elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0001-0600
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: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion; Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: The following is my description of events. Just prior to boarding the flight the #4 FA notified the Captain that she was just notified that her neighbors tested positive for COVID-19. She asked him what she should do and he told her that she was obligated to inform the company. The Captain asked the #4 if she had been in contact / socialized with the neighbors and she said yes. The question the #4 now had was should she be removed from the trip or continue. Her main concern was she wanted it on record that if she finished the trip and then did in fact test positive that the company would not come back after her. She informed the Captain that she had no symptoms and felt fine. (note: She was sick the day before with issues she said were not related; migraine; heartburn etc. Upon landing she discussed with me while walking to hotel van for pickup to the hotel that she may call off sick if things did not improve on the overnight in ZZZ. At the XA:15am departure van time in ZZZ she said she felt 100% better than the day before. The Captain instructed her to contact whomever it was on the FA side scheduling and see what they tell her. Boarding was delayed while she contacted company who said there was no policy in place in a situation like this so it was up to her if she continued on trip. Since there is no policy in place for this unique situation they referred her to the COVID department to get the official guidance/policy and to get it on record she would not be held accountable. While the #4 was on the phone trying to get an answer so was the station personnel in ZZZ. After a long back and forth on the phone both the #4 and the Ground Personnel were told that as long as company clears it and the Captain and crew are in agreement she could continue on the trip. Company and crew cleared it so boarding began. The Captain requested the entire crew exchange contact numbers and stay in touch regarding any results from tests that are done. The #4 stated she was going to be tested and would inform us of the results. When the #4 called; she was referred to the dedicated COVID department to get the answers but they were not open. This further delayed the flight and process time it took to get an answer. This should be a 24 hour resource.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported that a flight attendant had come in contact with neighbors who were positive for COVID-19 and wanted guidance on whether she should continue with the trip or not.
Date: 202109
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: FBO
Mission: Training
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Workload; Time Pressure; Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Shot the RNAV XX at ZZZ and flew published missed. As we approached the hold at ZZZZZ; noticed non company aircraft on ADS-B +800 ft. and approximately 7 miles left of us on an intercept course. We radioed our missed approach and monitored frequency. As we approached the hold entry at ZZZZZ; non company aircraft began descending toward us (we were visual and they were low wing). In anticipation we started descending to try to get under them. They began turning left  approximately 500 ft. above us towards our path. At this point we lost visual with them and I took controls to turn to the right to avoid them as they descended lower. They continued their left turn and we regained visual with them at the same altitude. They continued descending as we flew opposite. Probably came within 400-200 ft. Could have monitored other frequencies to establish radio contact.




Synopsis: Flight Instructor reported a NMAC while attempting to fly the published missed approach from an  RNAV approach. The other aircraft was descending through the Instructor's altitude and there was no communication between the two aircraft.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: 6
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Falcon 10/100
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Oil Filler Cap
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Equipment / Tooling; Aircraft
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While in cruise we had the left engine oil light illuminate indicating low oil pressure. The oil pressure gauge confirmed the low oil pressure. Following our checklists we shut down the left engine. We requested to change our destination to ZZZ. On about a 10 mile final we realized the airspace was extremely busy and we [advised ATC] in the hope of avoiding the need for a diversion or go-around. We landed at ZZZ without incident. After landing we discovered that the left oil filler/dipstick cap had developed a gap in the O-ring allowing the engine oil to escape. When the O-ring was replaced and the oil replenished; the engine ran fine.


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


Synopsis: Falcon 10 flight crew shut down left engine due to low oil pressure. They discovered the O-Ring on the oil filler cap had a gap that allowed oil to escape.
Date: 201807
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Utility / Infrastructure
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I landed and was taxiing to loading pit and an individual had parked his SUV in the middle of the taxiway blocking access to loading pits. I had eye contact and motioned for him to move the vehicle. I waited a couple of minutes and then tried to ease by on the left side between hangar and SUV and wasn't comfortable with space so stopped and waited some more. Motioned again for him to move; and waited with no response from the individual. I contacted our ramp manager for assistance and began to reposition aircraft. Propwash caught hangar door resulting in damage to trailing edge of wings and rudder.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported aircraft damage while trying to taxi through a narrow space in the hangar area.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 25
Light: Night
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel System
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Started our flight in ZZZ2 to ZZZ1; ZZZ; ZZZ2 for our commercial cross country requirement. Had flight planned around XA:00am with the student for our departure at XH:30 pm. Flight up to ZZZ1 was uneventful; burned we burned 21 gallons going up; leaving us with 29 gallons to get to ZZZ. The flight planned showed we required 19 gallons to land at ZZZ where we planned to refuel before returning to ZZZ2. This left us with 10 gallons reserve; meaning over 1 hour of flight time at cruise. Roughly 50 miles out from ZZZ we had engine roughness and realized we had pulled the tank dry; so we swapped tanks again with no issue. We knew we had a reserve left and headed directly for ZZZ. Upon entering the pattern and turning base (2 miles) the engine sputtered again and we knew we had run out of gas. Knowing we would not make the runway we notified ATC and landed uneventfully on highway. Fire responded with no injuries or damage. ZZZ ground crew towed the airplane to the airport we had an A&P check everything over; added fuel; did a ground run; everything checked out good and we continued the flight to ZZZ2. Coincidentally when we fueled at ZZZ knowing the airplane has a 50 gallon capacity and the POH says all 50 gallons usable; from dead empty the plane only took 48.2 gallons. In conclusion; during the flight back from ZZZ1 to ZZZ we knew the head wind was more than we had factored for so we recalculated midair and that is where our mathematical error came into play. A simple addition mistake caused us to land just short of the runway that night.




Synopsis: Flight Instructor reported that a miscalculation of fuel requirements resulted in fuel exhaustion and an off-airport landing.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: HKY.Airport, NC
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: Cessna Citation Mustang (C510)
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZTL
ATC / advisory: Tower HKY
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On approach into HKY; I was given direct to ZOMAR and cleared for the GPS 6 LP approach. Weather was 600 feet overcast with pretty good visibility. Approach mode was selected on the autopilot and GPS sequenced the approach arriving at ZOMAR. The autopilot initiated the turn to KUVRE and the approach became active. At this time the glide path was alive and intercepted. As the aircraft proceeded to follow the glide path; at some point during descent the glide path became unreliable and went away. As soon as I noticed; I stopped the descent and leveled off which was at 2;700 MSL. I believe that this was just outside of KUVRE. The autopilot at this point was disconnected. I continued to fly the approach by hand as an LNAV approach. Airport was in sight at MDA and the landing was completed safely.




Synopsis: CE510 pilot reported continuing descent after loss of the glideslope signal on approach into HKY.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: While working Flight X inbound to ZZZ who was descending on the RNAV Arrival I observed a VFR target merging. I issued traffic approximately ten miles away. Flight X was level at 12;000 ft. while the VFR Target appeared to be at 14;500 ft. The target in question appeared to be descending toward Aircraft X; so I issued a direct descent to 8;000 ft. for Aircraft X. The VFR target also began to descend. The only turn that would've worked in my estimation was a left turn; but that would have put Aircraft X in another unsafe position with terrain/Minimum Vectoring Altitude (9500 ft.). A right turn would have been converging and earlier descent could have cause loss of radio communication and RADAR coverage. I reported the incident to the Operational Supervisor in charge immediately and was just informed today that the crew of Aircraft X filed a NMAC report. I honestly don't know what could have been done. My understanding is that the conflicting aircraft canceled an IFR flight plan to ZZZ1. Perhaps had I been speaking to that aircraft; this could have been avoided. There was really no good alternative or course of action in my opinion.




Synopsis: TRACON Controller reported an Air Carrier descending on an RNAV arrival reported a NMAC with an unidentified VFR aircraft.
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: GRK.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D GRK
ATC / advisory: TRACON GRK
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: On flight to GRK after deviating around weather we were cleared to descend to 2;000 feet for vectors ILS 15. When [we] were at 2;000 myself and the First Officer (FO) remarked that this seems very low at that time we got a too low gear warning at that time we asked ATC if he wanted us at 2;000 since that is what we were cleared to. He said I was going to tell you to climb up to 3;000 for vectors for the ILS 15. So we did and completed the approach. We were approximately about 5 miles from OKEST fix for the ILS.I believe the controller said 2;000 feet and that is what we said back and verified with each other it was 2;000 feet. It also was a long delay in ZZZ due to severe weather along the route.Make sure both crewmembers verify the MSA and landing elevation to maybe prevent this from happening again.


Second narrative: While descending on the approach; we were assigned 2;000 feet. Upon leveling we ask ourselves about such a low altitude for the approach. The captain then inquired about the altitude and at the same time the RA 'TOO LOW GEAR' Aural warning was activated. We started a climb back due to the aural warning and ATC replied with a request to level at 3;000 feet. We complied.To this point; I honestly believe the controller assigned and we replied back 2;000 feet for our approach.I think I should emphasize on reading the airport and touchdown zone altitudes on both IFR and VFR approach conditions and not just only for the IFR conditions. This will make it an ingrained habit in our day to day flying.


Synopsis: An air carrier crew on vectors for GRK ILS Runway 15 was given a descent to 3;000 feet but read back and descended to 2;000 feet. The crew felt low and when asking about the cleared altitude received an EGPWS 'TOO LOW GEAR' aural warning.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Citation III; VI; VII (C650)
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Bird / Animal
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Encountered bird strike on climbout after departure. Shut down right engine as a precautionary measure and diverted to [nearby airport] which was the closest airport with fire and rescue if needed. Flight and landing was uneventful with no assistance required.




Synopsis: CE-650 Captain reported a precautionary right engine shutdown after a bird strike on climb; followed by a successful divert to a nearby airport.
Date: 201603
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification; Workload; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; 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
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: The requirement to have ATC announce the 8;000 foot change at ARCHI (MENLO has the same issues) and the subsequent verbal response and verification by the pilots has created undue and unnecessary verbiage during a critical phase of flight. The NOTAM has been in effect through a number of [publisher] revision cycles and still has not been incorporated. As a previous ATC specialist I recognized the burden it is placing on the NORCAL controllers as well as the pilots. It has obviously been through the proper Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) process and through NOTAM it is implied that it's official and a safe procedure. Please let me know why we have not gotten past the 'temporary' permanent calls of the 800[0] foot exception? I have heard the frequency become saturated with read backs when the controllers are trying to conduct handoffs and pass clearances and traffic callouts; all priority calls in a charted visual environment where visual separation requirements are placed upon the pilots. Simply put the unnecessary call outs should be eliminated. The procedure is either good or bad but in either case we are making it worse with all the radio chatter. Let's get it published and quit delaying the procedure. Thanks




Synopsis: B737 pilot reported communication problems associated with the 8;000 foot change at intersection ARCHI.
Date: 202004
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: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: We were working the flight and were not informed of the X passengers with COVID-19 symptoms until already in flight. They were sitting in the aft near our crew rest seats. They didn't wear their masks for the entirety of the flight. Will we be informed if they receive positive tests for the Coronavirus?




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported not being informed of passengers on the aircraft with COVID-19 symptoms until after airborne.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: Y90.TRACON, CT
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class C BDL
ATC / advisory: TRACON BDL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During descent; passing 6;300 ft. for 5;000 ft. I noticed a reflection off of an object just below me. I watched the object quickly pass around 50 feet below and slightly to the right of my aircraft. The object appeared to be a 4-propeller drone of some type. The encounter was quick and only lasted second. We reported the incident to ATC and followed up with a phone call on the ground.




Synopsis: Air Carrier pilot reported a NMAC with a drone.