elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZAB.ARTCC, NM
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZAB
ATC / advisory: Center ZAB
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: We were flying just North of White Sands Missile test at 33;000 feet. We started to get multiple intermittent EICAM messages related to the GPS system.  We notified ATC and they confirmed that the military was doing GPS jamming at White Sands.  Eventually; we lost both GPS units; (GPS Primary FAIL) and developed a bad drift in our inertials (20+ miles).  We confirmed the position error with our IPAD GPS; VOR; and by RADAR position with ATC.  Our NDs showed us north of a NAVAID by 10 miles; when we were actually about 10 miles south of it.  We disabled GPS input to the inertials; and used automatic radio updates to calm the inertial units down.  Number 2 was still showing excessive drift; so we went to ATT REF on Number 2; and switched the First Officer displays to Number 3.  We called Dispatch on the Crew Phone App; and had a group discussion with him and a rep from Maintenance.  The Maintenance Rep and the book had no way to get the GPS units back on line.  Both units were showing blanks on their position ref pages.  We were down to VOR navigation; and headings from ATC.  We discussed diverting; but decided to press on after checking the weather and confirming with ATC that they could handle the additional work load of vectoring us; as we were unable to do any RNAV navigation. GPS jamming needs to be discontinued near commercial aviation.  Had we been IMC or the weather had been worse at our destination; we would have had to divert.  Our position was over 20 miles off of what was displayed on our screen. We confirmed this by the GPS in our IPADS; VOR; and RADAR position with ATC.




Synopsis: An air carrier pilot reported losing both GPS units and was off course due to military GPS jamming.
Date: 201312
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operating under: Part 91
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel Tank Cap
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Departed with 52 gallons fuel for what should have been a two hour flight with a calculated 12 gallons per hour fuel burn. Inadvertent loss of fuel cap led to fuel exhaustion; at which point I initiated emergency landing procedures which resulted in a successful landing; with no harm to passengers or aircraft.




Synopsis: C182 pilot experiences fuel exhaustion at 7;500 feet resulting in a successful emergency landing. A fuel tank cap is found to be missing after landing.
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SR20
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Nose Gear
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; General Evacuated; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Visual approach to a normal landing with student manipulating the controls. Student touched down on the runway centerline at the correct touchdown speed; on the base wheels first. As the airplane slowed; the aerodynamic braking slowly lowered the nose. Upon the nose wheel contacting the surface there was a strong and deep vibration; almost like a bucking sensation followed by a loud crack and then the nosewheel collapsed under the engine compartment causing the propeller to strike the surface of the runway. I immediately turned off the fuel and moved the mixture control to idle cutoff and commanded the student to shut off all electrical systems which he did without hesitation. The aircraft slid on its nose to a stop. No occupants were injured. Prior to this incident I had reported that the nosewheel on this specific airplane was vibrating badly. The airplane was brought in to maintenance where work was performed and the aircraft was released back to service. The maintenance work was done one day before this incident.




Synopsis: SR20 instructor reported their aircraft's nose gear failed following what appeared to be a normal landing.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Check Pilot; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Weather; Procedure; Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: As we approached the gate in ZZZ; the Ground Crew member was using non-lighted wands during dusk hours at a shaded gate making it difficult to see his hand signals. Although not required during dusk; it was difficult to see and understand his hand signals. Once we came to a stop I observed what appeared to be a chocks in signal. I released the park brake to cool them off as we were on a quick turn as stated in the SOPM (Standard Operating Procedures Manual); and then we began a slow roll back as the aircraft was not in fact; chocked in. We rolled back about a ft. or two before I realized we weren't chocked in. I had to restart an engine to re-position the aircraft to the correct parking spot. The Ground Crew member and I debriefed the situation and both agreed that lighted wands may prevent the event in the future.No lighted wands made it difficult to understand the ground crew's hand signals. My interpretation of the aircraft being chock in. At the time of dusk in shaded areas such as Gate XX in ZZZ; lighted wands would increase the margin of safety.




Synopsis: EMB-170 Captain reported uncommanded aircraft movement after misinterpreting Marshaller's instructions.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Workload; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Company Policy
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Maintenance marshalled inbound flight into the Gate. At same time an arrival at an adjacent Gate was also being marshalled in. After stopping of aircraft; external power was hooked up by maintenance. Flight crew shutdown #2 engine. The beacon was shutoff. The #1 engine continued to run. As normal operations; the ramp personnel install chocks and cones. After seeing the beacon extinguish; the ramp personnel approached the running #1 engine with intent to place a cone at the inlet and alongside the outboard cowling. Simultaneously maintenance was trying to make visual contact with flight crew to communicate external power was hooked up and showing available. Fortunately maintenance was able to get the attention of the endangered ramp personnel who retreated back to outside the silhouette. According to Captain's Pirep: 'During engine shutdown with #1 start lever in cutoff engine did not shut down for 30 seconds. Full authority engine control (FADEC) fault light flashed on then off. Shook lever in detent and engine shutoff.'I believe the engine was running for approximately one minute with the beacon off. The exact time of the engine running is not as important the fact the beacon was turned off prior to the engine being shutdown normally or abnormally. Resulting in a false visual indication to approach the aircraft. Maintenance believes the ramp personnel would have been ingested had they not been able to get their attention. All personnel have to increase their situational awareness during higher risk phases of operations. Noise levels of engines running along with adjacent gates arrival contributed to diminished aural sensitivity. Installing chocks and cones is a routine task but very near unforgiving equipment. The flight crew needed to verify engine was shutting down prior to turning off the beacon. Everyone needs to be prepared for abnormal operations especially when a malfunction is occurring.




Synopsis: Flight crew turned off beacon prior to #1 engine shutting down. Noticing the beacon was turned off; ramp personnel assumed the engines were shut down and proceeded to attempt to set out cones in front of the running engine. The Captain stated that the engine ran for 30 seconds after the start lever was placed in the cutoff position.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: Y14.Airport, SD
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E FSD
ATC / advisory: CTAF Y14
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Entering the left upwind for runway 16 at the Lincoln County Airport (Y14). As we were passing within the crosswind leg for runway 34; a blue drone was spotted. No evasive action was necessary. However; the drone appeared to be too high and too close for being that close to the airport.




Synopsis: GA pilot entering the Y14 traffic pattern at 2;500 ft reported a near miss with a UAS which was too high and close to the airport.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Widebody Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B LAX
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: While on the ILS for runway 25L; I saw a drone pass by our left wing at postion HUNDA; 13.1DME. We advised ATC at the time and followed up with the supervisor after blocking in. The drone appeared to be approximately a 100-200 ft. off of our left wing and blue and white in color; I couldn't tell if it was stationary at the time due to the short duration that I saw it. No further actions were taken.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported a NMAC with a UAV while on an ILS approach.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Lubrication Oil
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At FL190 on climbout: The left [engine]' low oil pressure' light illuminated; with the left oil pressure gauge reading zero. Leveled off at FL200 and reviewed the QRH. Shutdown the left engine and returned for a landing. Declared an emergency with ATC.


Second narrative: [Narrative #2 did not contain any additional information]


Synopsis: MD80 flight crew experiences loss of oil pressure on the left engine during climb passing FL190. The engine is shutdown and flight returns to the departure airport.
Date: 201903
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 8
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Aeronca Champion
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Object; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While landing; after being cleared to land at ZZZ on Runway XXR; the aircraft departed the right edge of the runway just northeast of Taxiway X; at about a 30 degree to 45 degree angle; on the ground and upright after the right wing temporarily lifted up to an approximately 20 degree to 30 degree angle. It rolled across the grass between Runway XXR and the parallel taxiway; where the aircraft came to rest in a normal; upright attitude and on an approximate heading of 070 degrees. Between the time the aircraft began to depart the runway and the time it came to rest; I felt the impact of the aircraft hitting something. I'm not sure what the aircraft hit; but I think it was a runway light.While on Taxiway Y; the Tower instructed me to 'make a 180;' which I did. I then requested a taxi clearance back to [hangar] which I received and executed. The aircraft taxied normally. When I arrived back at the hangar; I looked for any damage and; at first; found none. But after pushing the aircraft back in the hangar and looking again for damage; I discovered some minor scratches on the leading edge of the left main landing gear strut.In my opinion this incident might have been prevented by greater recency of experience of taildragger operations.




Synopsis: Aeronca pilot reported a loss of control after landing that resulted in a runway excursion and minor damage from contacting runway light.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB-505 / Phenom 300
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZZ
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Person / Animal / Bird
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Airport; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: During the takeoff roll I called out 'runway's clear' (a special consideration call due to the presence of people and dogs near and on the runway earlier). Prior to hearing '70 knots' a dog walked directly in from of the plane. I called 'abort abort abort'. During the abort the dog was struck by either or both the nose gear and left main gear. We taxied back to the ramp to shut down; inspected the plane; and the Captain spoke with company. Our inspection of the plane did not find any visible damage. After multiple discussions it was determined to AOG the plane. The only person I gave my personal information to was a police officer. The Pilot in Command contacted Company; Maintenance; and Operations. SOP's and training proved to be vital to the safe outcome of this rejected takeoff. It would be worth noting in the 'feasibility' section that during the many hours spent at ZZZZ there were constantly people and dogs walking on and crossing the runway during Tower operation. Use vigilance! The database for this [report] is outdated with Runways 8/26 at ZZZZ; they are now 9/27.




Synopsis: A Fractional jet pilot reported a rejected takeoff due to striking a dog on the runway.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Second reporter function: Dispatcher
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On climb out; received #3 HYD ELEV OFF. Complied with the level one alert procedures. We had the HYD page pulled up and saw that the number 3 hydraulic system was losing fluid rapidly. It initially stopped at 2;5 and then continued leaking. Our next alerts were #3 HYD OFF followed by #3 HYD FAIL. The final amount in the reservoir was .4. We complied with the HYD 3 FAIL checklist and I switched autopilot to the #2 autopilot. We coordinated with [Operations] and ATC (Air Traffic Control) to set up dump to get to an acceptable LGW (Landing Gross Weight). We did a present position hold in accordance with ATC instructions at FL260 and dumped 75K lbs of fuel to a gross weight of 450K lbs. We secured the dump and requested priority handling and were vectored back to ZZZ and had an uneventful landing. We exited off the runway at Taxiway XX and shutdown the airplane. Maintenance towed us to gate for a transload to gate. We discussed several different landing scenarios enroute (i.e. the potential issue of brake failure; and potential slat issues). Fortunately; everything worked as advertised and we didn't have to use the options we had discussed. Failure of the #3 HYD System. Ultimately I believe it was an issue in the stab trim.


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


Synopsis: MD-11 flight crew encountered a Hydraulic System failure during climb that resulted in a return to the departure airport.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On our way from ZZZ to ZZZ1 at 4;500 ft. MSL we began to experience an engine failure; I executed proper technique for troubleshoot as well as ran our emergency checklist. I was on flight following and at the time was on with ZZZ Center. After trouble shoot and checklist were unsuccessful I let Center know I needed to request priority handling. I was not currently close enough to make it to an airport so I immediately began looking for a field. I chose my field and successfully got the plane safely on the ground not causing harm to the plane; myself; passenger; and the field in which I landed. After we were on the ground I visually inspected the fuel tanks to see if that was the issue. The tanks were completely empty to my surprise. During preflight I visually inspected the fuel tanks and sumped them properly. After landing and with empty tanks both fuel gauges were still reading that we had plenty of fuel. It was at this point I realized that we had inoperative fuel gauges and a possible fuel leak somewhere. After talking to authorities and an inspector from the FAA; the best course of action was to get a mechanic to come out and verify that we did indeed have an issue and to record it in the maintenance records. After we were able to accomplish that; we refueled both tanks and were able to depart and land at the nearest field which was ZZZ3. After looking back at the situation I think I could have prevented the situation by being more diligent when it came to preflight inspection and fuel planning.




Synopsis: Pilot reported that fuel exhaustion caused by inaccurate fuel gauges resulted in a forced landing.