sectors. Each aircraft was on a different frequency from the other but in the same immediate airspace.Controllers need to pay attention to all aircraft in their sector as well as the neighboring sectors during hand-offs and provide appropriate horizontal and vertical separation.




Synopsis: An air carrier aircraft in cruise at 10;000 MSL on an unpressurized ferry flight suffered a close encounter with an unidentified opposite direction aircraft in a climb.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: C90.TRACON, IL
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ORD
ATC / advisory: TRACON C90
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were vectored off of the arrival (ENDEE 4; I believe) on a left base and told to expect the visual 22L. The Controller gave us a left turn to 340 degrees and a descent from 4000 ft to 3000 ft. Passing through 3250 ft and inside of SAILZ approaching final; the Controller called out a traffic alert and told us to level off. We leveled at 3150 ft. He then told us to make a tight left turn towards the airport. He called traffic off our right side which we were unable to acquire visually. I immediately turned the autopilot off when told to make the tight left turn and was flying mostly by instruments and monitoring bank angle and altitude and thus unable to scan outside for traffic. The Captain was looking outside and unable to see the conflict. I did look down at my MFD and saw a yellow traffic target on the right side of our aircraft symbol at +100 feet.We were subsequently cleared for the visual approach once the traffic was no longer a factor and landed the aircraft normally. Oddly; we did not receive a TCAS RA or TA aural alert. 100 ft of vertical separation is the closest I have ever been to another aircraft and consider this a near miss event.There were no crew errors made which contributed to this event. We followed all ATC instructions as precisely as possible. I believe this was an ATC Controller mistake who gave us a bad vector/altitude which led to a near miss event. It is also possible that it was not an ATC mistake and the GA aircraft was at fault and in airspace which he should not have been. On a separate note; it is my opinion that GA aircraft should not be allowed to fly so close to congested Class B and Class C airspace. An overhaul of GA rules would prevent this issue. Also; if GA aircraft are allowed to fly so close; they should be required to be in constant contact with ATC.




Synopsis: B737-800 First Officer reported an NMAC on approach to MDW.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZAB.ARTCC, NM
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Traffic Management; Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airspace Structure; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was asked to take the TMML/MOS position and training; specifically for the late night changeover. We discussed a couple of tasks and duties regarding the position and performing the changeover that we do on a daily basis. We logged into the scheduling website (SAMS) and we began to approve the schedule requests for the [next two] days. After approving all pertinent schedules; we then moved to the MAST (Military Airspace Scheduling Tool) and ultimately printed out the sheet. My trainee was accomplishing this at a steady pace and we also had additional steps to take due to a new MAST under trial at this time. My trainee started to input the schedules into our URET; and then recognized that R5107B airspace was not active and the sheet stated that it should be active currently. We then revisited the SAMS website to check status of R5107B and found that the SAMS site stated that R5107B was active. I then informed my STMC; and ultimately; the supervisors in those affected areas/operations manager were informed. We activated the airspace for the remainder of the time requested. After some research; we found out that the airspace requested (R5107B) was created in SAMS. The airspace went active. No phone call from the scheduling agency was made to the MOS position; even though normally when add-on/amendment is made in SAMS we receive a call/heads up to ensure everyone is aware of the pending change. Our Operations Manager stated that numerous aircraft traversed this restricted airspace that was supposed to be shown active. Ultimately; an agency not giving the MOS a phone call and submitting a request only 61 minutes prior to activation of the airspace is unsatisfactory; to say the least; thankfully; no known incidents/accidents due to airspace encroachment. Although there are several LOAs and rules set up for prior notice and recall time needed; I believe that there should be at least a 3 hour notice of any changes/add ons made in SAMS; or a phone call made to the MOS position if within that period of time and a request is made. Also; if the airspace request has not been 'approved' by MOS; coordination with TMU needs to be made prior to activating/use of the requested airspace.




Synopsis: ZAB TMU Controller voiced concern regarding notification procedures on restricted airspace activation; noting that several aircraft transversed restricted airspace because of flawed equipment and procedures.
Date: 201605
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Sport Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel Tank Cap
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Sea; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: [After departure] I flew for about an hour and stopped for fuel. My next planned stop to be a 300 SM mile leg. The plane holds 24 gallons of fuel; burns 6 gal an hour for 4 hours of flight; and this would be a 3 hour flight leaving an hour fuel reserve. There is a fuel totalizer that I had checked against the actual fuel used and had been spot on. There are also clear fuel sight gauges at each wing root and had been checking those vs. the fuel totalizer. I had been flying for about 2.5 hours and when I checked the sight gauges [there was] just a trace of fuel to be seen. I checked the totalizer and it indicated that there should be 6 gallons of fuel. My decision then was to land as soon as possible then the engine lost rpm; I rocked the wings to see if I could see any fuel showing in the sight gauges. There was barely any to be seen. The process of rocking the wings gave my power back for a couple of minutes while I looked for a suitable landing site. Then I lost power so I set up for the site I had chosen which was a stubble field near a road and nearby were some houses. I went through my emergency check list and called 121.5 and prepared to land. Right away I knew that the outcome would be a nonevent as the plane is a bush type plane. I tried to re-contact the emergency frequency to let them know that there was not a problem other than needing some fuel but was unable to contact them on my radio. After I shut down I used my cell and called FSS to let them know. They had already notified the Sheriff and the Sheriff was on scene in about 10 minutes; helped me get some 100LL. I discovered on landing that the left fuel cap which has a vent that must be pointed forward was on backwards that caused the fuel to be siphoned from the tank. I added 8 gallons of fuel. Checking the fuel caps is a normal part of my preflight however I was distracted by a person that came by to look at my airplane and he was asking questions about the plane; so I think I missed the fact that the fuel cap was on the wrong direction. A vivid lesson not to be forgotten.




Synopsis: Carbon Cub pilot reported executing an uneventful forced landing after experiencing fuel exhaustion related to improper fuel cap orientation.
Date: 201403
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 400
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Hercules (C-130)/L100/382
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Ground Excursion Runway; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: After being handed off by Approach; I was cleared by Tower to land following a C-130 performing a touch and go. After touching down; I began braking as the plane decelerated. Several seconds after touching down; the aircraft suddenly and forcefully veered off to the right on a heading off the runway towards the grassy median. I was able to continue taxing to the fire station and turned off my engine to inspect the aircraft. No damage was noted to the tires or wheel fairings or to the aircraft in general. In addition; no damage was noted to the runway environment. I started the engine and asked for taxi clearance to the FBO. A subsequent inspection by a Mechanic found no damage at all to the aircraft; including to the tires or wheel fairings; and no mechanical issues with the brakes. I believe that this event was caused by wake turbulence. I was cleared to land with no warning about wake turbulence. The separation was less than 2 minutes. The C-130 did a touch and go on a short final.




Synopsis: Columbia 400 pilot experiences a runway excursion after landing behind a C130 doing a touch and go. The reporter believes that wake turbulence caused his loss of control.