elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 7
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing; Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Time Pressure; Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft; Manuals
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was on an IFR flight plan from ZZZ to ZZZ1. I began to experience engine surging. I attempted to troubleshoot; but it continued to worsen. I informed Approach that I needed to divert to ZZZ2. That controller asked if I was declaring an emergency; and I said no; but he took my souls on board and fuel remaining. Shortly thereafter he switched me to another frequency. I checked in with that controller and continued to ZZZ2. The condition continued to worsen; so I attempted to contact Approach to let them know I was in an emergency and needed priority into ZZZ2. I attempted to contact Approach multiple times with no response. It sounded as though he was busy on other frequencies. In hindsight I should've squawked 7700; but didn't think of it at the time. I was primarily concentrating on flying the airplane and managing the engine.At this point I was inside ZZZ2's surface area and had reached the last altitude I had been cleared to. I needed to continue my descent to land; so after another failed attempt to contact Approach; I proceeded with my descent and switched to ZZZ2 tower. They were expecting me; and they contacted Approach and informed me I was cleared for the Visual Approach. I landed uneventfully otherwise. Police and fire were waiting for me.I was uncomfortable continuing the descent without being cleared and switching frequencies without being told; but felt both actions were necessary for the safe outcome of my flight. I should have officially declared my emergency when the first controller asked; and squawked 7700. It seems to me the second approach controller forgot about me; or perhaps he was busy making space for me; but either way the lack of communication did add a bit of stress to the situation.




Synopsis: An IFR single engine light aircraft pilot experienced engine surging and diverted to a nearby airport and landed safely. The pilot lost contact with Approach descended on their own and switched to the tower frequency.
Date: 202004
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Departed ZZZ from Runway XX southbound. On initial climb out; I saw the two large tower structures at 1;703 ft. MSL and 1;741 ft. MSL directly on our departure flight path and deviated to avoid. Then saw the altimeter and noticed I exceeded the climb out by approximately 100 feet; then commenced descent to below the 2;500 ft. Class D ceiling. Then contacted departure for flight following. In the future I would start correcting course to deviate around towers immediately after departure from Runway XX.




Synopsis: C182 pilot reported a CFTT after takeoff involving towers located in the departure path.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: JFK.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B JFK
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Automation Aircraft TA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Arriving JFK visual approach 22L. Radar vectors being given. Received traffic advisory followed immediately by resolution advisory to descend 800 ft. a minute. Aircraft passed directly above our aircraft by 400 ft. as verified only by information on primary flight display. Reported to ATC and were given new heading vector to continue the approach without further incident. Air Traffic Control never pointed out this traffic to us. However they knew he was in the area once we declared executing the RA.




Synopsis: A321 Captain reported that while on visual approach to landing; TA followed by RA caused NMAC; verified only by information on PFD.
Date: 202011
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
Result: Flight Crew Overrode Automation
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On descent into ZZZ; we momentarily exceeded Vmo by approximately 1 knot for less than 3 seconds. I later completed an AML entry and notified Maintenance Control. There was no operational impact.   I was the CA and PF. While on descent into ZZZ; ATC halted our descent at FL240. This put us behind our VPATH solution. When we were next cleared to descend; I elected to go into Vertical Speed Mode; selecting 2000 FPM in order to recapture the VPATH. The task saturation over the next few seconds took my scan away from our airspeed; and we surpassed and we surpassed XXX knots; our 'barber pole' airspeed. I immediately disconnected the AP; overrode the autothrottles and raised the nose of the aircraft. The max airspeed reached [was] XXY knots for a second or two; before returning to green numbers. There appeared to be no adverse effect on the aircraft or passengers. I later completed an AML entry and notified Maintenance Control. I had not flown in 3 weeks; due to my inactivity on reserve status. I now know that I must be more diligent on my scan; especially when I have not flown in a while. On descent; I must be more cognizant of airspeed when using the VS mode. In this case; using Green FLCH would have been a better choice. It was an excellent learning opportunity.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported momentarily exceeding the aircraft's maximum operating limit speed on descent. The Captain cited lack of flying as a contributing factor.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
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: Electrical Power
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: [In cruise flight] dual IRS DC Fail lights illuminated. Captain retained control and directed QRH. I read QRH. We follow QRH and checked for popped CBs. No popped CBs. Battery voltage low at 11 Volts. QRH advised to consider a divert to nearest suitable airport because Engine APU fire extinguishing might not be available if needed. APU might not start. Upon coordination with Dispatch and crew consultation; Captain elected to divert to [a nearby alternate]. I agreed with her decision and judgment. Upon divert request with ATC; we explained that we were diverting as a precaution for our electrical problem. We had no indication of any further systems degradation and did not declare an emergency. We also referred to our divert considerations on the standard checklist card. Captain advised crew and passengers of the situation. We flew a safe and uneventful arrival; approach; and landing. Upon taxi to [the] gate the APU; as QRH predicted; failed to start. At the gate we shut down the number 2 engine; connected ground power; and then shut down number 1 engine.


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


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported diverting to an alternate after both IRS DC fail lights illuminated in cruise.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The First Officer (FO) was the Pilot Flying (PF) and we were cleared for the visual Runway. The winds were out of the northwest gusting to 30+ knots. While on short final and between an altitude of 100 feet and 50 feet the FO believed that we had encounter wind shear right over the runway; because of the lack of response of aircraft flight control. He elected to go around; during the go around the aircraft main gear touched the runway. We set up for a second approach and the landing was uneventful. As a precaution I elect to have  maintenance check the aircraft for a possible tail strike during the go around.


Second narrative: I was flying the visual approach at runway 29. At the time; the wind was reported to be 18kts gusting to 30kts; from a direction of 340. During the last 50 feet the aircraft felt out of control in the roll axis. I decided to go-around. The landing gear did touch the runway before we got airborne. We returned for a second approach to runway 29 and landed uneventfully.


Synopsis: A B757 flight crew on short final elected to go-around because the pilot flying thought the aircraft...'felt out of control in the roll axis.'  The aircraft touched down briefly. They then flew a second approach to a successful landing.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MTPP.Airport, FO
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: TRACON MTPP
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Possible dangerous situation at MTPP. I've been flying to Haiti since 1989 and have been there literally a thousand times. In the past month I've observed a new tower that's been put up right on the runway centerline landing on 28. You pass it at 300 FT and it is attached to or adjacent to an orange building. You don't pass over it by very much and it's not depicted on any chart. On an engine out scenario departing east it's an absolute hazard. Not sure how long it's been there but I just started flying in there again in the past month or so. Landing on 28; if you are even slightly low on the PAPI you may be dangerously close. To make matters even more interesting; the PAPI lights aren't properly calculated. One side might show 2 red and 2 white and the other side shows 1 red and 3 white. It is Haiti after all and we all shrug our shoulders and stay alert. But that tower really shouldn't be there!




Synopsis: An air carrier pilot reported the presence of a tower recently erected roughly one mile from the threshold on the extended Runway 28 centerline at MTPP. The reporter believes it would be a potential hazard in the event of an engine failure when departing Runway 10 or if an arrival to Runway 28 should descend even modestly below the PAPI on Runway 28.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MYF.Tower, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower MYF
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Time Pressure; Communication Breakdown; Distraction
Second reporter function: Ground; Supervisor / CIC
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Staffing; Procedure; Human Factors; Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: LC1 and LC2 were split and I was working LC1. Traffic was busy. Aircraft Y was just crossing the runway threshold to land when I and the other LC controller observed Aircraft X turn onto the active runway which Aircraft Y was landing on. The other LC controller quickly instructed Aircraft X to exit the runway. The LC2 controller gave Aircraft X hold instructions which he read back correctly. He then continued to turn onto the active runway witch he was told to hold short off. I believe this happened because he had exited onto our intersecting runway which has no lines on it to show where the parallel runway edge lines should be. Another contributing factor is that GC was combined with CIC (which is an everyday event) so there was one less set of eyes over the operation witch decreases the safety culture here at MYF.We have NO FLMs so I would recommend getting some FLMs so that GC is not combined with CIC witch takes away from the operation and is a safety issue. I recommend that we be considered here at MYF to be slated with more controllers. This would help elevate with the high volume of traffic that we face daily while being staffed to the minimums nearly every day.


Second narrative: Contributing factors:1. Runway markings: There are no markings on runway 23 (crossing runway) that indicates the runway edge lines of runway 28R and runway 28L. When pilots get approval to exit runway 23 and are told to hold short of runway 28L; how are they to know where to stop? 2. Staffing: As emphasized in previous reports; our staffing numbers are inadequate for the amount of traffic we have been working. It has become necessary to keep the LC position split. In doing so; GC and CIC are almost always combined. We currently have no FLMs supervising the operations. If we had a separate CIC; an extra set of eyes could have prevented this situation from occurring.


Synopsis: MYF Tower Controllers reported a runway incursion citing that a lack of runway markings and minimal staffing attributed to the incursion.
Date: 201704
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PKMJ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: CTAF PKMJ
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Taking off on Runway 7 in PKMJ requires a back taxi on the runway. Nearing the turnaround point there is a yellow taxi line to indicate where to turn. Whereas normally an airport marking will indicate a safe area this one (if followed) will take you within a few feet of the red runway end lights. In the past I have noticed these lights bent or missing so it seems aircraft have tried to follow these markings with either nose or main gear making impact.




Synopsis: Pilot reported turnaround markings may direct aircraft to taxi close to or over runway end lights on Runway 7 at PKMJ.
Date: 201812
Location: ZZZ.Airport, 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: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was monitoring this ramp directed loading flight out of ZZZ. 10 ten minutes prior to departure I noticed the ramp was in the process to final DSTG [Departure Staging Guide] and had seen the hazmat item #1 in a completely different pit from what was originally planned and not secured with the FAA requirement of 15 bags minimum. I turned the auto final [closeout] off and called ZZZ OPS an advised that ramp does not have the FAR requirement of 15 bags to secure dangerous goods where the hazmat item was located. The plane was pushed off the gate and ramp called me said that there was an error and they need the flight unlocked to move the hazmat item to a completely different pit from where it originally was finalized at. Ramp confirmed it was in pit 4. The DSTG was finalized a second time with 15 bags minimum and weights were sent.




Synopsis: Ground Personnel reported cargo load crew improperly loaded Hazmat shipment.
Date: 201709
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Powerplant Lubrication System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: In cruise at 29;000 ft; the Captain noticed that the left engine oil quantity was at 0. He brought the issue to my attention and we both noticed that the oil pressure indication had dropped and was erratically hovering around 20 to 27. We ran the 'Engine Oil Press' checklist which prompted the 'Engine Shutdown Checklists.' After contacting Dispatch; we decided to divert. We notified the Flight Attendants and passengers. While receiving guidance from ATC; we completed the appropriate checklists and landed safely as per SOP. Upon inspection by Maintenance personnel; it was determined that the engine was completely out of oil.


Second narrative: The left engine oil quantity indicated zero; and the left oil pressure was slowly decreasing yet still in the normal range. We ran the oil pressure QRH. Since the oil pressure was continuing to fall we also reviewed the Engine Shutdown checklist. The oil pressure dropped into the caution range and [the engine] was shutdown using the QRH.


Synopsis: B757 flight crew reported loss of left engine oil quantity in cruise.  The crew elected to shut down the engine and divert.