elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Sundowner 23
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Student
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Second reporter function: Instructor
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: My plan for the day was to practice landings. It was a clear day without clouds; unrestricted visibility  with the winds pretty well in line with the runway. I performed a total of 6 successful normal landings. During the 7th approach everything seemed normal; including  the approach speed & altitude; the round-out seemed normal as well. However; as I was preparing to touch down; it felt like a bounce. Took evasive action; however; by that time the plane had started to steer to the right; assuming the propeller had struck the pavement causing the oscillation to the right. The momentum forced me into the grass; I still appeared to have some directional control which allowed me to get the plane back onto the runway. The changes in surface from pavement to grass and back to the pavement exacerbated nose wheel damage. There were no injuries or damage to property. The plane's nose gear bent backwards and had to be towed back to the FBO. Everything happened very fast!


Second narrative: My student was soloing in the pattern. He has about 80 hours; and previously I had been preparing him for his Private Pilot check ride. I had practiced every possible situation upon landing; and how to recover from it. We had done recovery from a bounce; and ballooning. Extreme cross winds; go arounds. After about 4 to 5 landings in the pattern; he bounced the plane. I cannot report what happened as I was not on board the airplane. According to him; he landed very hard. The plane had some damage to it.


Synopsis: BE-23 student pilot and his instructor reported the student lost control of his aircraft after landing; resulting in a runway excursion and damage to the nose gear.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: PHX.Airport, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm; Turbulence
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B PHX
ATC / advisory: TRACON P50
Second aircraft: B747 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: A flap overspeed occurred during a visual approach to runway 26 in PHX. We were vectored tight to the airport due to severe thunderstorms east of the field. We were also given a vector tight behind a B747; less than 5 miles in trail. I decided to hand fly the approach due to being high and tight to both the airport and B-747. While configuring we started to experience wake turbulence in addition to light turbulence from the weather. While handling the aircraft in the wake turbulence we were closing in on the FAF and I didn't want the flight director to level and not capture the glide slope; so I called for the missed approach altitude to be set. However I did not realize we were still in FLCH; instead of FPA. The auto throttles advanced and the speed rapidly rose. I immediately pitched the aircraft up and overrode the throttles to idle. I oversped the flaps 3 by 1 kt for about 1 second. I then called for a go-around which was executed without TOGA since we were basically at altitude and FLCH was already active. An uneventful approach to landing followed the go-around. On the ground Dispatch and Maintenance were notified; logbook entry made and an inspection was done; with no defects noted. The go around was not put in the Maintenance log because it was a non-TOGA go-around. We should have requested a delay vector to not be so tight on the B747. Also both the FO and I should have caught that we were in FLCH when I requested the missed approach altitude. Either of these would have prevented the flap limitation exceedance.


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


Synopsis: EMB-175 flight crew reported executing a go-around on approach to PHX after encountering wake turbulence in trail of a B747.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BIL.Airport, MT
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; Turbulence; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E BIL
ATC / advisory: TRACON BIL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: Arriving into BIL on the KUSTR3 RNAV Arrival; as soon as Center handed us off to Billings Approach; we were cleared for the ILS 28R approach. At this point we were inside FSYTH descending to 10;000 feet and slowing. KUSTR has a max crossing speed of 250 KT above 10;000 feet. The next waypoint is YUTUR followed by PILLR 'At 230 KT and 6;300 feet' then the transition to YIGUD and the approach for 28R. The approach plate; however; has a note saying 'MAX 230 KIAS' at PILLR.'  We flew 230 KIAS to PILLR; but the relatively large heading change from approximately 207 degrees inbound to PILLR to approximately 254 degrees outbound caused the airplane to overshoot on the transition from PILLR to YIGUD before finally intercepting the final approach course. The mandatory 230KT at PILLR on the STAR is too much for the autopilot to handle; and since the approach plate has a note for a MAX 230 KIAS at PILLR; it's confusing. Is the mandatory speed at PILLR on the KUSTR Star just a misprint/omission where they left out the word MAX. Anyway; 230 KIAS is too much speed at PILLR and should be reduced considerably.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported a confusing published speed restriction on KUSTR RNAV Arrival to BIL contributed to a track heading deviation.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: VPC.Airport, GA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Winds calm.; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cheetah; Tiger; Traveler AA5 Series
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class E VPC
ATC / advisory: CTAF VPC
Second aircraft: Mooney Aircraft Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Sea
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: As I and another pilot were taking off from Runway 19 at Cartersville GA/Bartow County airport (VPC); we noticed a single-engine Mooney airplane taxiing back off the runway at the far end (Runway 01 threshold). After returning to VPC about two hours later; we received a radio call over the CTAF from a ground crewman at the FBO asking if we could receive his transmission. We verified both ways that we could each hear each other loud and clear. The line crewman then stated that the pilot of the Mooney we had seen earlier had stated over the CTAF to the line crewman that the Mooney pilot could not make radio contact with our aircraft when we departed earlier. The line crewman stated later that the Mooney pilot seemed to be in a hurry to depart; and at one point the pilot called on the CTAF to a Learjet that was under tow on the ramp and/or taxiway ahead of the Mooney; asking for the Learjet's intentions. The same line crewman replied over the CTAF that the Learjet was under tow; and later stated that the Mooney tried to taxi around the Learjet to get to the departure end of Runway 01. Before entering Runway 19; I announced over the CTAF that we were taking Runway 19 for immediate takeoff. We did not see the Mooney until we were airborne. The line crewman stated later that the Mooney pilot had called over the CTAF asking our intentions. We did not hear the Mooney pilot. Then; according to the line crewman; the Mooney pilot stated over the CTAF that he was taking Runway 01 anyway; and the line crewman advised over the CTAF that a Grumman was already taking off from Runway 19; indicating that the line crewman could hear us over the CTAF. We did not hear the radio transmissions of the Mooney pilot and the line crewman; except for the Mooney's initial transmission that he was taxiing from the ramp to Runway 01.




Synopsis: AA5 pilot reported some communication difficulties during operations at VPC; a non-tower airport.
Date: 201705
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZMA.ARTCC, FL
Flight conditions: Marginal
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operator: Other ALL
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent; Climb; Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZMA; Class E ZMA
ATC / advisory: Center ZMA
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Weather; Company Policy; Human Factors; Staffing
Primary problem: Staffing

Narrative: While working sectors combined; weather was building in and around the sector. Sectors were stratified and we were supposed to be getting 15 miles in trail. As the sector started to get busy I asked the Supervisor if we are supposed to be getting the posted in trail and if not to increase it and make sure we get it. The Supervisor walked over to monitor the situation and did nothing. As the sector got busier; I told the Supervisor that this is not working and asked to have the sector split. By the time someone came to split the sector it was too late to split. There was a heavy departure and arrival push with what seemed to be no in trail at all using two different frequencies. I lost command of the frequencies due to pilots stepping over each other requesting deviations. In my estimation I almost had about 3 maybe 4 losses of separation and not sure if any airspace violations. At which point I told my Assist to call all the TRACONs and tell them to terminate all VFR aircraft and spin all aircraft that were airborne and we are not taking any more handoffs until the sector gets under control. My assist was a developmental and was doing the best he could with coordination. The lack of sufficient TMU (Traffic Management Unit) initiatives and enforcement combined with the sectors not being split in a timely fashion led to this event. Why it happened I'm not sure but it is becoming an all too common event.This being the 3rd time this has happened to me; I would recommend revising stratification procedures as there is nothing in place for satellite airports that I am aware of. I would also recommend investigating why TMU and management are not proactive in implementing necessary procedures to facilitate a safe operation. If it is found that the current operational procedures are sufficient to maintaining safety; then perhaps training the workforce how to work high volume traffic with weather deviations with sectors combined and no in trail.




Synopsis: ZMA Center Controller reported several near losses of separation and possible airspace violations due to the workload.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Between flights
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: We have a scheduled X hour and XX minute sit in ZZZZ until our return to ZZZZ1.  My concern is the bus that they locked us into for two hours with not enough seats and no bathroom.  I stood for two hours due to not enough seats to space out with during this pandemic.  I understand these are tough times; but we need to at least get a tour bus so we can spread out.Bottom line; we are on a X-day trip; back side of the clock; had to wait an hour for the ZZZZ1 crew to de-plane due to COVID; then get locked in a people mover bus for 2 hours with not enough seats and no lavatory; unable to spread out so some had to stand or sit on the floor.  At a minimum we need a tour bus with a large enough area to spread out.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported that while waiting to depart; they were locked for 2 hours in a small bus with not enough seats for everyone and no bathroom.
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Escape Slide
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After a bird strike inspection was completed and we were ready to depart; FO tried to arm R1 door. Tried multiple times and came up to cockpit and informed me that he couldn't arm R1. I went back to see if I could help him or arm it and I couldn't do either - the arm handle wouldn't go all the way to the armed position. We opened the door to see if there was something in the door track that was restricting the door from being armed and saw some cords and a carabiner type connector hanging down off of the door. We got the mechanic to look at it. After his inspection; he said that the activation line was wrapped around the girt bar and he would have to MEL the slide. He did that and we continued to destination.




Synopsis: B757 Captain is informed by the First Officer that he cannot arm the R1 door. Maintenance is called and indicates that the slide may have been improperly installed and will have to be deferred.
Date: 201407
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: CYYC.Airport, AB
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower CYYC
Aircraft component: GPWS
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airport
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Landing on the south runway left side new runway the 'Too Low Terrain' [warning] went off... all else normal on a VFR day. Seems the aircraft did not know the new runway was there... landed ... all ok... just wanted someone to know.




Synopsis: On a VMC approach to the new Runway 17L at CYYC the flight crew of a B737 received a Too Low Terrain EGPWS warning.
Date: 202106
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 35
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On this aircraft; annual inspection is current and the most recent oil change had happened less than 2 flight hours prior; with the mechanic noting that the filter cut check was normal. I had flown the aircraft uneventfully for about 0.9 hours previous to this. Preflight was normal and showed good fuel quantity in all tanks and no evidence of water or sediment in any fuel cell or the main sump. Engine oil was full and run-up checks were normal. I executed a straight-in approach [planning on a touch-and-go]. I conducted my descent check in accordance with the checklist along with a 'GUMPS' check. Final approach and landing were normal. I pushed up power for the 'go' portion and the aircraft initially responded normally.  Shortly after takeoff I heard the RPMs drop and felt the airplane experience a partial power loss. I checked mixture; prop; and throttle all in the full forward position (they were) and maintained landing attitude until touchdown.  During this time I announced (incorrectly) 'engine failure' on Tower frequency. Once the aircraft was down; the engine was still running and I was able to taxi clear of the runway.  At this point; after continued power manipulation the engine stopped. I maintained radio contact with Tower until a tug arrived to taxi the aircraft back to the hangar. I documented throttle/mixture settings; fuel quantity indicators; and checked the sumps. There was no apparent damage to the aircraft or any property; and no injuries.




Synopsis: BE35 pilot reported a safe landing following a partial power loss shortly after takeoff.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MKY.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E RSW
Second aircraft: Cessna 152
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Flying at 2000 ft south west of MKY. Training flight straight and level flight. Aircraft; Cessna; spotted at same level. Head on to the right of my aircraft. Evasive maneuver initiated descending turn to the right on my part. Evasive maneuver initiated on the other aircraft; ascending. Lost sight of the aircraft during the maneuver. No accidents reported.




Synopsis: GA flight instructor reported a NMAC during a training flight near MKY.
Date: 201410
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X departed [with] standard routing. The aircraft checked on climbing to 150; 360 heading; 250 kts (all standard). I then climbed the aircraft to FL230. Shortly thereafter; I cleared him 'direct ZZZZZ; resume normal airspeed.' The pilot advised that ZZZZZ was not on his route; that his next filed fix was ZZZ. While that's true; he had filed ZZZ..; The ZZZZZ routing was listed in blue and should have been issued in his original clearance. I advised him to put ZZZZZ in the box and proceed direct and that I had a revision to his routing beyond that; when he was ready to copy. He asked me to spell ZZZZZ for him; which I did. Once he had ZZZZZ in and was proceeding direct; he advised he was ready for the revision. I then cleared him; which he correctly read back. It should be noted that English clearly was not this pilot's first language; making all this communication somewhat laborious.  On high-climbers (FL240 or higher) over ZZZ; [the Center] has an Automated Information Transfer (AIT) procedure within the SOP. The aircraft is flashed to sector XX who then flashes it on to sector XY. I honestly don't remember if I did or I didn't flash the aircraft to anyone; but I don't believe I did. At some point I saw that sector XY had the handoff and shipped the aircraft to them. The aircraft entered sector XX at or very near FL230 without a handoff or pointout. While I like the AIT procedure in general; this may be an example of a problem with it. After a million times using it; you tend to look for sector XY having track control and ship him; regardless of how it got to that point. Also; and again I'm not sure;  I believe I never flashed him to anyone. If that's the case; the data block auto-flashed to XY based on route and requested final altitude; bypassing XX entirely. In my opinion this is unsafe. If there's an AIT it needs to flash as per the AIT; or not at all. Certainly I'd notice that I still have track control and initiate either a proper handoff procedure or a pointout.




Synopsis: Enroute Controller described a probable airspace infraction when utilizing the long established AIT procedure.