elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B787 Dreamliner Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: Tower SFO
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airport; Airspace Structure; Company Policy
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On final we received a TCAS traffic alert at 1;500 feet. The alert showed traffic right behind us at 1;500 feet. The alert cleared and we continued. Tower frequency was very busy; but tower did not indicate any traffic issues in our proximity. At 800 feet we received a TCAS Climb RA. The traffic showed within the aircraft symbol on the 5 mile scale. I rotated to the match the RA and initiated a missed approach. The RA resolved and we completed the missed approach and subsequent approach and landing uneventfully. There was apparently no conflicting traffic and the RA was a false indication.




Synopsis: B787 Captain reported receiving a false TCAS/RA and executed a go-around.
Date: 201512
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SR20
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was with a student taxiing to the active runway from the ramp. Another instructor was out on the airfield with his student; preparing to send him on his first solo. The AWOS indicated winds favoring Runway XX; so we made a radio call saying that we were taxiing to Runway XX. At that point; I communicated by radio with the other instructor about his student's upcoming first solo; a non-critical call that could have waited until the airplane was stationary (mistake number one). As we approached the hold short line for Runway YY; we slowed (but did not stop - mistake number two) and made a cursory scan for other aircraft left and right. We expected that the other instructor would be using Runway XX and so we failed to catch that he was actually beginning his takeoff roll on Runway YY (mistake number four). Whether his student actually called out Runway YY or XX is irrelevant; my student and I heard Runway XX and that's where our eyes were. We crossed the hold short line and were approaching the runway edge markings when we got an unreadable radio call; but which definitely contained the numbers Runway YY. We immediately stopped and looked to our right. Sure enough; the other aircraft was on the takeoff roll about to pass in front of us. They rotated well before our intersection and were clear above us before passing our position next to the runway. I consider this occurrence to be entirely my fault. I should have come to a complete stop at the hold short line and scanned completely rather than a brief glance; no matter where I thought the other traffic on the airfield was. I should have avoided making non-critical radio calls in a sterile cockpit situation. I should have realized that students can and do make mistakes; and if the student really did call out Runway XX mistakenly; I should have been aware that he could have made the call in error.I am usually the one to insist on proper adherence to SOPs and best practices. I am disappointed in myself and my performance today. Skill and professionalism; not luck; are what keep us safe. Today I was only lucky.




Synopsis: A general aviation instructor pilot reported a critical ground conflict with another training aircraft on takeoff roll at a non-towered airport. Distraction and communication breakdown were cited as contributing factors.
Date: 202106
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: M-20 J (201) / Allegro
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: UNICOM ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Possible porpoise on landing. Go-around initiated. P-factor pulled aircraft off runway. Aircraft came to stop on taxiway.




Synopsis: M-20 J flight instructor reported a runway excursion on landing.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MDW.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 2
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower MDW
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: We were lined up and waiting for takeoff on Runway 04R at MDW during single runway operations. Tower told us to taxi clear of the runway with no delay by turning right on Taxiway Victor (presumably for departure/arrival spacing). We were trying to expedite off the (wet) runway to prevent a go-around of the aircraft on final. I was not familiar with Taxiway Victor; I have never used it. Jeppesen page 10-9 airport diagram was selected on my EFB but the screen was in standby for takeoff; I did not feel it was safe to wake up the display while expeditiously taxiing on a wet runway. I also did not feel it was safe to turn onto an unmarked taxiway; and I was looking for visual confirmation of which taxiway it was before turning. I inadvertently taxied past Taxiway Victor looking for the Taxiway Victor sign. Taxiway Victor is not labeled from that direction; the taxiway signs are labeled on their north side but blank on the south side. Tower then told us to clear at Taxiway Y2. We cleared off the runway. Airport needs to comply with FARs on taxiway signage. Missed assigned taxiway when clearing runway due to lack of taxiway signage.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported a taxiway incursion at MDW airport. Taxiway V signage was cited as a contributing factor.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZJX
ATC / advisory: TRACON F11
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon departing to the southeast; I began to smell something in the cockpit. It was a very faint smell; and my student began to smell it as well. I looked down at our electrical panel and saw smoke beginning to come out. I immediately turned off all of the light switches and began a turn back towards [our departure airport] while advising ATC of the turn around. Upon turning off the electrical switches; the smoke stopped almost immediately; so I decided to leave the rest of our electrical equipment on and come back for a landing. The fire crew noted that there was no hot spot within the aircraft and that we turned off the switches in time to avoid any electrical fire.




Synopsis: C172 Instructor reported smoke in the cockpit that stopped after he turned off the light switches.
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZDC.ARTCC, VA
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Night
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 ZDC
ATC / advisory: Center ZDC
Aircraft component: MCP
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was the pilot flying (PF) and we were given a descent to FL290 out of FL390. At FL300 the pilot monitoring (PM) asked if he wanted me to re-cruise us at FL290. I said yes. He re-cruised us to FL290 as we continued the descent. Shortly thereafter; Washington Center gave us a crossing restriction to be at FL240 35 miles south of RICCS. I reached up to set 240 in the MCP window; but since we had not reached FL290; I changed my mind and reprogrammed the FMC.While trying to reprogram the FMC; I could not get it to accept FL240 at 35S of RICCS. It kept giving me a constraint error. I asked the PM why that was going on and we both focused on the FMC. Once the plane leveled at FL290; the FMC would accept the FL240 entry. I verbalized and confirmed that we were in LNAV and VNAV and that 35 south of RICCS was loaded in the FMS at FL240. However; I never went back and verified that I had selected FL240 in the MCP window. There were only a couple of miles before the descent was to begin. I noticed we had received a message on the FMC to reset the altitude and realized my mistake. By this time; we were high; and I initiated a vertical speed (VS) descent with speedbrakes at a faster airspeed. Just as we were beginning the descent; Washington Center called and asked if we were given a crossing restriction. We leveled at FL240 at approximately 32 miles south of RICCS.I should have immediately set the altitude in the MCP window; which would have protected us. My reaching up to set the window probably threw off the PM and then my confusion on why the FMC would not except my inputs lead me down a rabbit hole that distracted me. I failed to properly follow the input and verify procedures and had I; I would have caught my mistake.


Second narrative: ...Conversation distracted us from realizing the failure to descend.


Synopsis: An air carrier crew was cleared to cross a point at FL240 and after programming the FMC became distracted in conversation. Consequently; they failed to set the MCP altitude and crossed the fix high.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: MD-83
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Exterior Pax/Crew Door
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Climbing thru 9;000 FT; aft galley door caution light Illuminated. Cabin depressurized. Declared an emergency. [Diverted to a suitable airport and made] an overweight landing.


Second narrative: On departure; we were climbing through approximately 9;000 when we received a cabin altitude light and audible warning. I leveled off as the Captain coordinated with ATC. On analysis; the aft galley door light annunciator light was illuminated and the cabin altitude was approximately 9;500 FT. The Captain declared an emergency ATC and coordinated a divert. The divert was uneventful with an overweight landing at 139;000 LBS.


Synopsis: MD80 flight crew experiences a door warning climbing through 9;000 FT followed quickly by a cabin altitude warning. Crew diverts to a suitable alternate for an overweight landing.
Date: 202007
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Two passengers were non compliant with the face mask policy.  When approached by one of my FA's; they verbally abused the FA and shouted obscenities.  FA briefed me on the incident.  I had a Supervisor get involved; and although the family promised they would be compliant with the face mask policy; the flight attendants were adamant that the verbal abuse would continue.  I elected not to take [the] incident airborne; so I had them removed from the aircraft.  The FA's informed me that several passengers in that area were thankful the issue was being addressed and that passengers were removed.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported two passengers became verbally abusive to the flight attendants when they were asked to follow face mask policy.
Date: 202106
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
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 ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Air Traffic Control requested that Aircraft X fly a heading of 110; and maintain 3;000 ft. until established on the localizer for Runway XXL ILS approach. Once established on the heading of 110; and stabilized; Air Traffic Control advised the crew of opposite direction traffic. Traffic was within 500 ft. of Aircraft X; and when the traffic ascended to less than 400 ft.; the Traffic Advisory warning initiated; 'Traffic. Traffic. Climb.' The autopilot was immediately disengaged; and the advisory was followed to climb; then updated to bank left. Final deviation altitude was 3;200 ft. MSL; and was quickly corrected to the assigned 3;000 ft. when traffic was no factor. Air Traffic Control was advised of the deviation.


Second narrative: We were on a heading to intercept approach path for Runway XXL into ZZZ. Approach gave us heading 110 degrees to intercept and maintain 3;000 ft. until established on the ILS XXL approach. As we turned to 110 degrees and established Approach also mentioned traffic opposite direction while were looking outside we told Approach LOOKING FOR TRAFFIC. Once we were established on heading received Traffic Advisory warning advise to turn and climb at approximately 400 ft. closing to 200 ft. I disengaged autopilot as I turned and climbed following traffic advisory warning. My First Officer advised ATC about traffic advisory and deviation. We then returned to 3;000 ft. and established on approach.


Synopsis: EMB 175 Flight Crew reported taking evasive action when receiving a TCAS RA.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Bird / Animal
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: During takeoff at V1 to Vr; three medium sized birds we're noticed flying above the runway at about the level of the aircraft. One of the birds crossed in front of the aircraft from right to left then disappeared down the left side of the fuselage. No indications of a bird strike were noticed by the flight crew and all engine indications were normal. After giving the flight attendants the 10;000 foot chime; the flight attendants called the flight deck saying one of the onboard mechanics wanted to talk to the flight crew. The mechanic was allowed to enter the flight deck. Upon arrival in the flight deck the mechanic advised he heard a noticeable pitch change in the Number one engine at rotation. All engine indications were normal; and the flight proceeded to destination.Upon post flight at the destination the left engine was examined and evidence of a bird strike was found. Fan blade number 17 was damaged beyond repair. Fan blades 16 and 18 were damaged; but within serviceable limits. No other evidence of bird strikes were noted on the fuselage.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported they encountered birds just after takeoff. One bird is believed to have struck the engine resulting in some blade damage.
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DWH.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground DWH; Tower DWH
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airport; Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: After landing on Runway 17R. Tower instructed to clear Taxiway Echo and contact Ground. There was another aircraft landing behind me. After clearing there was an aircraft holding on Taxiway Foxtrot and as I cleared Ground instructed me to hold short of Foxtrot which was immediate upon exiting runway. Due to pace of aircraft I inadvertently crossed Foxtrot not seeing hold short marks; (which are poorly marked). And believed Ground wanted me to taxi in front of the aircraft holding short of Echo in order to clear the runway. As I progressed on Echo I stopped what I believed was the hold short markers for the next Runway 17L (also poorly marked). Ground then requested without delay I cross 17L. All of this occurred in less than 30 seconds.




Synopsis: DWH Tower instructed pilot to exit Runway 17R at Taxiway E. Ground instructed pilot to hold short of Foxtrot but poor taxiway markings caused pilot to miss 'F' on 'E' and hold short of Runway 17L.