elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Sport 19
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Student
Human factors: Confusion; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While performing initial solo for Private Pilot Stage 1 flight; on my second touch and go I veered off of runway 36. There was a slight crosswind which yawed my aircraft to the right; and I applied incorrect input to straighten the aircraft. I lowered my left aileron; but pushed in right rudder. I landed on the runway slightly sideways to the right; then bounced a few times until I went between the runway lights into the dirt between runways. I then secured the aircraft; and called Tower to let them know what happened. I contacted dispatch; and informed them and waited for further instructions. No damage to aircraft; no injury to myself. I had been taught the proper crosswind correction inputs; just out of instinct I pushed in the right rudder instead of left.




Synopsis: A BE19 student pilot encountered a slight crosswind while landing which veered the airplane to the right causing a runway excursion. He applied incorrect flight control inputs.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: PHX.Airport, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZAB
ATC / advisory: Center ZAB
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Undershoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were at FL400 before given a step-down to start the EAGUL 6 Arrival to PHX. At one point; we were given descent to FL370 and soon after to continue to FL360. I entered FL370 in the Cruise page and selected VNAV. FL360 was in the MCP Altitude window; but we did not descend. Checking in with ABQ Center; we gave them our current altitude; and he asked us if we were given a restriction. At this point; we got confused after seeing FL360 in the MCP Altitude window. Center again queried us and we admitted that we weren't sure exactly what altitude we were to descend to. He then gave us the 'descend via' clearance and we proceeded uneventfully to Sky Harbor.


Second narrative: [No substantive additional information was included in the secondary report.]


Synopsis: A B737-700 flight crew failed to properly program ATC descent clearances into their FMS and Altitude Alert window and; thus; stopped their descent from FL400 at FL370 vice FL360.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E SCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: I was providing VFR vectors to a Cessna for a practice instrument approach. The flight was on a south downwind to CRQ when the pilot reported that an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle with a red light came within 50 feet of his position. Regulate UAV usage and prosecute violators.




Synopsis: SCT Controller reported a conflict between a Cessna 172 pilot and an unmanned aerial vehicle within 50 feet of their aircraft while on a south downwind to CRQ.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: FLL.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SR22
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class C FLL
ATC / advisory: Tower FLL
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Ground
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Confusion
Second reporter function: Local
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A runway had recently been reopened; after a 3 month closure due to construction. During that time the runway was a cold runway; and Ground Control owned it to cross as needed. It had recently been reopened as a departure only runway. I began working Ground Control. A Cirrus; landed and requested to taxi to parking at an FBO. That FBO is on the opposite side of the airport; and requires the aircraft to cross the newly opened runway in order to get there. I gave the aircraft detailed taxi instructions to get to his ramp; including instructions to cross the runway to get to the ramp; without coordinating with Local Control. After 3 months of Ground Control owning the runway; it didn't click in my mind that it was now a hot runway; thereby requiring coordination from [Local Control] in order to cross it. A better briefing of what routes should be used for aircraft to get to different FBO's; considering the fact that there are numerous taxiway closures. This can make the traffic flow very difficult and inefficient at times.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information.]


Synopsis: FLL Controller reported issuing a runway crossing without coordinating with Local Control.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Flap/Slat Control System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Takeoff Roll
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: First Officer's takeoff.  At about 60 KIAS we got a Master Caution light and a level 2 FLAP DISAGREE alert. Rejected takeoff performed by Captain; cleared Runway; coordinated with ATC; Ramp Tower; and Maintenance; returned to gate; wrote logbook entry. [It was] beautiful weather. Aircraft had previous write-ups for FLAP DISAGREE in flight problems; which Maintenance attempted to repair.




Synopsis: A MD-11 Captain rejected a takeoff at 60 KTS after the Master Caution and FLAP DISAGREE alerted. The event had occurred previously.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm; Turbulence
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine Air Pneumatic Ducting
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At FL280 10 minutes into cruise we received an Right 14th Duct Warning EICAS master warning. Radios were transferred to the flying Pilot; the FO. I performed the QRH for R 14th stage duct warning. The QRH required R 14th stage bleed closed and if message remained enunciated after 40 seconds then to retard the effected thrust lever to idle. The warning message persisted so the R thrust lever was brought to idle thrust and diversion to the nearest suitable airport was planned. We complied; advised ATC; contacted dispatch and maintenance while searching for suitable airports with long dry runways; and favorable weather conditions as we were surrounded by thunderstorms that we had been navigating through. We requested vectors to the [diversion] airport. Checklists were performed; Flight attendant briefing; and passenger announcements and notifications were made. Dispatch re-released us to divert and were given fuel burn numbers to [the diversion airport]. Landing numbers were obtained and the aircraft was configured for a flaps 20 landing. Extra time was required for a proper abnormal landing briefing so we requested delay vectors and were given a series of right turns to return to the final approach course. Landing was made normally and without incident. We taxied to a gate that had been prepared for our arrival and passengers were deplaned after a short while once we pulled into the gate. Dispatch and Maintenance were contacted by phone and crew was debriefed by Chief Pilot and were returned to duty status. A recover flight was sent so we could continue with Passengers to our original destination.




Synopsis: CRJ200 Captain reported experiencing a 14th stage duct EICAS master warning at FL280. QRH procedures were not effective and the crew elected to divert to the nearest suitable  airport.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LGA.Airport, NY
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Oxygen System/General
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: While servicing crew oxygen bottles found red oily watery substance dripping from Haskell oxygen booster servicing device.  In further investigation I noticed a clear bowl mounted to the Haskell booster also had collected red fluid. I shut down operation of oxygen servicing and reported this to my manager.I suspect oil is coming from the hangar shop air compressor used to pump the Haskell device.[Suggest] an oil-less compressor dedicated for the oxygen room only with an air/oil separator filter.




Synopsis: Technician reported that while servicing crew oxygen bottles he found oil dripping from the servicing device.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Scout 8GCBC
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Ground Excursion Runway; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight; Routine Inspection
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I relocated ACA Scout for maintenance.   A few days prior a wind gust blew the aircraft off into grass between taxiway and runway after landing.  The first concern was risk of prop impact with taxi lights and full power was applied and the aircraft was flown to where it is based.  After landing damage was discovered to the right wingtip which apparently impacted a taxiway sign on the ground during the takeoff following the wind gust.  Insurance was notified right away when the damage occurred.  In describing the incident to the adjuster I asked if any report needed to be filed and was advised no.   Bore scope inspection was performed to the wing and deemed airworthy by the pilot for relocation for repairs and avionics work over the subsequent 60 days or so. Arrangements have been made for the ACA factory to remove the wing for repairs and subsequent reinstallation on the airframe.




Synopsis: An ACA Scout pilot reported a runway excursion after landing due to a gust of wind. Power is applied and the aircraft is flown back to base. Post flight revealed damage to the right wingtip and the aircraft is subsequently flown to another airport for repairs.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LGA.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class B LGA
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: 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: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The Controller working HAARP sector at N90 asked if I would take a Cessna overhead going to LMO. I told him unable and then he asked if I would take him on the river; I said yes to which he responded with WILCO. The HAARP Controller took Aircraft X through my airspace at 2000ft without any coordination. He did not even attempt to hand off the plane to me and instead handed them off to directly EWR Tower. I was later told by the Supervisor that he intentionally did it and was taken off position. I have previously filed a report regarding similar scenarios where the controller at N90 violates LGA's Class Bravo airspace without any repercussions. The controllers at N90 are intentionally jeopardizing the safety of the NAS (National Airspace System) without any consideration to the flying public. I asked management at LGA to investigate [report] immediately after it happened. I continuously asked them for two months if they had any finding from that incident but they delayed looking into it and said that too much time has passed. The only way I can see this changing would be to take disciplinary actions against those individual controllers and the management that are covering up these incidences.




Synopsis: LGA Tower Controller reported an airspace violation; and associated problems with N90 TRACON.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZLC.ARTCC, UT
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZLC
ATC / advisory: Center ZLC
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting; Workload; Distraction; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Procedure; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: A recent interpretation of the 7110.65 by the ZLC airspace office determined that routes of aircraft not covered by radar could not be amended. This was meant to include deviations for weather. There was a slide that stated that we were/are unable to authorize deviations to avoid weather for non radar aircraft. I couldn't believe it. ZLC sector 17 has large areas that lack radar coverage below 12;000ft MSL when all of the radar sites are operational. Aircraft X was on an IFR flight plan at 8;000ft MSL.We routinely lose radar coverage on this flight somewhere between the OLF and GGW. Somewhere on the west side of GGW; Aircraft X requested a deviation around weather along his route. [Special considerations were taken for Aircraft X] as advised by the airspace office. I relieved the controller and asked Aircraft X if they were clear of the weather and if they could re-intercept airway V430. They responded in the affirmative and did so.There needs to be a safe solution that allows for the assistance of aircraft that need to initiate an instrument approach or deviate around weather without radar coverage. [Having to give special considerations to aircraft] 20 times a day and/or telling the pilots unable due to lack of radar coverage is unacceptable.




Synopsis: ZLC Controller reported of an interpretation change of the FAA Order 7110.65 at the ARTCC. The reporter stated 'routes of aircraft not covered by radar could not be amended.'  Reporter wanted a safe solution that allows the assistance of aircraft that may need to deviate for weather or approaches.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 33
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine Oil Seals
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While established in normal cruise at 6;000 ft MSL 18 NM SE of ZZZ; noticed the oil pressure at +/- 20 psi; normal pressure being 50-60 psi. [Advised ATC] and proceeded direct to ZZZ at 6;000 ft. The engine seized due to oil exhaustion about 10 NM SE of the airport. Due to headwinds and wind-milling propeller; an off airport landing was conducted to a field. The aircraft sustained no damage and was towed the remaining distance to a repair shop located on the airport.  Follow-on investigation revealed oil had leaked from the base of the oil filter adapter bracket through a split in the fiber gasket at the base of the adapter. The aircraft had operated normally with no indication of an oil leak 45 flight hours previous to this incident. The oil filter adapter bracket is an aftermarket product manufactured by F&M; now Tempest; Model C6LC-L. It is imperative that owners and operators of Continental IO-470; IO-520; IO-550; TSIO-520 engines with F&M / Tempest C6LC-L Oil filter adapters diligently follow the manufacturer's ten step installation instructions including the following note: ATTENTION 'The oil filter adapter transfer cylinder must be re-tightened to 65 foot pounds of torque between 8 and 12 hours of operation after its installation or any time the adapter is removed or re-installed. Use of a torque wrench is mandatory.' I believe pilots; owners; operators; mechanics and repair stations are unaware of this critical requirement; which was ultimately a causal factor in this incident.




Synopsis: BE33 pilot reported correct maintenance procedures were not followed resulting in an engine seizure and off airport landing.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Nose Gear
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I approached the airport for a full-stop landing after an uneventful flight. I had not noticed anything amiss on my extensive preflight inspection. At the conclusion of a stabilized approach through the left downwind for our cleared runway; I touched down on the rear mains; as trained; and slowly released back pressure to allow the nose wheel to contact the runway. I smoothly applied brake pressure and as we slowed down; suddenly; the toe-brake assembly began to vibrate and shake violently; and a thud was heard and a scraping/grinding sound was heard. The runway filled our view as the gear fork ground down and the aircraft nosed-down slightly. My passenger and I immediately performed all emergency shutdown actions and exited the aircraft. We noticed that the tips of the prop had struck the ground upon exit. We made our way off the runway and awaited assistance. The landing had been uneventful aside from those last few moments; and once it happened; it was sudden and frightening; and almost paralyzing. Having a passenger-pilot certainly helped in such a stressful situation. It appears to have been a mechanical failure in the nose-gear.


Second narrative: Pilot conducting full stop landing via left downwind for RWY XXR. Stable approach conducted to standards. Aircraft entered ground effect. Main gear touched down. Nose slowly lowered. Nose gear touched down. Normal brake pressure applied. 2 seconds later plane drops pitch and scraping noise is observed. Mixture is pulled to cutoff to stop engine. Plane came to a stop on centerline. Pilot flying shut off all switches. Pilot flying and pilot not flying exited aircraft and went to side of runway for safety.


Synopsis: Private pilot flying PA-28 aircraft encountered nose gear failure during landing rollout.