elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201705
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MMMX.Airport, FO
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Post-Flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The First Officer and I ate the Company supplied crew meals out of MMMX. We were later diagnosed by our treating physicians as having Ecoli. Many others have [reported] to being sick after eating the Company supplied crew meals out of MMMX. An email was sent to the Flight Office advising that my First Officer and myself were both sick. I also noted that I suspected it was from the crew meal out of MMMX.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported becoming ill after eating the company supplied crew meal departing MMMX.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Ultralight
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 103
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While flying my powered paraglider (FAR Part 103) I heard the engine sputter. I had a parking lot below me and initially turned to land there. As I assessed the situation unfolding; I determined there was limited space to land and since the engine was still working; I aborted the landing but was faced with trees to maneuver around. The right side of my powered paraglider wing just slightly clipped a tree branch - no damage occurred. I continued the climb and landed at an alternate site.I suspect the fuel I was using was several months old and may have been the reason for the engine sputter. I drained it and replaced it with fresh fuel. A subsequent flight for an hour didn't appear to have any issues.




Synopsis: Paraglider pilot reported engine performance issues prompted an unplanned landing that was aborted for another site; however; contact was made with a tree branch.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Baron 55/Cochise
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise; Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Fuel Issue; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was making a precautionary return to the airport after experiencing a decrease in fuel pressure on my left engine. In the descent phase to ZZZ the left engine began running worse and worse as I descended. I activated low boost on the left engine to keep it running. I was able to keep the engine running until landing by a combination of low and high boost and manipulating the throttle. On roll out; my right engine idle was low and in an attempt to keep it running I hit low boost and pushed the throttle up; but it died anyway. Managing asymmetric thrust and keeping the left engine running so I could clear the active runway and not shut the airport down; took my full attention. I did not turn the little boost off of the right engine until I had cleared the runway and by then the system was pressure charged and porting fuel overboard.In retrospect I should have feathered and secured the left engine and concentrated on landing and clearing the runway. This would have reduced my workload.




Synopsis: BE55 pilot reported a fuel system malfunction inflight.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Staffing; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Departing ZZZ. The Tug Driver reported ready for pushback and incorrectly asked me to release the parking brake in the same sentence. Looking at the ECAM screen; we noticed that the NW STRG DISC message was NOT displayed. I advised the Tug Driver of this and told him that the brakes were still set and that he needed to install the bypass pin. He replied 'O.K.; standby'. A few moments later he again reported ready to push but we still did not observe the NW STRG DISC message. He responded 'O.K.; hang on' and then I asked him whether or not he actually knew what I was referring to. He replied that he actually did not know what that was and that this was only the fourth push back that he had ever done. I asked him to get someone more seasoned out there to assist which he did. This other person got things set correctly and remained standing by for the push back procedure. It appears that the person driving the tug was either not trained; not trained properly; or simply was not at all paying attention while being trained. In any event he should not have been where he was doing the job he was supposed to be doing.




Synopsis: A319 Captain reported the Tug Driver at this location appeared untrained with regard to the pushback duties.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ROA.TRACON, VA
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C ROA
ATC / advisory: TRACON ROA
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
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: While being vectored on to RNAV 24Y with Roanoke Approach received a 'Terrain Pull Up' EGPWS warning. Aircraft was on a base leg between PROSE and HIBAN south of the final approach course at 4;000 ft. PF (Pilot Flying) complied with company procedures and climbed in response to the warning. Approach Control vectored aircraft back around for the same approach starting at a higher altitude.




Synopsis: Pilot reported receiving a EGPWS warning while flying into ROA.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; Windshear
Light: Night
Aircraft: B747 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Weather; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Weather during our approach and landing was night; moderate rain; moderate crosswind; and visibility about 2 miles. Disconnected autopilot at about 500 feet; and was lined up well on the runway centerline. Possibly due to fatigue; allowed profile to be less than desired. Was making correction at about the same time as the activation of the GPWS warning; 'Too Low.' I landed the aircraft at after a normal flare. Threshold minimum crossing height is 42 feet for the 747. We debriefed the approach after we landed; and also after block in. It is estimated that we descended through 50 feet just prior to the threshold; and estimate that the actual threshold crossing was about 40 feet; or 2 feet less than minimum. This was a learning experience; and I feel that we should report these occurrences. I will know to guard against this type of 'low on the glidepath' approach and landing in the future.




Synopsis: A fatigued B747 Captain reported crossing the runway threshold low during a night approach in moderated rain and winds.
Date: 201311
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DAL.Airport, TX
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; 7
Aircraft: Eclipse 500
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower DAL
Second aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Weather; Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: I was working Local Control West when an Eclipse 500; taxied out to Runway 13L via Taxiway Alpha. The Eclipse 500 called ready for departure; and I responded with 'roger;' due to an aircraft exiting the runway. I then cleared the Eclipse 500 for takeoff; and I noticed they had passed the new hold short line and were close to the runway where the old short line was located. A B737 was on RADAR vectors for the ILS 13L; 9 NM of DAL on the RADAR base leg; not of my frequency. The runways and taxiways appeared to be wet due to a continuous light rain all morning. I do not believe this hold line is in accordance with published requirements.




Synopsis: DAL Controller described a runway incursion event involving an aircraft taxiing to Runway 13L; the reporter claimed multiple same type occurrences and the existing hold lines are problematic and need adjusting.
Date: 202106
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: Medium Transport
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Human Factors; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Aircraft; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: Aircraft X went NORDO on the downwind. There was no reason given as to why the aircraft went silent. They entered into a 3;500 foot MVA (Minimum Vectoring Altitude). I tried to reach the aircraft on emergency frequency and back up radios.




Synopsis: TRACON Controller reported an aircraft on downwind lost radio contact and flew below the Minimum Vectoring Altitude.
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower SFO
Second aircraft: Medium Transport
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: Staffing; Airport; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: We were landing and departing 28s. It was busy. I told Aircraft Y to turn off of Runway 28 onto non active Runway 19L and hold short of F contact Ground. He turned off of the active runway. I cleared Aircraft X for takeoff. As I cleared Aircraft X; Aircraft Z was taxing to runway 28L. Aircraft Z was crossing the ones and blocked my view of Aircraft Y. Aircraft Z had just crossed 19R and was on F. Aircraft X said he was aborting takeoff; due to aircraft on the runway. [Aircraft X] taxied back to Runway 28L. Everything looked good from my angle. Even at this time I don't know if I would have caught it. View blocked by taxing aircraft. Plenty of time for Aircraft Y to exit. Nothing blocking him from moving forward. I think Aircraft Y was concerned about the size of Aircraft Z and held. Never understand why pilots will not fully clear an active runway.I scanned the runway. [I need to] look more closely at the ASDE. I asked my local assist and he said it was really hard to tell. I think it was just one of those weird situations where everyone was at the wrong place at the wrong time. In the future I will advise the aircraft to fully exit the runway. Move up as far as they can to hold short of F. Definitely something that I will not let happen again. With summer and constant 28 I am glad I was able to experience this now. I will be more aware of this pitfall in the future.




Synopsis: Controller working Local position describes incident where he could not see slow moving aircraft exiting runway position because view was blocked by another aircraft; while departing aircraft rejects take-off.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZSU.ARTCC, PR
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZSU
ATC / advisory: Center ZSU
Second aircraft: Hercules (C-130)
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: Shortly after I assumed the position I noticed that the previous controller's instruction for a B737 to expedite descent was not working as planned. I issued a turn to the descending B737 aircraft and called traffic with no reply from the B737. We have bad radios in the area; so I watch a second to see if he took the turn. I called a total of three times to the B737 before he took the turn. I had also called traffic to the C130 and the pilot reported traffic in sight. The projected path initially looked close but appeared separation would not be lost. I wanted the turn for extra comfort but as it played out it ended to be right at the minimums for separation as they passed. We have had frequency problems on 135.7 for an extended amount of time; but I'm not sure if I was blocked; pilot was not listening; or it was a blind spot. I believe if the B737 had taken the turn when I initialized it I would have had plenty of space. Proper frequencies would be great. We have been reporting those down for years. Maintenance seems to reset it; someone does a brief frequency check and it's called back up. The expedite descent clearance was not necessary in the first place. I should have just stopped descent vertically as soon as I sat down.




Synopsis: ZSU Controller described a failed attempt to issue a descent clearance noting the frequency utilized has had problems for an extended amount of time.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation V/Ultra/Encore (C560)
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At FL260 in cruise flight we both suddenly heard and felt a difference in the cabin atmosphere and noise level. We both scanned the instruments and found the Cabin Alt was climbing and the differential pressure was descending. We [responded to the situation] and were given a small descent to FL210 due to traffic. Before we got to FL210 ATC gave us 10;000 ft. We both donned our O2 masks and ran the Quick Reference Checklist. We leveled at 10;000 ft. and contacted our company about our issue and when they got back to us they requested we [divert] to [a nearby airport] instead of continuing to [destination]. [We] landed without further incident.


Second narrative: [Report Narrative Contained No Additional Information.]


Synopsis: CE-560EP flight crew reported loss of pressurization at FL260. Flight descended and diverted.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ATL.Airport, GA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp ATL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During pushback off in KATL; instructions from Ramp Control were 'Push approved tail north.' While under tow; we felt a slight jolt shortly after the start of the pushback. We stopped the pushback and were advised by Tug Driver that we had just struck a Provisioning Truck with the aircraft's left wing. We then got pulled back into the gate and deplaned.


Second narrative: During pushback with the aircraft under tow; a slight jolt was felt and the Tug Driver brought the aircraft to a stop. The Tug Driver then informed me the left wingtip had come into contact with a provisioning truck. The parking brake was set until Ground Personnel assessed the situation and made the decision to tow the aircraft back to the gate. Once at the gate; Passengers were deplaned and the aircraft was taken out of service. No injuries were reported by Passengers or Crew.Observation: After contact was made with the truck; I was surprised to see how far back the truck was parked and how little room there was for error. Since standard push procedures in ATL normally call for a tail north or tail south push; I was surprised a truck would be parked so deep in the push zone even though the truck was parked outside of the Safety Zone. It appears as if the Tug Driver started to turn the tail of the aircraft to the north (per Ramp instructions) too soon.


Synopsis: B737-800 crew reported contact with a truck during pushback at ATL.
Date: 201204
Location: FFZ.Airport, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 40
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D FFZ
ATC / advisory: Tower FFZ
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction
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: We were returning to land at Falcon Field when we were instructed to enter left traffic for Runway 22R. There were other airplanes arriving for landing; so we were sequenced as number three for landing and were instructed to follow the preceding aircraft on a final approach. The position of the aircraft was provided and I identified the aircraft and advised Tower that I had the traffic in sight. Since I was instructing my student; my attention was divided between the traffic and my student. Soon I realized that we had lost visual contact with the aircraft I was supposed to follow; so I began to scan the area to re-establish visual contact. I identified an aircraft on final; so we continued the approach for landing. We proceeded turning base when we thought that our separation was adequate; only to find ourselves converging with another aircraft on final. I immediately made a sharp left turn to avoid a collision. The other aircraft on final made a call to Tower asking about my airplane and why we were as close we were. Tower seemed to be unaware of the situation or they deemed it non-threatening (this I do not know). I advised Tower that I indeed had made a left turn to avoid the other aircraft. I met with the pilot of the other aircraft on the ground and we discussed the situation. From my perspective; he was not at fault. I told him the situation and that the error on my part (identifying and following the wrong airplane) led to a near miss mid-air collision. In hindsight I should have advised Tower that I had lost visual contact with the other aircraft in the first place. I could have also confirmed the position of the other aircraft to verify we were adequately separated. I am glad that we were continuously vigilant for any traffic conflicts which I believe allowed me to take the controls and maneuver to avoid the collision. A contributing factor that could have led to this mishap would be the fact that I let my guard down in controlled airspace.




Synopsis: Instructor pilot in light aircraft described an NMAC at FFZ when he followed the wrong aircraft to the airport.