elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201309
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: NCT.TRACON, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation X (C750)
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E NCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Aircraft component: Cowling
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After four hours of flight we were descending thru 15;000 FT MSL and being vectored on the arrival. We heard a sudden bang and felt a vibration. We slowed the aircraft to 200 KIAS and checked aircraft systems. The vibration settled down and all aircraft and engine systems were normal. We disconnected the autopilot and aircraft flight was normal. We continued a normal visual approach and landing. On taxi to the ramp Ground Control reported to us that it appeared the engine cowling on the Number 2 engine was missing.


Second narrative: We had flown from the east coast uneventfully and upon descent on the arrival and descending through 15;000 FT we heard a loud bang and felt a vibration. We chose to slow the plane to 200 KTS and the vibration was drastically less. We had no CAS messages or abnormal indications in the cockpit. We thought that possibly a gear door had fallen open. I chose to turn off the autopilot once the plane was stabilized below 200 KTS and we were at approximately 10;000 FT to make sure the autopilot wasn't masking a bigger problem. The plane flew normally so we continued on the arrival and had a normal landing. Upon taxi in; the Controller working Ground Control advised us that part of our right engine cowling was missing. Upon exiting the plane a large part of the center section of the right engine cowling was missing. An engine inspection had been completed on both engines the day prior. The cowlings were latched and locked externally and verified visually on the pre-flight inspection. Our initial thought is that the latching/locking mechanism located inside the cowling was not installed/locked properly after the engine inspection.


Synopsis: CE750 flight crew reports a loud bang and vibration descending through 15;000 FT. No CAS messages are present and the vibration is greatly reduced when speed is reduced. Flight continues to a normal landing where Ground Control reports that a large portion of the right engine cowl is missing.
Date: 202108
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Communication Breakdown; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During cruise the 'low level' caution light came on for the hydraulic system. The First Officer and I ran the QRH for the low hydraulic fluid level condition. I tried to contact the dispatcher and maintenance control to establish the next best course of action; however the connection was lost and I could not re-establish.After running the procedure I notified Center of the mechanical issue and requested priority. Because there were potential problems with braking and steering that would not be discovered till on the ground I erred on the side of safety and felt [requesting priority] was the best course of action.Center coordinated with the FBO on the ground at ZZZ with providing possible assistance with a tug.Upon landing I took care to maintain the centerline using rudder control and used BETA to slow down the aircraft needing minimal braking for the majority of the landing roll. Once I was safely slowed I attempted to use the steering and found it functional with no issues. I also found that braking was normal and was not diminished.There were no further issues and the flight terminated without needing any assistance.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported a Hydraulic system 'low level ' caution message during cruise flight and continued the flight to a safe landing.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Citation V/Ultra/Encore (C560)
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Enroute at FL310 approximately 35 minutes from [destination]; we heard a loud pop and the cabin pressurization rate of climb went to 4;000 fpm. A descent was requested from ATC; approved; and initiated.  EMERGENCY procedures were initiated and completed.  Aircraft diverted to [a nearby alternate] with the cabin altitude stabilized at approximately 13;000 feet until the descent was completed.




Synopsis: A CE-560 Captain reported diverting to a nearby alternate after experiencing loss of cabin pressure.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During landing; touchdown; aircraft drifted to the right of centerline and my student attempted to correct and bring himself back onto centerline but slammed on the brakes. The aircraft then proceeded to skid to the left and when I took controls I attempted to get the aircraft back onto centerline but at this point the aircraft kept skidding to the right and eventually off the runway and onto the grass area. No damage was done to aircraft and to any runway lights.




Synopsis: PA-28 instructor pilot reported a runway excursion after the student pilot lost control during landing rollout.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: I90.TRACON, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B IAH
ATC / advisory: TRACON I90
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During our climb out of IAH on the STYCK 6 departure our cockpit jumpseater said that we overflew a black quad copter drone. Our altitude was about five thousand feet and climbing; and we estimated that the drone altitude was about 3500-4000 feet. We reported this to ATC and continued on to our destination.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported sighting a quadcopter drone at approximately 4000 feet while flying the STYCK6 departure out of IAH.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: CLT.Airport, NC
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: When approaching takeoff position for Runway 36C and following a Heavy 767 we asked Tower for 2 minutes separation. We were told to hold short; then [a other air carrier] aircraft behind us was cleared to back taxi into position and hold; by the time he added power for takeoff it was almost 2 minutes. Then several more aircraft were cleared in front of us for takeoff; an obvious scolding by Tower for trying to be safe. Tower then asked another [air carrier] pilot to take the runway and they replied; 'He only asked for 2 minutes!' The Tower then responded that they appreciated everyone's concern for my delay but that they were coordinating with the other side of the airport. We were a 321 and quite heavy; with the tail wind it was only the safe call to ask for 2 minutes; being punished for this is uncalled for. I never made a radio call nor questioned Tower on the radio.




Synopsis: A321 pilot reported he was moved far down the takeoff queue in apparent retribution after he asked for a two minute delay in takeoff for wake turbulence considerations.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Climb
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We Departed ZZZZ on [the] SID. Departure Control began vectoring us soon after takeoff with a turn to 270. We were eventually cleared to climb to FL120. Climbing through about FL100 we were cleared to climb to FL230 and turn to 210. My First Officer (FO) repeated clearance to Departure Control; 'Heading 210; climb 230'. No further reply from Departure followed that transmission. Approaching FL130 the controller asked us to verify our altitude. FO replied with our current altitude passing (about FL130) Climbing 230. The Controller immediately told us to stop our climb and cleared us to level off at FL140. We complied with the new clearance and proceeded with the Departure. No reason was given for the revised clearance. I had no doubt that we had been cleared to climb to FL230 and figured that a traffic issue had required the controller to modify our altitude clearance. The next morning as I thought about it I realized that although the controller didn't dispute our read back to the climb to FL230 I may have misheard the altitude portion of the clearance. I may very well have heard our call sign and with the language issues in [foreign airports] it sounded like Climb [the call sign of our aircraft] to me. If I did misunderstand the clearance it was due to a combination of factors. 1. The inherent language difficulties when flying in [foreign airspace]2. Controllers switching back and forth between [a foreign language] and English as he communicated with [local] and [international] flights.3. High inbound and outbound traffic load resulting constant radio chatter in both [a foreign language] and English.4. Confusing our call sign; Air Carrier X as a clearance to climb to [a similar end number]. The only variable that can really be controlled is the call sign. If we had been Air Carrier Y I don't think it likely that I would have misconstrued that as an altitude clearance but as Air Carrier X it may have been misunderstood as an altitude.


Second narrative: [Report Narrative contained no additional information]


Synopsis: B777 Crew reported ATC called for an intermediate level off during climb out from a foreign airport which may have been attributed to misunderstanding the clearance.
Date: 201507
Location: JFK.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Cloudy
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B JFK
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Second aircraft: Cirrus Aircraft Undifferentiated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After takeoff Runway 13R at JFK; heading 070; leveling at 8000 feet in IMC conditions; we received a traffic alert from NY TRACON of a Cirrus 12 o/clock westbound at 8500 feet. We were IMC in about a 500 foot thick cloud layer. Immediately afterwards TCAS issued a 'descend; descend' and a rapid descent to approx. 7200 feet was done as the other aircraft passed right over us (targets on TCAS merged) with TCAS indicating the other target approx. 1000 feet above us. After TCAS conflict cleared we continued our climb uneventfully. Since we were IMC we never visually saw the other aircraft.ATC should have vectored us 10 degrees left or right; instead of head-on; or; had us level off at 7000 FT instead of 8000 FT; a mere 500 FT below oncoming VFR traffic.




Synopsis: B737-800 First Officer reported receiving a RA shortly after takeoff from JFK from a small aircraft about 500 FT above them.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Light Transport
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor; Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was conducting an introductory flight. I was monitoring the CTAF when I heard an aircraft say they were departing. I did not reply with my position because I did not think I would be a factor to the airport traffic and to help with frequency congestion. I watched the aircraft lift off the runway and start its climb. After watching it climb I figured it was going to depart north because [that] runway has a standard left pattern. I kept watching [the] aircraft and it looked like it was turning south instead. Being that the aircraft was a high performance turbine aircraft I figured that the safest way to go about collision avoidance was to continue toward the airport and get inside what I thought its turn radius was. Soon after; while I was trying to get the ATIS; I lost sight of the aircraft and decided to continue straight for the airport while I tried to reestablish visual contact. I was trying to maneuver the aircraft in a right bank so that I could establish visual contact with other traffic in the area when my student pointed out that a jet just flew right under us. It looked like it was about 500 feet below us and was on a west-northwest heading. I continued and contacted Approach. After contacting Approach I was given the phone number to TRACON and was told to call them when I land. During the phone call with TRACON I was told the jet had to take evasive action due to TCAS (Traffic Collision Avoidance System) RA (Resolution Advisory) and was asked to contact Approach when flying around the Class C satellite airports in the future. I believe the situation could have been avoided if I would have announced my position when the jet announced its takeoff on the CTAF or if I would have contacted Approach further out from the airport.




Synopsis: C172 instructor pilot reported an NMAC with a departing corporate jet; citing poor CTAF communications as a contributing factor.
Date: 201605
Location: ZLA.ARTCC, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZLA
ATC / advisory: Center ZLA
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Confusion; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Procedure
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: During climb; ATC indicated that we were left of course and recommended a heading to intercept J18 into GBN. We the pilots both showed on course yet dialed in raw data to use since we could not determine what was wrong. We double checked the route and both pilots agreed there was no error. At the next waypoint passage; the aircraft again started to deviate off course and eventually we revived numerous ECAMS and Nav Accuracy Downgrade message and continued to use raw data. As we worked out our problem; numerous other airlines also reported the same problem of GPS failed. A conversation was had with dispatch whom upon further review; discovered that the Military would be deactivating GPS. We reported to Maintenance then cancelled the GPS failures as we had reasonably established the cause of the Nav errors.




Synopsis: Following a track deviation detected by ATC; an air carrier crew began NAVAID navigation along J18 and determined the military had deactivated the GPS. ECAM and NAV accuracy alerts were received.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: NCT.TRACON, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While transitioning from the KENNO2 Arrival to the ILS Z RWY (Runway) 16R (After KLOCK and before BELBE); FMA kicked off VNAV and defaulted to CWS. As a result; the aircraft descended below 9;000 ft. MEA. PF (Pilot Flying) flying detected cause at approximately 7;800 ft.; leveled the aircraft and climbed to 8;000 ft. Shortly thereafter ATC queried our altitude. We didn't receive any other indications (Terrain warning; etc.)PF didn't remove discontinuity between KLOCK and BELBE. Aircraft continued descent towards 7;500 ft.; the altitude set in the FMA. PF/PNF (Pilot Not Flying) didn't sufficiently/simultaneously review the waypoints in the FMC.Authorized/conducted a visual approach without incident.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported not removing a discontinuity which resulted in the aircraft descending below the MEA during arrival to RNO airport.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Sail Plane
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Local glider [operations]; light/no wind. Standard operations in such conditions are to take off and land in opposite directions. I made 3 MI/1;500 feet radio call for standard left pattern landing North. Visually observed [another] glider at South end of airfield 1;800 feet. I made pattern entry call at IP; left pattern; landing North. I performed checklist and lost sight of [him] while visually verifying check items. I verified runway was clear of gliders/tow plane and flew a standard downwind pattern for a long landing that would place me a few hundred feet from the take off point. At approximately mid field; 30 feet off the ground; I had spoilers closed and was using ground effect to extend glide to touch down point. I observed the [other glider] with spoilers open on opposite final approximately 500 feet distant and 150 feet above. I opened spoilers to full position and dropped to the runway steering to the left edge. [The other glider] closed spoilers and passed overhead. Both pilots reacted correctly after recognizing the situation. Both aircraft had safe landings with no damage. [The other glider] pilot had observed multiple take off and landings during the operating day and has [operated at field] for years with experience using opposite takeoff/landing patterns. It is unknown why he flew the South landing pattern.




Synopsis: Glider pilot reported an NMAC with another glider while landing at a private field.