elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201904
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Windshear; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-20 Pacer/PA-22 Tri-Pacer
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: During a training flight for the aircraft owner who is a low time private pilot with prior tailwheel experience in a different make/model; the pilot in command completed a full stall 3-point landing and was rolling out when the aircraft began drifting left of centerline; the student had full right rudder applied with the instructor also applying full right rudder and aircraft was not responding to the rudder command. Aircraft turned approximately 110 degrees in a skidding turn when the right main gear collapsed. The right wingtip contacted the runway and propeller struck the ground. Neither occupant was injured. Prior to the ground loop; the pilot completed two 3-point landings without incident or intervention by the instructor. Winds were approximately 8 knots about 10 degrees off runway heading. An eye witness said the windsock turned 90 degrees about the time of touchdown. The windsock was not in view to the pilot or instructor from the position of the loss of control. The aircraft is a modified Piper PA20 Pacer with a 180 HP engine with constant speed prop; vortex generators; droop tips; and tundra tires. The aircraft is more difficult to control than a standard PA20 due to the excessive pitch response to power changes and the pilot has little experience with operating a constant speed propeller tending to rely on audible feedback while making power adjustments rather than using the manifold pressure gauge resulting in unstable and inconsistent power application in the final approach phase.Author of this report is the instructor.




Synopsis: PA20 instructor reported loss of control on landing resulting in ground loop and aircraft damage.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion; Human-Machine Interface
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: 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; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were on a visual approach to Runway XXL at ZZZ at 3;000 feet. Approach cleared us for a visual approach about 7 miles out and we were giving a heading towards the FAF following an airbus. PF set 2;000 feet in the MCP and we began a slow descent heading inbound to the airport. ATC issued a 'low altitude alert' at about 2;300 feet. We leveled off and intercepted the G/S just past the FAF. In addition; we had to rapidly slow since the airbus in front slowed rapidly and ATC wanted us to slow to approximately 150 knots or less. They really did not leave us much lateral room. We slowed and configured while descending. We were never near an obstacle; nor were we a threat to another aircraft. We were still above the 1;000 feet stable approach criteria (1;300 to 1;500 feet) and met the criteria proof to reaching 1;000 feet. We were lower than what was normally flow for that area but still seamed safe. Again on a visual approach. PF stated that he read 2;000 feet at the FAF and misread the altitude. The FAF altitude is 2;800 feet. I did not reverify it since we were visual and I was working on setting up radios and configuration for landing. I assumed he saw it correctly.I can't find where we violated anything. We were a little low for the area but still in a safe position to land and had visual clearance from all obstacles. I know next time to verify the altitude in the MCP from the chart myself. That is that only thing that may have stopped the lower alt in the first place.


Second narrative: On receiving landing clearance; I set 2;000 feet in the altitude window and planned to descend to that altitude at ZZZZZ; the FAF.  I misread the approach plate. The correct altitude at ZZZZZ is 2;800 feet. The Tower gave us a Low Altitude Alert at 2;200 MSL in VMC and we maintained that altitude (we were nearly at glideslope intercept) until glideslope intercept.  We landed uneventfully.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported entering the wrong altitude in the MCP and descending below FAF altitude which resulted in Air Traffic Control issuing a low altitude alert.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZMA.ARTCC, FL
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: IAI1125 (Astra)
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class A ZMA
ATC / advisory: Center ZMA
Aircraft component: Electronic Flt Bag (EFB)
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Manuals
Primary problem: Manuals

Narrative: We use Commercial 1 Flight Data; installed on iPads (total 3 devices carried on board) for cockpit approach procedures. On this flight when conducting the arrival brief it was noted that the pilot not flying had a more current STAR for the FISEL arrival into FLL than the pilot flying. The remainder of the flight was conducted using the pilot not flying's charts. Post flight it was verified that all iPads showed that the databases were current and showed the next update was over a week in the future. Tech support was contacted and I was informed that it was a 'glitch' and that the product needed to be deactivated and reactivated to fix the problem and that there is no way to tell we had charts that were not current.




Synopsis: Astra Captain reports discovering during arrival briefing that his FISEL 5 STAR is out of date in his iPad when compared to the First Officers iPad. Post flight revealed that both iPad's had current databases. The database provider described the problem as a glitch that was easily correctable.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Seaplane or Amphibian
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Gear Float
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: After a normal landing on the water; aircraft suddenly start to turn right. I correct the course of the plane and put in idle speed to continue taxing it back to a location on the shoreline of the lake. When at idle speed noticed aircraft was leaning toward the passenger side. I opened the door to check if I could notice some problems with the floats but I saw nothing. I kept taxing back (8 minutes) I noticed more leaning to the right float. I tried to put the plane on step to speed up towards shore understanding I had a problem and one float was taking in water fast. I was able to put the plane on step for few seconds but difficult to keep straight and plane sinking more on the right side. I went back to idle; 100 feet from shore hoping to make it and I saw plane flipping slowly nose in the lake. I told copilot to abandon the aircraft; while shutting off the engine so propeller would not hurt pilot and copilot falling forward and to minimize engine and prop damage. I Opened the seat belt with right hand keeping an eye on copilot and same time open door with left hand. Plane flipped and water rushed in. I was able to squeeze myself out ... copilot was out as well. I did not hit anything on the water and before landing I did a W.E.T. circle (weather; environment; terrain check); landed with 2 flaps at 65 mph normal. After recovering the plane we noticed 2 compartments collapsed on the right float; I believed they failed A third compartment (horizontal wall side) failed inside due to taxing on step and that caused the plane to finally sink. These float compartments are only glued ; have no structure and were supposed to be in CARBON FIBER and composite. I noticed no carbon fiber; only composite. I lost the plane because of float failure!

Callback: Reporter states that the winds were light and the water surface was calm during landing. Post flight examination of the float revealed that two compartments had collapsed due to failure of internal bulkheads. He believes that either design flaws or manufacturing defects caused the float to fail.



Synopsis: After a water landing on a calm surface; the pilot of an amphibious aircraft notes the aircraft beginning to lean to the right. An attempt to fast taxi to the shore results in the aircraft sinking faster and eventually flipping 100 feet from shore.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B777-200
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: Air Conditioning Distribution System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: EICAS system displayed 'RECIRC FAN' status message; shortly followed by EICAS Caution message 'SMOKE CREW REST MAIN'; shortly followed by call from flight attendants that they smelled a smoke like odor in the Main Deck Crew Rest compartment. After searching compartment no smoke could be seen; nor could its source be located. Compartment was evacuated and smoke odor dissipated. Shortly after; both the EICAS status and caution messages cleared on their own.Decision was made to divert flight to [a nearby airport]. ATC and Dispatch were notified; requesting crash/fire equipment to be standing by for landing.Flight landed uneventfully.


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


Synopsis: B777 flight crew reported diverting to an alternate airport after receiving EICAS alerts RECIRC FAN and SMOKE CREW REST MAIN; followed by reports of a smoke-like odor.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Aircraft component: Gear Extend/Retract Mechanism
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At the ramp 'APU Battery Charger' and 'Main Battery Charger' status messages illuminated. Engines are started; parking brake is still on. I planned to power down briefly.  As we do normal power down every time we shut down the aircraft; I turned off all AC generators first and all the indication was normal except the above messages. Upon turning off the Main Battery switch; the nose gear retracted all of sudden; without any warning or message. Both of the main gears were not retracted and showing the green indications. I asked the Ramp Agent to bring up boarding stair and deplaned the passengers normally.I did not expect the nose gear retraction upon turning off AC power and the Main Battery Switch. I did not expect any threat as the parking brake was not even released.

Callback: The reporter stated that the nose gear retraction valve on this particular aircraft was very sensitive and did in fact retract the gear. This was the second similar event with the same anomaly. The valve involved was on this aircraft model's AD list and was replaced after this event. All the Company's aircraft were also checked but no other defective valves were found.



Synopsis: A CRJ200 nose gear retracted at the gate with both engines running after the Captain powered the aircraft down and selected the Battery Switch OFF in order to reset APU and Main Battery Charger EICAS alerts.
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZLC.ARTCC, UT
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZLC
ATC / advisory: Center ZLC
Second aircraft: Large Transport
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft Y was climbing off of SLC direct RWF; approximately 50 miles west of OCS; Rock Springs Wyoming.  Aircraft Y was climbing out of FL330 for FL370.  Aircraft X was enroute from DEN direct to BOI level at FL340.  I recognized a potential conflict between the two aircraft and turned Aircraft X 15 (fifteen) degrees left for traffic.  Aircraft X acknowledged the 15 left turn.  A few minutes later the conflict alert flashed and I noticed Aircraft X aircraft had turned right instead of left.  I then issued a clearance to Aircraft X to turn 20 left and then descended the aircraft to FL330 and told him to expedite his descent.  Aircraft X acknowledged the new turn and the descent and stated he had the traffic on TCAS and the traffic was in sight.  I advised Aircraft X that the first turn had been issued to the left not to the right.  After he was clear of the Aircraft Y I resumed Aircraft X's course to BOI and climbed him back up to FL340.Upon review of the tapes of the incident; it was found that Aircraft X read back the initial 15 degree left turn but had apparently turned 15 right instead.  The closest proximity was approximately 4 miles and 800 feet.Apparently one pilot readback the clearance and the other pilot turned the aircraft the wrong direction.  Better cockpit communication would seem to be warranted.  From the controller's standpoint; watch each aircraft that they comply with each clearance given; but that is problematic when you have a busy sector.  We work under the expectations that our clearances will be complied with expeditiously and correctly.  When I noticed the mistake from the pilot; it took me a moment to realize what had happened.  In the future I could expect less from the pilots and be prepared for errors and how to correct them.




Synopsis: ZLC Controller reports of airborne conflict because pilot turned in opposite direction as instructed and readback.
Date: 201305
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Nose Gear Tire
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Object; Inflight Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Equipment / Tooling; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Equipment failure: Towbar hitch broken causing the towbar to separate away from the aircraft. Aircraft was being towed using a Steward and Stevenson pushback tractor; one of our better pushback tractors but by no means a towing tractor. We have a Goldhofer tow tractor but it is out of service more than in service. We towed across 2 taxiways making a couple left and right turns. As I was guiding the aircraft into the gate; I was positioned to the driver's right side due to a pre-positioned GPU. Making sure tractor cleared unit. As the tow was almost complete and tow tractor was slowing down I was guiding tractor to stop mark. I happened then to notice the nose of aircraft veering to the left of the tow tractor. I quickly crossed over to the left hand side of tractor to see what was going on only to hear a loud pop and then a second pop. The tractors driver also noticed at the same time and quickly pulled forward going to the right side away from nose of the aircraft. Simultaneously I radio to flight deck to set brakes. This happened so quick we didn't have time to stop aircraft before it ran over the towbar popping both nose gear tires. My angle of vision was blocked by the position of the GPU and the tow tractor.




Synopsis: Ground crewman supervising an aircraft tow reports a broken tow bar hitch approaching the gate. Before the aircraft can be signaled to set brakes the nose tires run over the towbar popping both tires.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Aircraft: A-1 Husky
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was asked to extend my downwind leg and the Controller would call my base. I [was] informed to start my base and Controller apologized (he extended my downwind too far.) I was cleared for 28R. I was on short final 200 FT from the threshold when a twin engine aircraft came from my 4 o'clock position almost 150 FT below me. It appeared he was cleared to land on 28L and switched to 28R. The plane I was flying was doing 65 mph indicated. I contacted Tower [and] explained I had traffic 150 FT in front of me landing and I was going around. Controller advised me to do a right 360 and I was number 1 28R. Upon starting my right 360 I had to apply power and climb due to buildings. My climbing 360 turn brought me within 1;000 FT of a Champ that was on his downwind leg. I was not advised of traffic. I continued my 360 and made a touch and go. Upon landing no contact was made by Tower to me other than the standard taxi instructions. I am filing this report by advice of a senior flight instructor at field.




Synopsis: Aviat Husky pilot reported an NMAC with a light twin on approach.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: APU
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; Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate; Pre-flight
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Weather
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon arriving at the plane for the first flight of the day I completed the safety checks then proceeded to start the APU. After getting little rotation I selected stop. After a few minutes the First Officer again attempted the start with the same indications. Knowing that we could not board the passengers due to the temperature; around 24 that morning; we advised operations of the situation and requested a GPU; heat cart and a start cart. After these were in place we went back on the aircraft and the First Officer attempted an APU start again with very little rotation and a redline EGT prompting a shutoff. I then went outside and a ramper informed us that he saw sparks coming from the APU exhaust and at that time I noticed some smoke coming out of the closed APU inlet door. The First Officer and I walked to the rear of the aircraft and did not see a fire but chose to have the fire truck come over to be on the safe side and to double check. After the truck arrived and after some looking around they confirmed that there was no fire. I called maintenance and talked it over and a write up was made and a mechanic was sent out.After knowing that there was no fire perhaps I could have investigated a little further before getting the airport fire involved.




Synopsis: The third attempt to start the APU of a CRJ-200 on a cold morning; resulted in insufficient spool up and an EGT at or above redline followed by a report from ground crew advising of sparks from the APU exhaust. CFR was called as a precaution and maintenance was initiated.
Date: 201210
Location: PDX.Airport, OR
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class C PDX
ATC / advisory: TRACON P80
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Weather; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Descent on approach PDX Runway 28R at level off 5;300 FT MSL got a EGPWS warning TERRAIN TERRAIN PULL UP PULL UP. In IMC conditions performed escape profile climbing to 7;400 FT MSL. Advised ATC and was assured no terrain close to us. Called ATC on the ground and was advised we were right over a 4;300 FT peak when warning went off. ATC advised us of no loss of separation with other aircraft.




Synopsis: An aircraft descending on the PDX Runway 28R approach took evasive action to an EGPWS TERRAIN warning at 5;300 FT and was advised that they were over a 4;300 FT peak.