elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Upon Landing and clearing the runway XXL at ZZZ; I believed that tower stated 'Next left; remain this frequency; taxi to park'.  Unfortunately tower actually said 'Next left; contact ground point nine' as I played back from the avionics playback function after tower strangely issued me a taxi clearance while I was already taxiing. I read back the (what I thought was a re-issued clearance) and began to question if I heard the initial runway clearing call correctly. After utilizing the playback feature; I realized I taxied without a clearance.  With the reduced flight activity of the COVID-19 pandemic; I need to slow down; take more time; and be extra cautious. This is amplified by my expectation bias from the past few flights as tower has given me the 'Monitor and taxi to park' clearance. Clearance; ground; and tower have all been combined lately due to reduced activity.  In many cases; clearance has had us taxi with tower frequency; and such.  All the more reason to be extra cautious. Take additional time; and listen carefully as we are all in very non-standard operations.




Synopsis: Pilot reported a taxiway incursion partially due to expectation bias.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Icing
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Caravan 208B
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Ice/Rain Protection System
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Prior to aircraft loading I performed a Cold Weather preflight including ground test of the TKS system. Ground temp at Ramp departure was +02C with a ceiling of 600 ft overcast. I departed the Ramp with the aircraft's cargo compartment completely full from floor to ceiling. I turned the TKS system ON Hi during my taxi to the departure runway so that the wing would be 'wetted' prior to entering the clouds after takeoff. After takeoff while climbing to 5000 ft MSL with the TKS system now ON Normal I turned on the Cabin Heat /Defrost and immediately smelled the telltale TKS alcohol odor. Wanting to avoid the throat and eye irritation that I have experienced in the past from TKS fumes in the cockpit I promptly turned OFF the cabin heat while leaving the TKS system ON until I topped the cloud layer. After exiting the clouds I turned the TKS system OFF and tried the cabin heat again. Once again; I immediately smelled the alcohol smell. When I turned OFF the cabin heat the alcohol odor was no longer present. To avoid breathing the TKS fumes while using the cabin heat I donned my mask and breathed O2 for the next 30 minutes until the alcohol smell was no longer detectable with cabin heat. TKS system total AM run time with ground test plus taxi out to topping the cloud layer was less than 10 minutes. It is my opinion that TKS fluid mist shed by the prop slinger was being drawn into the cockpit from the air stream surrounding the aircraft nacelle via the aircraft bleed air system. I believe that the fact that the alcohol odor in the cockpit dissipated each time that I turned the cabin heat OFF while the TKS system was in use and later; after the TKS system had been turned OFF; until the prop slinger supply lines had sufficiently drained down in flight supports my position. This episode is a reminder of the necessity for pilots to have available and; when needed; to use supplemental O2 any time that the TKS system is used in flight when the Cabin Heat/Defrost is also used. This action will minimize the potential for pilot physical symptoms and/or possible mental impairment. As of yet there is no effective way to prevent TKS fumes from entering the cockpit under this and similar flight in icing scenarios.




Synopsis: Cessna Caravan pilot reported TKS fumes in the cockpit inhibiting the use of the cabin heater unless the oxygen mask is used.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: wind gusts; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Ground Excursion Runway; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On landing; wind gust blew plane off [centerline]; Added full power for go-around and plane continued to turn from the runway. All airspeed lost and plane dropped (maybe 5-10 feet). One landing gear sheared off and plane went into grass to south of runway and other landing gear and wing broke. Pilot some minor scratches. Passenger no injury. Walked away from the plane.




Synopsis: Small aircraft pilot reported the aircraft was damaged after a hard landing incident.
Date: 202102
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Icing; 4
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 35
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Engineer
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: While flying from ZZZ to ZZZ1 I experienced light rhyme icing at 6;000 ft.; -10C about 125 miles SE of ZZZ2. I could see the sun above and tried to climb above the deck to get above it. I went up to 11;000 ft.; -20C; but was still IMC and now picking up Rhyme. I descended back to 6;000 ft. and it got worse. I descending to 4;000 ft.; -10C; and now had about 1.5 inches of ice on all leading edges and the wind screen. ATC recommended several airports 20 miles off my nose; but these were smaller airports; shorter runways; and no ATC. I elected to fly 65 miles west to ZZZ2 due to longer runway; ATC; and ground support (including emergency vehicles). I never [advised ATC]; but I began to lose power and had a difficult time maintaining 4;000 ft.; ZZZ2 Approach provided priority handling for me and I was unaware. I flew the ILS to Runway XX (VFR conditions) because I could not see out my wind screen. I carried an extra 30 kts. on final and delayed lowering the landing gear until 1 nm landing with approach flaps only. I was able to land safely but had to flare out the side windows. ZZZ2 approach and tower were outstanding. My flight planning showed I'd be well west of the forecast icing; but several aircraft were reporting icing in my area from 6-10;000 ft. I landed without incident; terminated the priority handling; and had no damage to aircraft.




Synopsis: Pilot flying V35B aircraft reports icing inflight.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: IAH.Tower, TX
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B IAH
ATC / advisory: Tower IAH
Second aircraft: Heavy Transport
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Climbing out; Flight Attendant called at approximately 3;000 feet and reported a metallic sound hit the aircraft on takeoff and climbout. The takeoff itself was uneventful from the flight deck and no threat posed by the attitude at rotation; etc. However; we departed behind a heavy aircraft and once airborne experienced a lateral shifting of the aircraft in wake vortices; which may have shifted cargo. Flight control and flight response were normal throughout the flight as was systems integrity. I mentioned the Flight Attendant report to Departure Control; so that they might warn the Tower for a possible FOD inspection of the runway. Once at destination; a walk around was performed and there were no issues with the aircraft; no damage whatsoever.




Synopsis: B777 Captain reported encountering wake turbulence behind a Heavy aircraft during departure from IAH airport.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MCO.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: Mixed
Aircraft: Medium Transport; High Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B MCO
ATC / advisory: TRACON MCO
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airport; Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I am a Part 121 Captain on a RNAV equipped twin turboprop aircraft. Recently our departure clearance has changed to the Citrus 1 Departure. This is a vectored departure with an assigned altitude of 2;000 feet. When taking off Runway 36R with ZZZ as our destination; we are assigned a 270 heading. We are kept at 2;000 feet for at least 10 miles in most cases (I am told because of a VFR corridor). This now forces us below the Class B airspace. Many times we are also vectored over Disney World at 2;000 feet. Eventually we are allowed to climb and then are given direct FSHUN waypoint.I was told that because of an agreement between MCO and the TRACON; we are not allowed to do any RNAV departures because we are a 'prop'. There is a FSHUN 2 RNAV departure that is for both jets and turboprops; according to the chart. I've even requested a higher initial altitude but that isn't allowed either. I was told by MCO clearance delivery that this is the safest option.How can this be safe? A Part 121 Air Carrier being held below Class B airspace at least 200 knots; so that GA aircraft can pass overhead on a VFR corridor in an extremely GA heavy area.




Synopsis: Captain reported the MCO Citrus 1 Departure puts them below the Class B airspace and into heavy GA traffic environment.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZLA
ATC / advisory: Center ZLA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: On a very late night flight to LAX from the East coast; we were given a STAR change from the SEAVU 2 arrival to the REDEYE 2 arrival by LA center. The clearance was direct KONZL then descend via the REDEYE 2. We changed the STAR and arrival runway in the FMS and re-briefed our arrival. Upon reviewing the Jeppesen chart for the REDEYE2 we determined that the 'bottom altitude' (i.e.; the altitude to set in the autopilot mode control panel window) should be 10;000. I reviewed the chart multiple times and agreed that at or above 10;000 at the waypoint DOWNE was the last published altitude restriction.Later in the descent I noticed we made a mistake and the bottom altitude is actually 8;000 not 10;000. I discovered this error when I reviewed the Jeppesen chart once again on my EFB and noticed that there was a small box with a long arrow separated from the box labeling a waypoint (SANTA MONICA VOR).  This small box only has 'At 8000'' in it and is located far away from the waypoint and far away from the label of the waypoint.  Most of the altitudes are located right under the label of the waypoint.  There is no apparent reason that Jeppesen had to locate the 8000 label away from the waypoint label.  And in so doing they nearly caused us to set in the wrong altitude and have an altitude deviation.  If I had not caught our error when I did then we would have leveled at 10;000 and not made SANTA MONICA at 8;000.The government chart seems to locate every altitude constraint under the waypoint label in a way that is easier to see (https://skyvector.com/files/tpp/1512/pdf/00237REDEYE.PDF ). I would recommend that Jeppesen change its chart design to do the same to prevent other crews from making this mistake.This mistake has been made before as shown in the NASA ASRS database:   #589145 from 2003 'Apch also told us that a lot of crews fail to cross SMO VOR at 8000 ft.'




Synopsis: Flight crew received a late runway and arrival change to LAX. When they programed the new data into their flight computers they experienced difficulty determining the final published altitude. They attributed this difficulty to a design flaw in the way altitude restrictions were depicted on the chart.
Date: 201410
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ATL.Airport, GA
Flight conditions: Marginal
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ATL
ATC / advisory: Tower ATL
Second aircraft: MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Cleared for takeoff on 26L after MD-80 took off. Appeared to be MRS (Min radar separation) about 2.5 miles between us and aircraft ahead of us. We RNAV to MPASS; approximately 300 feet agl Captain (CA) was flying pilot got 20 degree bank to the left on the aircraft with some pretty good turbulence. The feel of the aircraft confirmed we encountered wake turbulence from the MD-80. At around 1000 feet to 2000 feet agl experienced more wake turbulence resulting in a 20 degree bank roll. CA was still flying the airplane and was able to correct to initial position again. First Officer pilot monitoring told Atlanta tower about the event. He informed us he would notify his supervisor. Aircraft entered into two uncommand 20 degree bank rolls. One at a very low altitude. With new re-cat of wake turbulence this has a cause for concern at low altitude.




Synopsis: CRJ-200 First Officer reported wake encounter departing ATL in trail of an MD-80 that resulted in two low altitude 20-degree rolls.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Gulfstream IV / G350 / G450
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
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: We were taxiing into the [FBO] ramp in LAX. The marshaller was instructing us to park on the north side of the ramp usually reserved for larger commercial aircraft. We were just south of the zipper line for autos in a non-movement area when the airplane stopped. The marshaller continued to tell us to move forward; but we were unable. At this time we heard on Ground Control frequency that the asphalt had failed under our right main. We shut down the aircraft and came out to find the tire had sunk approximately 6 inches through the asphalt. There was no damage to the aircraft.I think the only way to avoid this scenario would have been if we parked in a different location.




Synopsis: G-IV FO reported the asphalt ramp pavement at a LAX FBO failed under his right main gear; making further taxi impossible.
Date: 201904
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SBP.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 152
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D SBP
ATC / advisory: Tower SBP
Second aircraft: Cessna Twin Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Student
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I am a student pilot and was doing touch and go practice. I had done my first touch and go of the day. I made my crosswind turn roughly .5 NM past the threshold of Runway 11 at 700 feet. I continued a climb to 1;000 to 1;100 feet and made my turn downwind. Seconds into the downwind turn a twin-engine Cessna cut up and across the nose of my plane with an estimated miss distance of 10 to 20 feet. I flew through the wake turbulence/prop wash of the twin-engine seconds later when I entered the air where the twin-engine had been. The twin-engine continued its ascent up and out of the airspace. After the near midair collision no calls came from the Tower; the twin-engine; nor myself. I was given clearance for my next touch and go shortly after. No corrective action was taken by myself due to the lack of time to react to the NMAC. I was not informed of the traffic or any actions to take nor do I remember the twin-engine having been given information on my location. I believe that this contributed to the incident and if information of this type had been given alongside preventative actions; such as an extended upwind for either aircraft involved; this incident could have been avoided. I believe it was unrealistic for ATC to assume both aircraft would spot each other with no advisory given the short timeline of events and close proximity.

Callback: Reporter stated no traffic information relayed to them or other aircraft before or after the NMAC. Reporter was a new student pilot and did not want to say anything to the Tower.



Synopsis: C152 student pilot reported a NMAC with a light twin during climbout from a touch and go.
Date: 201810
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
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: Routine Inspection
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: With the requirements for HAZMAT to be loaded with 15 bags surrounding the load; aircraft doorways can become crowded for loading and offloading of cargo. [With the configuration of company] B757 AC; fifteen bags around a package are all loaded in Pit 2; the doorway; limiting the space for employees to maneuver.  Pit 1; forward of the door; was empty in this load plan. This loading configuration is unnecessarily dangerous for the potential for falls during the loading and unloading process. During the loading of an aircraft an employee is required to be inside the cargo hold of the aircraft.This loading practice of baggage right to the door has become a common practice in the industry today.




Synopsis: Ramp Supervisor reported the requirement of 15 bags surrounding HAZMAT shipment creates a hazardous situation during loading/unloading of cargo.