elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201305
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: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface; Workload
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Dispatch
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: The computer autocalculated routes for a flight to SFO. I created release 1 for the flight one and a half hours later with the understanding that the computer autocalculates 4 hours prior to scheduled departure time. The flight was scheduled to depart an hour and a half later. The first release included an optimized route around a meso-scale weather system in the Midwest Region and had SJC as an alternate. The Captain called to increase fuel; so release 2 was generated for the fuel request. Afterwards; I noticed the alternate was removed; so a third release was submitted with fuel and SJC added to once again. The Captain then called back to report the route on the last two releases did not match the first or flight plan filed with ATC. I generated release 4 to match the original route on the ATC strip; fuel; and alternate I believe the computer autocalculated the release twice; thus changing my optimized route and removing my alternate. Had the Captain not caught the discrepancy; the route would have been dangerous and the release would have been illegal.




Synopsis: The Dispatcher's first three releases were in error due to automatic modification made by the computerized dispatch system.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: J3 Cub
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Weather; Procedure
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: While practicing off airport; back country landings I experienced an unusual gust of quartering tailwind immediately following liftoff which destroyed lift and resulted in an impact with the ground.No injuries but substantial damage to the airplane. All required reports were timely made. This was in a large meadow on top of a butte with a slope up to the south. Landing was made to the south into the wind; uphill and uneventful except for a downdraft experienced on short final. This should have been recognized as a factor to be considered.Normal takeoff from this location is to the north down the gradient. Unfortunately on the incident day; the wind had increased velocity after our landing; a stop was made here. In retrospect; it would have been safer to takeoff into the wind or maintain more time on the ground to build airspeed with the downhill takeoff.Also; it is now clear that takeoffs with little or no bailout opportunities in case of problems should be avoided.




Synopsis: PA-11 pilot reported aircraft ground strike on takeoff which damaged the aircraft.
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Challenger 300
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Aircraft component: Autopilot
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On descent into SFO; we were cleared for the Quiet Bridge Visual approach at 10;000 and told to cross ARCHI at 8;000. We started our descent from 10;000 to 8;000 with 8;000 in the altitude window. As the aircraft failed to capture the selected altitude flying pilot disconnected the autopilot and pitched up to stop the descent and maintain 8;000. The aircraft only went down to 7;800 feet during his prompt correction. After crossing ARCHI intersection; we continued our descent and visual approach. NORCAL did not say anything to us about the altitude and the aircraft was below 8;000 for less than 10 seconds.The prompt corrective action of the flying pilot prevented an altitude deviation. Continuing to utilize good situational awareness and scanning of instruments will help keep the number and severity of such incidents very small.


Second narrative: Sometimes the Challenger 300 autopilot with altitude capture is sloppy. We were trusting its ability and when it captured altitude late; we were attentive enough to prevent further altitude loss.


Synopsis: CL300 flight crew reports an altitude deviation over ARCHI during the Quiet Bridge Visual approach into SFO. The MCP was properly programed but the autopilot captured late and was quickly corrected by the pilot flying.
Date: 201812
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On the descent into ZZZ aircraft started to Dutch roll slightly. Autopilot was disconnected and rudder pressure was applied to each side; one at a time. The right rudder required approximately 2 times the pressure than the left to move the rudder. Captain elected to take over the pilot flying duties. An uneventful landing was performed at ZZZ. Maintenance write up was accomplished on the ground.


Second narrative: The aircraft was experiencing some rolling and yawing with auto pilot on the First officer (FO) side. FO disconnected autopilot and felt a stiffness in the the rudder. The Captain took controls. Landed ZZZ uneventful.


Synopsis: B767 flight crew reported aircraft having problems with rolling and yawing during descent.
Date: 201403
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: MIA.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Cheetah; Tiger; Traveler AA5 Series
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class B MIA
ATC / advisory: TRACON MIA
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Inflight Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On an assigned heading of 220 in a climb to an assigned altitude of 6;500 FT (flight following) while transitioning through Miami Class-B airspace I noticed a small flying object coming directly at me. We made a small deviation to the right and the object passed at the same altitude in opposing direction; heading northbound towards Miami. The object has no lights and was not under control by Miami Arrivals and appeared to be a small unmanned vehicle. It looked like miniature ultralight with a camera mounted to it. It would have certainly caused significant damage to the engine/airplane.




Synopsis: AA5B pilot reports sighting a possible UAV in MIA Class B airspace at 6;500 FT. A right deviation is made to avoid the craft which MIA ATC is unaware of.
Date: 201812
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B DEN
ATC / advisory: Tower DEN
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: DEN has installed a colored changing light display on Pena Boulevard that is very distracting to aircraft on final; particularly when landing north or perhaps on Runway 7. Multiple [pilots] complained and the Approach Controller also echoed concerns. It is very distracting in low ceiling conditions where the changing color is very reflected by the low clouds.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported being distracted by a lighted sign on a street adjacent to DEN airport.
Date: 202006
Location: VDF.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: CTAF VDF
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While doing touch and go's in the pattern Aircraft Y was on downwind as I came into the crosswind. I did not have a visual on Aircraft Y as I turned downwind. I was under the impression I gave Aircraft Y enough time for him to at least be mid-field. I overtook Aircraft Y roughly 200 feet above while turning downwind. I did not take into consideration how tight I was flying the pattern and the speed difference between the two aircraft. No damage. Just a close call. I will be more aware of my surroundings when doing pattern work in the future and allow for more spacing and time in between turns.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported an NMAC in the pattern at VDF airport.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ORD.Tower, IL
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B787-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ORD
ATC / advisory: Tower ORD
Aircraft component: MCP
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Automation Overrode Flight Crew; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During approach to ORD ILS 28C we received a 'minimums' oral alert while in IMC. We executed a missed approach and discovered one altimeter was selected in BARO while the other was in RADIO. Both pilots are very new on this aircraft and need to fly more than once a month. Both pilots are aware of the crosscheck of the correct altitude however missed the BARO/RADIO indication. We have learned this check is equally important as the correct altitude.




Synopsis: B787 Captain reported an automated minimums call out at 800 feet RA and went around. It was discovered that one pilot had mis-set the BARO radio knob to radio for the 801 foot DA. The reporter cited lack of experience on the B787 as a factor.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm; 0
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 425/441 Conquest I/Conquest II
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Reciprocating Engine Assembly
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While cruising at FL280 in full IMC; about 20-miles to the west of a Doppler painted line of extreme precipitation; the left engine of a CE-425 failed. Yaw was felt; gauges were cross checked; autofeather engaged; and left rudder application confirmed 'dead-foot; inoperative-engine'. While stabilizing the aircraft with rudder trim the autopilot disengaged increasing workload. Approximately 1-min after the left engine failed; the right engine failed; now requiring rudder readjustment while executing the emergency checklist for engine failure while airborne above Vmca while trying to maintain Vglide and straight and level. While descending an air restart of the left engine was executed successfully and left generator re-initiated; after having descended to 15;000 [feet] MSL. The right engine also successfully restarted using the starter and it was as if the last three minutes never happened - all gauge readings returned to normal. No fuel starvation; no ignitor failure issues; nada. The airplane was then flown away from the storm under normal operating conditions and landed 150 miles from where the restarts occurred. Upon reflection; the inertial separators were not opened; however; there was also no ice buildup on the wings (note; the prop heat; stall vane and pitot heats were on). Pre-mixed (JetA+) is always used. The strange part is that both engines failed within about a minute of each other - is it possible that the conditions were just right in the presence of the storm to drop the temperature or otherwise cause a fuel gelling instance that rectified itself once at an altitude where the temperature was above freezing? The fuel control heaters; fuel filters; vents and other sources of potential fuel starvation will be verified if further followup is of interest.




Synopsis: CE-425 pilot reported both engines flaming out in IMC and restarting both engines; descending and landing uneventfully.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: 7S3.Airport, OR
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke; 4.5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A109 All Series
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E P80
ATC / advisory: TRACON P80
Second aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Weather; Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We were in cruise flight at 2;000 FT AGL; ceiling at 3;000 FT at approximately 140 KTS. Aircraft appeared to be a Piper Cherokee on an opposing course directly ahead on a slightly offset course descending from the cloud cover. The aircraft was completely white in color. I spotted aircraft above at approximately 500 FT ahead and by the time I took evasive action we were in the proximity listed above. Evasive action was taken by me. At the last second the Cherokee appeared to turn right and away from us and pulled up as we turned right and descended. I was not yet talking with ATC due to my position and altitude to the other uncontrolled fields nearby. I was monitoring both of those frequencies and they were not on either of the frequencies. We continued on course. If I had TCAS in this aircraft this encounter probably would have not happened.




Synopsis: Helicopter pilot reports a NMAC with a PA28 at 2;000 FT near PDX.
Date: 202005
Location: SNH.Airport, TN
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: CTAF SNH
Second aircraft: Helicopter
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Immediately after landing on Runway 01 at SNH; and clearing the runway onto the taxiway; a helicopter flew directly overhead my aircraft at an altitude of 40 to 50 feet. I was both shocked and surprised by the close call of the helicopter appearing out of nowhere.I had flown a straight in visual approach to Runway 01. I made all of the required voice calls as prescribed for operations at a non-towered airport.I did not hear any other airplanes reporting to be in the vicinity of SNH. I was transmitting and receiving on 122.8; CTAF for the airport and had an operable radio.I can only surmise that the helicopter had me in sight throughout my approach; and based on his closeness to me after my landing; he may have followed me down throughout my approach and landing.The helicopter did not land after his low approach; and apparently left the area. Therefore; I was not able to address the situation with the pilot and resolve the close call. It remains a mystery to me as to what intentions the pilot of the helicopter had in mind to closely fly near a light sport airplane during its approach and landing.




Synopsis: Pilot reported a NMAC with a helicopter at SNH airport.
Date: 201807
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: STK.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G STK
ATC / advisory: CTAF STK
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Object; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Airport
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft attempted to land in opposing directions on the same runway. CTAF communication was established by both parties but imperfect reception led to a miscommunication. Once a conflict had been recognized during the landing roll-out; some evasive action took place that led to the other aircraft briefly leaving the runway and causing minor damage from striking an edge light. There were no injuries except to our pride. The event was discussed at length between us and led to an increased appreciation of the importance of clear and concise communication in the traffic pattern.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported a critical ground conflict when aircraft landed in the opposite direction at a non-towered airport.
Date: 202009
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 0.5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Fatigue; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: High over ZZZZZ [fix]. It was the last leg of a three-day. No HGS (Head-up Guidance System) and had to fly like I did as an FO without HUD (Heads-up Display). Just fell a little behind; probably from being tired; not eating much since airport selections are minimal; and not having flown an approach without a HUD in over a year.[Suggestion] Take meals with me because of the COVID impact on airport food. Fly without the HUD periodically. I did great on that approach and was stabilized at 1;000 feet in the end.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported an altitude deviation during approach.