elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: BHM.Airport, AL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: 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 C BHM
ATC / advisory: Tower BHM
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Southeast of MCDEN OM at 3000 ft MSL we were cleared for the visual approach. The PF selected Heading Select and began to descend. The course selected put him inside the marker. I asked if he saw the radio towers on my side of the aircraft which he said yes. Several seconds later; the GPWS Caution Obstacle Alert sounded. He then began a right turn that was putting us closer to the antennas. I then informed him he needed to turn left to avoid these antennas which he did. There was a definite miscommunication between Crew Members and an operating procedure that does not require over flight of the FAF at night.[Suggest] better Company SOP for night operations in VFR conditions.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer queried his Captain; the flying pilot; if he saw the towers southeast of the BHM Runway 6 MCDEM outer marker while turning and descending on a night visual approach. The positive response was followed by an GPWS obstacle caution; a turn towards the towers; and then evasive turns away from the towers.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Aircraft: PA-30 Twin Comanche
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Landing Gear
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were in the process of doing touch and goes. We had done two of them and the third landing was going to be a full stop. We came in on the approach in a very stable pitch and power setting. By that I mean 90 to 95 knots and 500 to 600 feet per minute for the descent. The student started his flare late and came down hard and bounced the aircraft back into the air. When this occurred he added power to get the plane flying again but when we came down the gear collapsed and we struck both the right and left props of the aircraft. There were no injuries and it seemed or appeared that the gear had folded into the wheel wells. We then exited the aircraft and airport security gave us a ride back to the hanger. The student did call for gear down before landing checklist abeam the 1000ft markers on the downwind leg. The gear handle was down when we exited the aircraft .




Synopsis: GA flight instructor reported the landing gear collapsed after a bounced landing by the pilot in training.
Date: 201904
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Aircraft component: APU
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty); Flight Attendant In Charge
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon landing in ZZZ the smell in the back galley aft cabin was horrible. It was like feet; puke; and exhaust all mixed together. C Flight Attendant and I discussed it and realized we were smelling the same thing. We got new pilots in ZZZ and we informed them of the smell. As we were at the gate the smell came back and we informed them of it. They said it was the APU. Took off without incident. Landing in ZZZ1 the smell came back. Taxiing in we informed the pilots the smell was back. The pilots said they can smell it and the filters just need to be changed on the APU. Didn't even know we had an incident until a phone call 2 hours later saying it was air cabin.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported recurring noxious fumes on landing.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SAN.Airport, CA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi; Final Approach
Airspace: Class B SAN
ATC / advisory: Tower SAN
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight; Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We were on short final for 27 in SAN. A military aircraft seemed to be hovering one or two miles south of our path. I was hand flying the approach when the F/O (First Officer) mentioned that the craft could be a drone. It was; and therefore much closer to our path that what we originally believed. It stayed at a fairly safe distance and I refocused on landing the aircraft. An aircraft was cleared for immediate takeoff and separation was tight. During the landing roll; the drone reappeared in my peripheral vision as it passed us on the taxiway. When we cleared the runway; it was now hovering over an (other carrier) aircraft in our 12 o'clock position at [the] Terminal. I advised the Tower of the encounter and its present location. The drone was black; probably two or three feet wide. It was being flown in a very skilled way. The hovering and flight path was precise. It was a professional instrument; not a toy. In my opinion; the intent was commercial; perhaps filming. That is where I would lead an investigation.This encounter highlights a safety issue of the highest level. A drone that size can be used in a terminal area of a major US airport without the knowledge of ATC. One or more can be used to cause catastrophic damage to commercial aircraft. The skill level of drone operators as well as the maneuverability capability can be the greatest hazard we face. The same event at night would have been unknown from anyone. This is an eye opener. It needs to be addressed.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported sighting a drone while flying a visual approach to runway 27 at SAN and then again hovering over a parked airplane upon landing.
Date: 201211
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CHS.Airport, SC
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
ATC / advisory: Tower CHS
Second aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was the OJTI on West RADAR. The trainee cleared aircraft X for visual approach/short approach to Runway 21; four miles north of the field. It claimed it could not make the descent. I took the frequency at that time because of task saturation of the trainee. I told aircraft one to maneuver as necessary for descent. After dealing with other aircraft sequencing into a satellite airport; noticed aircraft X had crossed final and turned outbound; making a left 270 with aircraft Y on final descending through 3;000 FT approximately 4 miles in trail of aircraft X. I instructed aircraft Y to maintain 3;000 FT and turn away from aircraft X. Never give pilots permission to maneuver as necessary; be directive. OJTI should realize task saturation of trainee sooner.




Synopsis: CHS Controller described a conflict event when indicating to a visual approach aircraft to 'maneuver as necessary' due to altitude resulting in a conflict with a succeeding aircraft
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Learjet 60
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization Control System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I took off and after about 10 minutes I leveled off at FL240 for our final cursing altitude. Not to much longer after that we got a Pressure System light. I looked at the cabin pressure and it was at 10;000 and it was climbing rapidly. The copilot called ATC and declared an emergency. I started an emergency decent and at the same time resetting the Cabin Pressure System. ATC cleared to descend to 12;000. I level off at 12;000 with the Cabin Pressure System reset. Everything was back to normal. I decided to continue going to destination. I called ATC and I asked for there telephone number and name. After landing I called ATC to make sure everything was OK; they agreed. There was no other airplane involved.




Synopsis: LR60 Captain reported a pressure system light sat FL240 and note cabin altitude going above 10;000 FT. ATC is notified and an emergency descent is initiated with the pressurization system being successfully reset during the descent. Flight continues to destination.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Sport Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Horizontal Stabilizer Trim
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Arriving at my destination in light to moderate turbulence; I noticed that my elevator trim was not actuating. I reset the circuit breaker; but this did not resolve the issue. Since the trim was in a nose down condition I needed to exert significant additional back pressure to control the descent and landing properly. I decided to alert the Tower Controller that I was requesting a precautionary standby landing due to this condition. I checked all of the systems I could think of; but could not resolve the condition of heavy nose down trim. I made my approach and bounced slightly at touchdown due to the wind and heavy control pressure so I decided to go around to enter a slightly longer pattern for a more stabilized approach. On my second approach I landed without any incident and returned to my hangar. On further investigation I discovered that I had inadvertently switched off the trim forward priority switch leaving me with no electric trim. The aircraft does not have a manual trim control. This mistake was due to my having hung my headset volume control/battery pack too near to the trim priority switch such that when I experienced some turbulence and I reached up to adjust my headset volume control and when I released it; it swung back and flipped off the trim switch. I knew the switch was there but simply forgot it while checking else where for the problem. Since the aircraft is brand new with approximately 20 hours total time since leaving the factory; this problem will not be likely to occur again because it will be a firm part of my future landing checklist items. The airplane has excellent characteristics even without trim control and the pilot will continue to improve his skills.




Synopsis: A Carbon Cub SS pilot had difficulty controlling the aircraft because of the nose down trim condition and determined after landing that he had inadvertently turned the Trim Priority Switch OFF when he hung a headset near it.
Date: 202011
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Other Person
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related; Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: We work in a small office and recently the scanners for the whole shift were placed into our work area; so the agents could pick them up. We feel like it is unsafe to have so many people in such a close proximity while we have a pandemic going on. I told management it was an unsafe idea but never got any real reasoning why they needed to move it now.




Synopsis: Airline office employee reported scanners were moved into their small room creating social distancing concerns as multiple people walk in their area to pick up the scanners.
Date: 201412
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: A80.TRACON, GA
Aircraft: MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ATL
ATC / advisory: TRACON A80
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Workload; Time Pressure; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: As we approached HONIE on the WARRR1 RNAV arrival into Atlanta; we had the 27L transition selected. Atlanta Approach controller changed our RWY to 26R several miles prior to HONIE. When CA selected the WARRR1 arrival for 26R; all waypoints are dropped out until the proper arrival can be selected. There are 10 pages with 50 possible combinations of runways and arrivals on them. There is also an FMS built-in delay before each page will populate. The aircraft goes into heading hold. This time delay and closeness to HONIE caused us to fly a more easterly heading than desired. 053 heading is the outbound course from HONIE to WARRR on the RWY 26 arrival. We are a very experienced crew and still did not have time to repopulate the FMS prior to passing HONIE. So the aircraft went into HDG HLD and a turn was made toward WARRR when we were finally 3-4 miles from WARRR.Controllers need to be aware of the difficulty of the MD-80 to reprogram the FMS on short notice; even when within the 10 mile no later than distance. Aircrews should be aware of the outbound heading after HONIE. At least they will be flying the proper course without wind correction. In the future; I will request a heading and not accept a short notice runway change into ATL.


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


Synopsis: When ATC gave the MD-80 flight crew a late runway change as they approached HONIE on the WARRR RNAV STAR to ATL; the flight crew was unable to program it in a timely fashion and a modest track deviation occurred as the reprogramming was accomplished. Delays inherent to technical peculiarities of reprogramming a complex procedure as well as the modest speed of the FMS were cited as contributing factors.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZJX.ARTCC, FL
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Night
Aircraft: Medium Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZJX
ATC / advisory: Center ZJX
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: In cruise at FL330; we experienced severe turbulence for about 20-30 seconds. We gained 700 feet of altitude and lost 40 knots. The auto throttles and the autopilot disengaged uncommanded; and the aircraft was uncontrollable. We leveled off at FL340 and continued the flight; which was fine with ATC. ATC did not give us a phone number to call; nor did he seem to be concerned with our altitude deviation. I informed ATC about the turbulence; and to not send another airplane through the area if possible. The lead flight attendant informed me that one of our other flight attendants bumped her head; but she did not need medical attention. After we landed [at destination]; this flight attendant decided to seek medical attention the next day. The flight attendants went row by row to ensure passengers were okay; and no passenger injuries were discovered. We landed [at destination] and I made an entry in the aircraft maintenance log for a severe turbulence encounter.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain describes a severe turbulence event where the aircraft gained 700 feet and lost 40 knots of airspeed. No injuries initially reported; however one of the flight attendants; who bumped her head in the turbulence; did seek medical attention after landing at the destination.
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cheetah; Tiger; Traveler AA5 Series
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: RV-10
Aircraft component: VHF
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While on IFR training mission; we stopped at ZZZ to refuel. The weather was VMC with calm winds. After refueling; at or about XA38; we notified ZZZ traffic of our taxiing intentions 'ZZZ traffic; Aircraft X; taxiing from fuel area to Runway XX; ZZZ.' via CTAF radio.Upon reaching the end of the taxiway and before entering the runway; at or about XA40; we notified CTAF of our departure intentions: 'ZZZ traffic; Aircraft X; departing XX; ZZZ.'Both myself and my CFII checked visually left and right and did not see any traffic on the ground nor in the air. Nothing showed on ADS-B. I taxied the plane onto Runway XX and moved the throttle to full power. As we accelerated to rotation speed; both my CFII and I spotted a low wing plane heading south; directly towards us; about 50 feet above the runway. As I was not immediately sure if they were landing or taking off; I pulled power off; began braking; and moved to the right side of the runway.The plane was taking off on Runway XY but never spoke on CTAF until after he was leaving the pattern when he identified himself as an RV10; departing to the southeast. Neither I [or] my CFII had the presence of mind to write down his tail number.After I exited the runway; my CFII double-checked to make sure that we were tuned to the correct CTAF frequency (we were). We both are certain that the RV10 never spoke on CTAF until after he took off and began to leave the pattern. My CFI checked his Stratus several times and never saw him on ADS-B; either.We taxied to Runway XY and took off without incident. As we took off; it became clear that due to runway slope and 'dip' that the end of [Runway] XX could not been from [Runway] XY. We are not sure that the RV10 ever saw us.This incident highlights the absolute necessity for proper radio communications at all times; even at so-called uncontrolled airports.




Synopsis: GA Instructor Pilot reported an aborted takeoff when they noticed another aircraft was taking off opposite direction on the same runway.