elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201207
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On climb out I noticed the right engine oil temperature was out of limits at 165 and rising. We completed the QRH; which called for an engine shutdown. The highest the temperature reached was 178 degrees. An uneventful [single engine] landing was made after declaring an emergency.




Synopsis: A regional jet Captain reported high right engine oil temperature on climbout. QRH was run; engine shut down; an emergency declared; and the flight returned for a safe landing at departure airport.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: X35.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G X35
ATC / advisory: CTAF X35
Second aircraft: Champion Citabria Undifferentiated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; 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: After a pleasant day of flying with my wife for breakfast we headed to X35 to fuel up before returning to the hanger at my home airport. Approximately 5 NM southwest of X35; I called our position and heard one other aircraft in the area who called his position as 6-7 northwest inbound as well. I entered a left downwind for Runway 28 and the second aircraft entered the pattern #2 behind me about 1 minute later. There was no other radio traffic noted. The turn to base and final were both called and while on short final a Citabria was noted taxiing toward the hold short line at Runway 28. I expected him to perform his runup at that location; but the aircraft never slowed and taxied directly onto the runway and began his takeoff roll. While affecting an emergency go around; I called and tried to notify him he had pulled directly in front of traffic on short final; but there was no response. I paralleled Runway 28 to the right as I cleaned up the plane and started to ascend upwind. During that time the Citabria took off and began a climb immediately to my left and at no time did the pilot of that aircraft appear to notice the situation had taken place. I allowed the other plane to climb into the pattern and I settled in #2 outside of his downwind so I could clearly keep him in sight. I again attempted to query him regarding his intentions and again there was no answer. The pilot of the C182 which entered the pattern initially behind me stated he had witnessed the entire event and his opinion was the Citabria pilot had never looked prior to taxiing out and did not appear to have a functional radio. The Citabria left the pattern to the southeast and I continued with a successful landing at that time. The time separation between our two aircraft closed to within approximately 6-10 seconds at the time of the incident. Too close!




Synopsis: A pilot was on short final to CTAF X35 Runway 28 reported a near miss with an aircraft not making the FAA recommended CTAF position reports as it departed.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: MBB-BK 117 All Series
Operating under: Part 91
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Chip Detector Indicator
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While in cruise flight; at approximately 130 KIAS; master caution light illuminated momentarily. Pilot identified 'XMSN CHIP' light as being associated. Pilot initially considered 'fuzz burn;' but light continued to flicker causing pilot to abort flight and return.... No emergency was declared. No special requests were made. Landing was uneventful.Pilot followed company; FAA; and aircraft specific procedures. This occurrence was the result of an unforeseen maintenance malfunction.




Synopsis: BK117 pilot experienced a Transmission Chip Detector warning in cruise flight and returned to base. Warning was determined to be an indicator malfunction.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Cockpit Window
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
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While in cruise flight at FL390; we heard a loud pop/bang and immediately saw that the right forward windscreen had completely shattered.  The cracking appeared to emanate from the lower left corner of the windscreen and we could also see what appeared to be some splattering of something in that same area.  It sure seemed like a bird strike; but at FL390?  We felt the inside of the window and checked the pressurization and determined that it appeared that it was only the outer pane that was shattered.  Within about 30 seconds of the initial sound; an ECAM message came up stating  that the window heat in that window was INOP.  Out of an abundance of caution; and to avoid some potential icing conditions that we could see between our position and the airport; we elected to declare an emergency and start an early descent.  This also allowed us to both reduce the pressure differential in the cabin as well as slow the aircraft speed.  We then proceeded to destination without further incident.  Upon arrival at the gate; and after making a couple of requested calls to the Tower and the company; I was able to look at the damaged area from the outside.  There appeared to be no other damage to the nose of the aircraft or any other sign of a bird strike; so I now doubt that was the cause.  What the splattered material is at the base of the windscreen; and what caused it to shatter; I do not know.




Synopsis: A320 Captain experiences a shattered right forward windshield at FL390.  Crew begins an early descent to reduce cabin differential pressure and declares an emergency.  A normal landing at destination ensues.
Date: 202001
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: RIC.Airport, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower RIC
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Airport
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: Aircraft X experienced two low speed rejected takeoffs due to predictive windshear alerts. RIC ATC (Air Traffic Control) reported that they regularly experience false windshear alerts during winter months at sunrise. Additionally; another air carrier flight experiences the same phenomenon right before Aircraft X took the runway for their first scheduled takeoff. After deferring the Predictive Windshear Detection and Avoidance System; Aircraft X successfully departed. This faulty windshear phenomenon occurred the previous day as well causing one flight to reject takeoff three separate times.Recommend publishing additional airport information about the faulty windshear detection for the aircrew so the safest decisions can be made while reducing lengthy delays.

Callback: The reporter stated that in discussion with the Air Traffic Control personnel working at the airport they mentioned that these false windshear alerts occur regularly mostly during the winter months and usually during the early morning hours.



Synopsis: Dispatcher reported that random windshear alerts occur at RIC airport when no significant weather exists.
Date: 201812
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation X (C750)
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Gear Extend/Retract Mechanism
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After a normal takeoff; [the First Officer] retracted the landing gear after confirmation of positive rate on gear command. He pointed out that the gear retracted abnormally; and the Left Main gear was indicating down and the red unlock light was illuminated. We agreed that ATC Departure would be notified of the problem and we would not be continuing the flight. [The First Officer] referenced the emergency checklist and we followed those steps.  ATC was advised that we needed to burn off fuel to reach landing weight and we were issued several holding patterns in the 1+ hour flight. We made a fly-by of the ZZZ tower; with 3 green lights indicated.  ZZZ tower advised gear appeared down and we entered right traffic for XXR. Touchdown and rollout were normal with no other issues noted.




Synopsis: Citation X Captain reported an abnormal landing gear retraction led to a diversion and normal landing.
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Aircraft: B737-900
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Second aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: ATC cleared us to descend via the BDEGA1 arrival to SFO. NCT approach never issued us a runway to expect. (ATIS advised 28R/28L landings in use) We queried NCT as to runway assignment crossing CORKK. We immediately programmed runway 28L into FMC and proceeded to BRIXX. Shortly after passing CORKK we encountered significant wake turbulence resulting in instant 50 degree right bank. I disconnected automation and flew the airplane back to straight and level while FO requested heading of 170 to avoid additional wake. ATC advised a left turn to 110 degrees to avoid departure traffic.Wake turbulence.


Second narrative: Shortly after passing CORKK intersection we experienced wake turbulence from the preceding B777. The wake turbulence threw the aircraft into a 45-50 degree right bank. The captain got control of the aircraft and immediately deviated right of course to avoid further wake turbulence. We communicated the wake turbulence and current deviation right of course to a heading of 170 to NCT. NCT then vectored us off the arrival path and for an approach into SFO without further incident. Not enough separation from a heavy aircraft. Wake turbulence seems to be more pronounced with non-winglets aircraft.


Synopsis: B737-900 flight crew reported encountering wake turbulence on arrival from preceding B777 into SFO; which resulted in a 50 degree right bank.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ERI.TRACON, PA
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class D ERI
ATC / advisory: TRACON ERI
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Time Pressure
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working West radar and had taken a hand-off from Cleveland Approach for Aircraft X. Around the same time I had taken a hand off on another aircraft inbound to Erie that was a student pilot. I was distracted by working the student pilot; trying to figure out if he was a full stop or a stop and go; so I could pass this information on to the tower. After the student pilot departed he asked to go to one of our satellite airports and then back to [an airport] which is in CLE approaches airspace. I then issued a new code for the student pilot and looked at Aircraft X route of flight. Believing I had enough time to amend the student pilot's route of flight so that is would handoff to CLE approach. I then walked over to the Arrival Data position and entered in an amendment to the student pilot's flight plan. When I walked back over to the scope I noticed Aircraft X route of flight was getting closer and closer to Dresdens (ZOB) airspace without a point out. I immediately called Dresden sector and pointed out Aircraft X. I was simply distracted by the student pilot needing help.




Synopsis: ERI TRACON Controller reported of a situation where he thought he had time to do a few tasks; but ended having to point out an aircraft at the last minute.
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Amateur/Home Built/Experimental
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Cessna Single Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airport; Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: While on a straight in approach to rwy 29 at ZZZ; I had a near miss with a single-engine Cessna. There was no reporting traffic; and I had been monitoring the airport frequency for 30 min prior to arrival. I called at 15 miles; 10 miles; and 5 miles that I was 'straight in for rwy 29; traffic permitting.' When at 4 miles out and descending through 1500 feet altitude; a single engine Cessna crossed directly in front of me from left to right at approximately 500 feet below and 1000 feet distance. He did not answer on the frequency and continued to fly north; apparently not having seen me. I had on all lights; which consisted of landing; strobe and nav lights. I did not have to take evasive action.

Callback: Reporter was the same for both reports and indicated that the reported encounters took place on the same approach to his home field; first 4 mile final and second on short final. He added that the airfield is a busy non-towered airport with a mix of many aircraft types. He uncovered later that due to the encounter with the mower; ground vehicles on this field are now provided with a hand held radio.

Second narrative: While on short final to RWY 29 at ZZZ; I had to execute a go-around to avoid a mower that started to cross the runway. I was on a straight-in approach as there was no reporting traffic and I had monitored the frequency for 30 min prior to landing. I called at 15 miles; 10 miles; 5 miles; 3 miles; and short final. A mowing vehicle; which consisted of a tractor with a high cab pulling the mowers was working the grass to the north (right side) of the runway. When I was no short final; approximately 200 feet from touchdown and at approximately 50 feet altitude; the mower began to cross the runway at the runway's edge. I executed a go-around; missing the top of the mower by approximately 20 feet.


Synopsis: A pilot reported two encounters while on approach to a non-towered airport. First an airborne conflict on 4 mile final followed by a severe ground conflict on short final that required evasive action.
Date: 201309
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Alon; Inc Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Throttle/Power Lever
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Object; Inflight Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I departed mid morning to checkout a student in an ER Coupe. We climbed to 2;600 FT MSL and practiced slow flight and stalls. About twenty minutes after takeoff we attempted to recover from the slow flight/stall condition by increasing the throttle but we did not receive an increase in RPMs. We assume the throttle cable to the engine broke. The engine remained at idle and we circled over a field and glided to land on the farm below. There was minimal damage to the airplane which included some dents on the left wing which hit some corn stalks and one of the tires popped. The student and I were the only two in the aircraft and neither of us was hurt.




Synopsis: An ER Coupe D engine would not accelerate above idle while recovering from slow flight/stall practice so the instructor landed in a nearby corn field resulting in minimal aircraft damage and a blown tire.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: PA-46 Malibu Meridian
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Nose Gear Wheel
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We had been holding for weather just southwest of the field. We were descended and cleared for the visual approach. We entered a dog legged right base and turned final. Everything at this point was normal. There was a slight (less than 10 knot) crosswind from the right. Tower cleared us to land and I was the non flying pilot in the right seat. We crossed the numbers on centerline at 90 knots +/- 2 knots. The main wheels touched and all was fine. However once the nose gear touched down; the plane veered hard left immediately. I would say that it was on a 45 degree path to leave the runway. I immediately jumped on the controls with the flying pilot pressing hard right rudder. The plane swerved hard to the right at this point but it felt as if it wanted to turn left again. I told the flying pilot the aircraft was mine and continued to apply full right rudder authority. I also used full reversing on the engine. The rudder pedals shimmied until we slowed to below taxi speed. Once we were at taxi speed; the plane seemed to be operating normally. I taxied us to the ramp; parked and visually inspected the aircraft. I found no problems with the tires; or problems with any of the linkages and the aircraft seems to be in good working order. Brakes seemed to work fine as well. There was no damage to the aircraft; and to the best of my knowledge we never departed the runway although we did come very close. After reading some reports and doing some research; several others have reported the same experience. I truly believe the nose wheel was not straight when landing. There was no standing water on the runway but the runway was wet and I believe this contributed to the incident. Have called Maintenance to see if there is a solution on their end.




Synopsis: PA46 pilot in the right seat reports a hard swerve to the left as the flying pilot in the left seat lowers the nose gear to the runway after main gear touchdown. The reporter gets on the controls and is able to prevent the aircraft from departing the runway and slow to taxi speed. The aircraft is taxied to parking without difficulty and no defects can be found on post flight inspection.