elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ROA.Airport, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium 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 ROA
ATC / advisory: TRACON ROA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On a visual approach to runway 34 at ROA we responded to a GPWS Terrain message. I was the PF (Pilot Flying) and had planned on joining the ILS at VINTON (FAF) to back up the visual approach. Approximately 4-5 miles abeam of the FAF with approach mode armed and autopilot engaged I got a LOC 1 capture and the aircraft started to make a left turn then it started going back right. As I was about to disconnect the automation we received the Terrain; Terrain; Pull Up message. I immediately increased thrust and started pitching up. The ground was clearly visible during the entire approach. Once clear; I assessed the situation and continued the approach by joining the localizer and glideslope near the FAF.Threats could have been the terrain. I thought I had a reasonable plan to manage that from previous experience at this airport; planning on backing up the approach with the ILS course and managing the descent for the final turn. Undesired aircraft state occurred when I got a LOC capture at a point I would not have expected. At no time did it appear that my descent planning was inappropriate. ATC had cleared us for the visual approach from 5200 ft and I was descending with the goal of turning final at the published altitude of 3800. ILS was tuned and I was monitoring the glide slope indications but not trying to fly the glide slope on the base leg.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported a ground proximity Terrain warning while on visual approach.
Date: 202202
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Other flight school
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Instructor; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Other IGI
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During departure shortly after lift off the aircraft seemed to be climbing slowly. At about 300 ft. there was a noticeable shutter and the aircraft nose dropped a bit. I told the student to apply full power. We regained engine power and continued the climb with the intention of discontinuing the flight and returning to land from the pattern. As we reached 700 ft. the engine shuttered again this time almost shutting down completely. I stated 'my flight controls' to the student and took over. I verified mixture and throttle where both full forward and pushed the nose down to prevent a stall. I then immediately reported engine roughness to the Tower and began returning to land immediately. Tower asked which runway I would like. I requested to land on the nearest Runway XX and was told to make left traffic. We landed on Runway XX and came to a full stop. The engine continued to run extremely rough on the ground but did not seize. We where able to taxi back to the ramp without further incident. [There were] no damage or injuries. No indication of an engine problem was identified during the run up or taxi before take off. Proper checklist usage was adhered to and oil pressure; oil temp; fuel flow and vacuum gauges all showed in the green prior to take off roll.




Synopsis: Small aircraft Flight Instructor reported a rough running engine during initial climb and returned to safe landing at departure airport.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: GPT.TRACON, MS
Aircraft: Fighter
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Tactical
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E GPT
ATC / advisory: TRACON GPT
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Workload; Distraction
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: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Chart Or Publication; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: Practice approaches being conducted almost continuously by varying types of aircraft as well as numerous system failures such as aircraft data tags not acquiring on targets or automated handoffs failing. After Aircraft X's second approach; I gave him his beacon code for the next leg of his flight and terminated the existing data tag. I then turned my attention to sequencing several other aircraft. For some reason Aircraft X never tagged up on new beacon code and was left runway heading and at 2;000 feet. After a few minutes; ARTCC called wondering about him being in their airspace and I began work on getting him back into my airspace as well as making his data tag acquire somehow. Eventually he just had to be manually tagged and handed of manually.Many aircraft conduct practice approaches at this airport but differ greatly in how they file flight plans. Sometimes it takes a lot of time and effort for controllers to make the correct flight plan active which takes their eyes and attention off the radar scope. When traffic reaches a certain level; it would be nice if someone could make sure flight plans were in the system properly before practice approaches are ready to continue the rest of their flight plan when radar controller is too busy to do so. I think STARS (New ATC software/hardware) will help as well.




Synopsis: A departing aircraft radar data tag did not acquire on the target. The Controller did not notice and forgot about the aircraft. The adjacent sector noticed the target in their airspace and reminded the previous Controller about the aircraft.
Date: 202103
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; Turbulence; Windshear; Thunderstorm
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Normal departure and flight enroute to ZZZ with thunderstorm approaching ZZZ airport on arrival from the west. Radar vectors for ILS XXL for approach; multiple speed adjustments from ATC on approach and no reports of wind gusts on initial arrival from ATC with winds 180/6 from ATIS. Storm had moved over field when on approach. On short final there was an RVR (Runway Visual Range) update from recall of greater than 5;000 RVR and moderate to heavy rain but no winds passed from recall. VMC around 1;100 feet and could see right and center runway but then went into torrential rain downpour around 400-500 feet on short final where Captain made an EFIS lights call and then I shortly after picked up runway lights and landing environment just prior to minimums and was a little high but was adjusting in close. Around 30-40 feet we had an instantaneous airspeed loss of around 10kts and at that time I had decided to go-around but with the airspeed loss and instantaneous loss of lift we touched down as go-around decision was made. We had a semi-hard landing and bounced and go-around selected all simultaneously. We were slow to put the speed brake back in after touching down but did eventually secure it and maintained attitude as we executed go around. Go-around procedures were completed airborne. Vectored back around by ATC for uneventful approach; landing and taxi in. The Captain and I both did a walk around of the aircraft post flight to ensure integrity of aircraft and check tail skid as a precaution but didn't notice the skid was ground down as we later were informed from the Director of Operations and Maintenance. We debriefed the event. Windshear/airspeed loss at low altitude while simultaneously executing go-around and didn't maintain proper go-around pitch once touching down as indicated from tail skid damage. Quicker reaction from crew with go-around with instantaneous airspeed loss and loss of lift and maintain proper attitude of aircraft on touchdown when executing go-around. Follow rules to live by; do not make large control inputs when in flare/go-around close to ground.




Synopsis: B767 flight crew reported windshear on landing resulting in tailstrike.
Date: 201711
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Eurocopter AS 350/355/EC130 - Astar/Twinstar/Ecureuil
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Rotorcraft
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Removed tie-downs from main rotor blades and performed walk around. The two medical crewmembers also performed walk arounds. We all failed to see the tail rotor block still attached to the tail rotor. Started aircraft; came to a very low momentary hover; and noted that there was insufficient right pedal. Landed the aircraft back on the ground with no issue.




Synopsis: AS-350 Pilot reported that failure to remove the tail rotor block resulted in insufficient right pedal on initial hover and a return to the ground.
Date: 202001
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PDX.Airport, OR
Light: Night
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C PDX
ATC / advisory: Tower PDX
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airport; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Aircraft X on final for 10L at PDX. Aircraft Y doing pattern work at VUO on the VUO advisory frequency. I was working both frequencies; PDX Tower in my headset; and VUO advisory with the handset. I called the Cessna traffic to Aircraft X and he reported them in sight. I reported Aircraft X traffic on the Pearson advisory frequency. I noticed Aircraft X start climbing and he indicated he had an RA. I issued a climb to 3;000 FT and runway heading. Aircraft X was re-sequenced; and landed without incident.VUO (Pearson airport) is not in a safe proximity to the final at PDX when we are landing to the east. It's as simple as that. For political or other reasons it remains open. Every single Controller here thinks it's not a matter of if; but when there will be an accident. I participate in flight deck training every single opportunity I get. I've seen how busy the cockpit is on final; especially in adverse weather like today. To have traffic in your face less than 1/2 mile away and the same altitude at 3 mile final is absurd. I would recommend to close the airport or forbid pattern work or develop some well-defined departure corridor that stays low and northbound. Until we do something; we will continue to get RA's; costing the airlines money and putting lives in danger; all for what?




Synopsis: Portland Tower Controller reported an airborne conflict between an air carrier on approach to PDX and a VFR aircraft on approach to VUO airport.
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Aircraft: DC-10 30
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pitot-Static System
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Captain rejected takeoff during takeoff roll at approximately 60 KTS due to no airspeed tape on airspeed indicator. Returned to ramp and found pitot covers installed.  I noticed the pitot cover installed during walk around; should have notified maintenance at that time.


Second narrative: Maintenance forgot to remove pitot covers.


Synopsis: An MD-11 flight crew reported they rejected their takeoff when they noticed no airspeed indication.  Pitot covers were found still installed.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Weather elements / visibility: Fog; Haze / Smoke; 6
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Student
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: I was completing my long X/C and the TAF's reported VFR conditions long after my proposed time of return to [departure airport].  I checked the weather forecast for the route of my flight and it also reported no fog at the proposed time of my enroute legs.  I encountered fog outside of the Class D Airspace below my aircraft by at least 1;500 feet upon my return to [departure airport].  I saw I could remain easily in VFR conditions; but still fly within the airspace.  I requested a Special VFR Clearance so I could attempt a straight-in approach to Runway 34; since fog was moving in quickly.  Upon my descent; I lost visual contact with the runway approximately 3 miles south of the approach end. I was above the fog in VFR condition and made the decision to break off my descent to the east and land at [another airport].  At no time was I in IMC; or not maintain visual contact with the ground.  The fog bank moved in sooner than predicted and was only over the airport runway.  The east and northeast of the airport had greater than 6 miles visibility; no fog and light haze.  I could see [a landmark] and I knew I was able to land at [the other airport]....  I maintained visibility and cloud clearance according to the limitations placed on my solo endorsement.




Synopsis: C172 Student Pilot; completing a long cross-country flight; encountered unforcasted fog upon return to departure airport and landed VFR at a nearby airport.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZLA.ARTCC, CA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZLA
ATC / advisory: Center ZLA
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute; Supervisor / CIC
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; 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: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Exited Penetrated Airspace
Contributing factors: Procedure; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: R2501 was released at 16000 feet and above. At XB:00 it was going 'HOT' released to ZLA 29000 feet and above. At approximately XA:50; I issued Aircraft X to descend now to 28000 feet then descend at pilots discretion to 24000 feet. At XB:00 R2501 went hot and alerted on my scope. As I saw this; Aircraft X was about 2 miles from the airspace and at 28300 feet. I immediately told Aircraft X to climb to 29000 feet immediately for active military airspace. Forty seconds later; Aircraft X entered R2501 at 28600 feet climbing to 29000 feet. I was aware of the change and just forgot at the time when I gave the clearance. A Controller in Charge was in charge and did not warn the area of the change as we normally do. Have the airspace come onto the scope 2 minutes prior to remind people sooner rather than it just coming onto the scope at the exact time.




Synopsis: ZLA Controller reported forgetting that a local restricted area was about to become active and descended an aircraft into the airspace.
Date: 201407
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ADS.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 33
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B DAL
ATC / advisory: TRACON D10
Second aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Utilizing VFR flight following and Class B transition from ADS. Requested altitude was 4;500 feet. Initial clearance from ADS was runway heading (150); at or below 2;000 feet. After takeoff; was switched to Approach. On initial contact with Approach; was cleared to 2;500 feet. I was still in climbout from ADS and continued my climb. As I was passing 2;200 feet; Approach called traffic at 10 o'clock; a B737. Approach also called me out to the aircraft. Traffic was abeam on the left; with a strong left bearing rate (drawing aft from my perspective) and was not a horizontal collision threat. Additionally; the traffic appeared to be above me. I called 'no factor' and continued my climb to 2;500 feet. At this point; the Controller cleared the B737 to descend on their approach. The crew then told the Controller that they had to climb for a Resolution Advisory. I also heard one 'traffic' alert from the Garmin. At no point did Approach direct me or the B737 to initiate evasion maneuvers ('Descend Immediately'.) I believe that I was flying in accordance with my clearance and that this was an inadvertent Resolution Advisory for the B737 crew. Looking at tracks for these planes; when they are on downwind for 13L at DAL; they cross a narrow strip at 3;000 feet. If I am climbing to a point 500 feet below and perpendicular to their flight path; TCAS may see me as a 'maneuvering' target with potential collision and provide an RA to the crew. With 500 feet separation being common in DFW Class B and TCAS seeing me 'climbing' into their flight path (before level off;) the system provided them an RA. Even if I was level; 500 feet separation may set off a TCAS. With the recent reduction in the Class B ceiling over ADS (2500) and a common VFR route through this approach corridor; minimal separation like this is likely to become more common. I recommend ATC review the altitude clearances for crossing traffic from ADS (departing 15 southbound) and DAL (downwinds for 13L.)




Synopsis: BE33 pilot departing ADS in compliance with ATC instructions is made aware that a B737 on downwind for 13L at DAL had a TCAS RA caused by his aircraft. At no time was vertical separation less than 500 feet but the BE33 was climbing and may trigger the TCAS RA.
Date: 201311
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Takeoff
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Starting out a 4 day trip and all was normal and by the book. The only thing is the Captain put a metal tin of Altoids between the flap and thrust levers. We did all checklists and had the takeoff configuration in green. However; when thrust was added; after a few seconds the Tin [rolled] down the console to the rudder trim and got stuck pushing it out of trim and [caused] a delayed EICAS message. I know this sounds crazy but it actually happened. Never put anything of significance on the thrust pedestal. Maybe there should be a quarterly bulletin on the event. I really would never have thought anything like this would happen from an Altoid can; but lesson learned.




Synopsis: CRJ-700 First Officer reported that a tin of mints placed between the flap and thrust levers rolled back on takeoff and lodged in the rudder trim causing an EICAS message and rejected takeoff.