elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BUF.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Snow
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground BUF
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown; Ground Excursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: After crossing the runway; I was taxiing the aircraft to [FBO]. Heavy blowing snow; low visibility along with the absence of illuminated taxi lights made the taxi very challenging. The taxiways were not plowed and the landscape was completely neutral due to the snow providing an appearance of all surfaces being level and continuous. At what I perceived as the entrance to the FBO. I observed a hashed black and yellow sign to my left with a blue unilluminated taxi light. To my right was a [business jet]. Straight ahead I observed the lineman and could see the FBO lights. As I continued the taxi I felt the nose wheel give and the aircraft stopped. We were traveling at such a low speed that the aircraft rested smoothly and at first I thought it was just deep snow as all surfaces except the runway were covered with roughly 8 inches of loose snow. I then concluded this wasn't the case as we both observed the drop in the aircraft nose attitude. Don't taxi when visibility is low and the combination of unplowed surfaces along with unlit taxiway lights. In these condition I should have requested a follow truck or a snow plow to follow. I would like to see markers placed at that location to avoid a reoccurrence. I was told by airport staff that this wasn't the first time it has happened and they wish that area be paved or marked.


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


Synopsis: The flight crew of a business jet reported becoming disoriented while taxiing to the gate in blowing snow and low visibility conditions which resulted in the aircraft departing the paved taxiway surface.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Inflight Event / Encounter VFR In IMC
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Unmanned MQ9s file IFR and depart to the resticted area; and then return; cancel IFR and land. Today low ceilings moved in after they departed; and they had to come back early. They had NO plan on what to do if they cannot cancel IFR; and they were flying around looking for a hole in the clouds to get down. They conflicted with the three IFR inbounds that I was vectoring. They also stated if they couldn't get below the clouds; that they would land. Ultimately they did find a hole in the clouds after getting 45 degrees left and right of course; causing a conflict with a northbound aircraft on the localizer at 4000. I then had to vector the MQ9s at this point to follow one of the aircraft. Something needs to be done to alleviate a situation from happening in the future. I have heard that this has happened multiple times. This is adding inherent risk to the NAS that doesn't need to. It just seems that the [drone operators] says we will fly; and if bad weather happens; then we can do whatever we want.




Synopsis: Approach Controller reported airborne conflict between UAV and commercial aircraft being vectored for approach.
Date: 201905
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Working as a resting pilot under FRMS rules for the [flight] departing ZZZ we heard a few loud pops from compressor stall of the Number 1 engine and then obvious loss of power. Looked out the window to see the first stage fan windmilling and no signs of fire or other damage. Sat tight for a bit to allow everyone to stabilize and then shared our thoughts with the forward cabin crew but also stating that any final word would have to come from the flying Captain and suggesting they just wait for him to call them which he did in a normal timely fashion given the situation. After confirming things in the cockpit were as we expected; engine shut down; no fire; preparing for return; I went to the back galley to make sure the aft cabin crew was fully informed and could expect a normal landing with fire trucks to follow with no need to prepare the cabin further yet be ready for evacuation if signal is given. We proceeded to land normally and have the AFR (Airport Fire Rescue) crews surround the aircraft. After taking the brake temps the left one was found to be hot; around 800 degrees F due to no thrust reverse on that engine and the braking system regulating more pressure to that side. The right brake was normal temp or about 300 F. The guys put a brake fan on it to speed up cooling and we then taxied to the gate with them in tow for an uneventful conclusion. Great job to both the flight and cabin crew in handling a startling event calmly and methodically.




Synopsis: B737 First Officer engine failure in flight resulting in a divert and uneventful landing.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Sierra 24
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was enroute from ZZZ to ZZZ1. I checked NOTAMs for enroute airports on [the] EFB that was updated that day. I was flying into the sun. I did not ask for flight following. I had one passenger. I stayed on frequency from ZZZ from the time I took off until I spotted the near miss. There was no prior notice of skydiving activity on this frequency which was close to [the] area of [the] near miss.I was in constant observation mode for airplanes and skydivers where the sectional shows activity. Near the field; I noticed a skydiver very close 300 ft. horizontal and 150 ft. vertical come out of the sun. My passenger spotted him at the same time. I immediately turned left away from the parachutist and continued observation for more parachutists. Upon landing; I looked back for parachuting activity NOTAMS. I only see 2. I felt that if I had called Approach/Departure for flight following after I left ZZZ; I might have had an ATC notification of skydiving activity in the respective area.




Synopsis: A-24A Pilot Flying reported an NMAC event with a skydiver.
Date: 201207
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Tobago TB-10
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Propeller
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During the crosswind turn; the airplane began to shake. Three inches of a prop blade broke off on a 2 blade prop. A radio call to CTAF was made; entered a left base; and made successful landing. Shut down engine when runway was made.




Synopsis: Tobago TB-10 pilot reported losing three inches off his prop blade; which caused a vibration. Pilot was in the pattern; so once runway was assured he shut down the engine and a successful landing ensued.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Second aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were cleared for the ILS 28L in San Francisco. Passing 5000 feet on glideslope; ATC was vectoring a 777 to join us for a 'side by' for 28R. We were 18 miles out when we got a TA; and my First Officer commented he was going to change the Transponder from TA/RA to 'TA only' per our procedures in SFO and DEN. As the 777 approached the localizer; we noticed he would not be able to join his localizer but fly through ours as well. He was probably at 4000 feet.Although we never received another TA; he was underneath us as we descended on the glideslope. I realized it wasn't going to work so I climbed from approximately 4500 feet to 5500 feet. Meanwhile; ATC was trying to send us around; but the call was blocked. I believe he flew directly under us less than 500 feet. We were vectored for another ILS with no further complications. Before we were handed off to Tower; Approach apologized and said that the 777 didn't turn in; in time. The next day I decided to review the Transponder policy and realized we are supposed to switch to 'TA only' inside of eight miles. We were 18 miles out.I failed to brief the eight mile point for TA only. Without a brief of eight miles; I'm concerned most would switch from TA/RA to TA only further than eight miles when another aircraft pulls alongside.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported executing a go-around from the SFO ILS Runway 28L after experiencing an NMAC with a B777 on parallel approach to Runway 28R.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation; General Police / Security Involved
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Captain was informed of disruptive passengers. Passenger was not obeying Flight Attendant commands; sexual assault on [other] passengers and appeared intoxicated. Captain went for toilet break and to discuss issue with Chief Purser. The Passenger quickly rushed forward and violently attacked Flight Attendant standing by door 1L; and then tried to open door 1L while in flight. Flight Attendant repelled attack and 2 other Flight Attendants restrained the Passenger. Captain informed passenger to stop actions and he was escorted to seat 1L. Captain ordered Tuff Cuffs on passenger's wrists and ankles. Captain recorded saying cuffs were not too tight and he was comfortable. 5 passengers in 1st class were very upset and feared for their safety. Captain ordered one First Officer to guard the passenger (Flight Attendants were short staffed) as he was violent; unpredictable and would not follow commands. The Passenger escaped from wrist cuffs and several times tried to get up to continue his deadly rampage. The Passenger from Economy section was used to help guard passengers (no Flight Attendants were available as they were short staffed) while pilots did required duties. Flight Attendant was injured but did not require medical attention At That Time; but was visibly shaken. Flight landed safely and no fatalities or damage to aircraft. [Foreign] Police would NOT board plane and said there was NO holding facility; ZZZZ station manager 3 times told Captain that [company] could NOT force passengers back to department station or hold passengers. The Passenger is dangerous; violent and unpredictable; but was released and continued on another flight....




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported an altercation with a hazardous passenger.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: King Air C90 E90
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Skydiving
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Second aircraft: Cessna Aircraft Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter function: Captain; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Cessna missed my skydiver with only 50 ft. to spare. I announced on [frequency] and talked with Approach and was one minute prior to jump run. These close encounters continue to happen in the area.




Synopsis: Pilot reported another aircraft nearly hitting the skydiver.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Operated an aircraft with an expired medical. With COVID 19 causing the FAA to extend a grace period I knew I had time to get it scheduled when things opened back up.  I had scheduled an appointment that got canceled.  I heard that the FAA had extended the grace period again into August; upon further investigation I believe that info was incorrect.  Immediately realizing the issue I scheduled my medical and completed it promptly.  The confusion of the FAA dates and crazy schedules with the COVID closures and a hectic work schedule contributed to this oversight.  I will stay more focused on the situation in the future to make sure I do not operate an aircraft with an expired medical.




Synopsis: Pilot reported flying an aircraft with an expired medical certificate.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: NEW.Airport, LA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class E MSY
ATC / advisory: TRACON MSY
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Departing NEW at night. Tower was unexpectedly closed. Contacted MSY APCH via RCO (Remote Communication Outlets). Received clearance; Controller did say hold for release but then upon my read back did not say contact him prior to or when number one which is standard. I departed VFR and leveling at 2000 ft contacted same controller on departure frequency. He asked if I was airborne; I said I was; and he then told me that I should have contacted him for a void time clearance. He later said that I should always contact ATC from a satellite facility for a void time clearance. I was VFR and following his clearance but in hindsight I should have contacted. His nonuse of standardized phraseology and the cold and windy conditions were factors in this.




Synopsis: Pilot receives IFR clearance while on the ground. Controller tells pilot to hold for release. Pilot departs airport VFR. Pilot gets chastised for departing the airport by ATC.
Date: 202103
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZOB.ARTCC, OH
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Other Aerial Survey
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZOB
ATC / advisory: Center ZOB
Second aircraft: UAV: Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During an aerial survey flight at approximately 16;500 feet the flight crew observed a drone pass 1 to 2 feet over the left wing tip of the aircraft. The drone was estimated 3 to 5 feet in diameter. It appeared to be a white color. It happened too quickly to describe the shape and dimensions with any degree of accuracy. Same goes for the direction of the craft. There would have been absolutely no chance of taking evasive action given how fast the event occurred. Same company has observed a drone at 15;500 [feet.] with a similar size and a near miss within 20 feet in the past.




Synopsis: A Pilot conducting an Aerial Survey mission reported a near miss with a unmanned aerial vehicle.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: MIA.Airport, FL
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Other Aircraft in Maintenance
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Aircraft X was an inbound flight into MIA. The aircraft was to remain overnight and was scheduled a check. When the aircraft arrived sometime between that and when the night shift took hold of this aircraft for that check in tech operations APC (Automatic Pressure Controller) there was a note. 'INDB - TERM CK #2 MLG BRAKE POSSIBLY WORN BEYOND LIMITS' AND 'INBD NLG TIRES BRAKE POSSIBLY WORN BEYOND LIMITS'. These are the encrypted messages and failed maintenance practices we are now seeing. The tires and brakes were in fact worn the supervisor who went to check this plane did not document this correctly into the logbook or on a non-routine tied to the aircraft. If you find an item you are to write the item as found appropriately. What if the check on this plane was deferred or the supervisor did not put this on the appropriate document and this known issue was allowed to be and the plane flew? These procedure set a bad trend in Maintenance where things get lost and documentation is poor.This event occurred because [Company] has a contract with their mechanics. While legal for an FAA certified airman to inspect airplanes which each supervisor does hold; they cannot contractually enter the items in the log book without a contractual penalty so the company is trying to save themselves that grief by putting items in a new way that does not legally tie that item to that airplane makes them aware of that item but saves them that penalty.The suggestion would be for the supervisor to log the items in the logbook or on a non-routine penalty or no penalty. Supervisors stop this practice get a better Maintenance program that can address these issues before they become concerned about them and to hire enough mechanics to fulfill their needs if this needs to be done or do nothing the mechanic would have found that item on that check which they did and the tires and brake were changed.




Synopsis: Maintenance Technician reported exposes incorrect method of writing up maintenance discrepancy by Company.