elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Aircraft: Citation Excel (C560XL)
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While downwind on approach to XXL; GPS failed and Approach reported that radio was garbled and scratchy; after I called and reported loss of my primary navigational aids. I continued turning my #2 radio then the GPS (Garmin 430) came back on line. As I started the approach needles swayed back and forth then settled down. Glide slope needle centered on glide path and after a few a few seconds needle and aircraft nosed down violently at 3000 fpm. I grabbed the controls and abandoned the approach. Approach asked if I needed assistance. I stated that I had navigational problems but wanted to try again. During 2nd approach I slowed aircraft too early from 170kts as requested; because needles were less erratic; but trailing traffic was closing on me and tower told me to abandon the approach. On 3rd attempt I flew the approach manually and maintained centerline averaging the heading because localizer needle and flight director swayed left and right.




Synopsis: C560XL pilot reported GPS malfunction that caused the aircraft to pitch down violently on the approach.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While I was heads down conducting the First Officer preflight and prior to exterior inspection the Captain released the parking brake due to brake temperatures and the plane insidiously rolled back and contacted the jet bridge. Always chock the airplane when it parks regardless of weather or other factors.




Synopsis: A319 First Officer reports the Captain releasing the parking brake at the gate due to high brake temperatures. The aircraft slowly rolls into the jetway due to no chocks.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Small Transport
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After canceling IFR on a visual approach into ZZZ; we switched to CTAF and began making position reports. Center had advised us of 2-3 aircraft in our vicinity as we approached the airport. We had one aircraft in sight and were looking for the others. There were several aircraft on the CTAF and no immediate conflicts were noted until a departing aircraft was shown on the TCAS display at 12 o'clock and climbing towards our altitude followed by an automated 'traffic' callout. We could not see it immediately or infer its exact course so started a slight right turn away from the airport to avoid [it]. After several seconds I spotted the other aircraft on a converging course from the left and advised my copilot to increase descent to increase separation as he continued flying and searching out my window. It was difficult to spot due to very little relative movement and it was more difficult to spot from the copilot's seat. During the correction I saw that we were on a collision course and directed a climb/level off before taking [the] controls and beginning a more aggressive climb. My copilot spotted the aircraft immediately after the control transfer and we passed approximately 500 feet above the other plane. I had the opportunity to discuss with the crew of the other aircraft on the ground. After checking in with Center and receiving a traffic advisory; it seems they saw us before our initial ('blind') right turn and began a left turn to increase separation; then a level off to allow us to pass above. The mirrored lateral and vertical corrections contributed to the closure. Our 'blind' turn was initiated due to the TCAS return; which displayed their position and climb; but no lateral movement information. Lateral movement information may have provided better situational awareness in this case. Spotting the aircraft sooner would have also helped prevent the conflict.




Synopsis: Part 135 Captain reported a NMAC while on approach.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke; 6
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Flight was from ZZZ-ZZZ1 IFR clearance in VMC albeit some smoke.Flight was cleared to 14;000 feet then changed to 13;000 after passing 12;000. Looking directly into the sun through smoky haze I did not get it level at 13;000 and busted. ATC made no comment; perhaps due late change. No traffic in the area and no conflicts. This was the second flight in the airplane in 6 months due to COVID shutdown. I attribute this to my fault with a little help from late altitude change and general overall COVID-19 rust.




Synopsis: Corporate pilot reported an altitude deviation and cited lack of recent flying as a contributing factor.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: F11.TRACON, FL
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class C SFB
ATC / advisory: TRACON F11
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Departure; Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Workload; Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Staffing; Procedure; Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Staffing

Narrative: I was working mostly student pilots on practice approaches and practice holding.  The weather was building off the departure end of SFB departure end of the 9L & 9R. Aircraft X came from Sector K or Sector D and should have come over at 040 as per the LOA; but came over at 030. I did notice that Aircraft X was not at the correct altitude; I knew it might be an issue; but I didn't feel a sense of urgency to climb the flight to 040 and had other things going on.The majority of my attention was focused on the west side of SFB. Arrivals for ORL were entering my airspace from the north and I was flowing them southwest over the SFB final and to the D sector; which is responsible for working them into ORL.  I identified Aircraft Y climbing off of SFB and turned the aircraft north and away from the precipitation which was building to the east. When I issued the 360 heading; I did not evaluate the proximity to Aircraft X. Frankly; I had been working at a high level for a long period; but was waiting for the traffic to die down. More and more IFR releases were flashing from SFB and I was definitely getting the feeling of reaching the edge of my skill level. I did ask for the sector to be split; but by that time I had already had an error. I was under the impression that the flight schools would not be operating at full capacity because of the Coronavirus epidemic; but they were out in full force.  I should have asked for help sooner.  I should have asked for the sector to be split about 30 minutes sooner. Once the sector was split; traffic was easily manageable. Even in times of normal staffing; I feel there are never enough controllers to split sectors without running long position times.




Synopsis: F11 TRACON Controller reported a conflict after an aircraft came over at the incorrect altitude.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Windshear
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Windshear was reported; cleared for the visual approach; stable at 1000 feet; windshear warning at about 500feet. I expressed concern for the go around; Captain said 'no no; that's a caution message;' landed. I asked Captain to explain his actions. Flying into ZZZ we were told there was windshear and windshear conditions reported. The Captain was pilot flying and I was pilot monitoring. Upon being told about the conditions I put the continuous ignition on and briefed the Captain that if we get a windshear warning that we would go around and fly to the published missed approach point. Once clear for the visual the aircraft was stable at 1000 feet where I made the 1000 foot stable call out. Around 500 feet the windshear aural alarm went off with the warnings displayed on the PFD. I said 'are you not going to go around;' the Captain said 'no that's a caution' and continued to then land. Once on the ground walking through the airport I pulled the Captain aside and asked him to explain why he chose to continue to land when I thought that the indications that the plane was giving us was a warning in which we needed to execute a go around procedure. He explained his reasoning as to why he thought it was a caution that was being displayed. I expressed why I thought it was incorrect and the conversation ended. Getting back to hotel room I researched what I found to be that I was correct in the sense that the alarms and messages were for a windshear warning and we should have gone around. I could have been more assertive to make the Captain go around.




Synopsis: CRJ-700 First Officer reported that Captain failed to execute a go around after receiving a windshear alert.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: S46.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B SEA
ATC / advisory: TRACON S46
Second aircraft: Light Transport
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Training was in progress on Final. We received notification Aircraft X was a medical emergency from the southwest. I told the plan to my trainee; we would descend the Aircraft on the approach to 16R to 2100 feet to allow Aircraft X descend for the visual approach. I also instructed the trainee to vector Aircraft X through the bay for the right base. I told him to start issuing traffic for pilot applied visual separation. Aircraft X reported Aircraft Z; a B737; in sight and told to maintain visual separation from the B737; we received a confirmation from Aircraft X for pilot applied visual separation. Aircraft Y reported Aircraft X insight; was told to maintain visual separation from Aircraft X; we did not receive a confirmation. Separation was lost before pilot applied visual separation was obtained. Aircraft X was cleared for a visual approach to 16L and began a descent while crossing over the top of Aircraft Y. Aircraft Y notified us he received a RA from Aircraft X.




Synopsis: S46 TRACON Controller reported separation was lost; before pilot applied visual separation was obtained.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We took off; at high speed went passed a plastic bag blowing by; no odd indications. FA (Flight Attendant) called up at 1;000 ft saying they had a smell. We said call back if it gets worse; I checked back at 10;000 and 18;000 and smell was still in back. We elected to run smoke fume removal and we had a faint smell in front of something similar to burning plastic? At 25;000 and after consulting FAs; dispatch and [Flight Operations] we diverted to ZZZ; we used our masks and kept them on until final; air was clear for us and there never was any smoke front or back. [Medics] boarded and checked out passenger; FA's and pilots. We were fine; FAs went to hospital. We had several alternatives and elected the most conservative option that gave us time to prepare and get the appropriate services for our passengers and crew.Be ready for fogging masks and dealing with those. Having FO (First Officer) fly as we do in training works very well.


Second narrative: Right at takeoff; we smelled something uncommon. Checked lavs and ovens for fire (even though smell wasn't 100% like smoke). Informed pilots of smell and no source of smell. Smell did not disappear and continued to pour into cabin during the flight. Took oxygen. Diverted to ZZZ.Get an air quality sensor on all aircraft to fix this issue and keep crew and passengers safe.


Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain and flight attendants reported fumes and odor in the cabin causing illness.
Date: 201710
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: Ramp
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: [Air carrier] elected to swap [aircraft make and model in schedule]. We previously had a similar issue whereas the Manager refused the aircraft based on the lack of training and equipment. Unfortunately; the same swap occurred again. Station reports initial call from [Air carrier] dispatch stated the personnel were unable to handle such equipment as the station does not have trained individuals (no regular service current or past). A subsequent call was made to the ticket counter (not General Manager or Senior Regional Manager) and agent accepted the aircraft swap. Notification/escalation came to Senior Regional Manager when aircraft was in range to station. Subsequently; the staff handled the aircraft for which they were not trained.




Synopsis: Airline ramp employee reported company personnel agreed to work an unfamiliar aircraft model without appropriate training.
Date: 201904
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: RV-10
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Cylinder Head
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: 1st flight new factory Lycoming IO-540-D4A5 in RV10. Informed tower of 1st engine run & requested staying in 'D' airspace at 3;500 ft. They approved for Delta space on north side of [the airspace]. After 2 spins around circuit engine shook; smoke & oil came from cowling on pilot side. Informed tower engine quit & they cleared XXL for landing. I shut down engine and electrical to prevent possible fire & made emergency landing dead stick. Upon towing back to hangar found large hole in case above #6 cylinder destroying engine.


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


Synopsis: RV-10 pilot reported engine failure during break-in flight.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DET.Airport, MI
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground DET
Aircraft component: Pilot Seat
Component problem: Improperly Operated; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Taxiing to Hold Short line to take off runway 33 Detroit City Airport. As I approached the Hold Short line I applied brakes to stop. My seat slipped back and my feet came off the brakes. It took several seconds to get my feet back on the brakes; but I traveled about 60 to 80 feet beyond the Hold Short Line. There was no other landing or departing traffic.




Synopsis: PA28 pilot reported a runway incursion when his seat slipped back while he attempted to apply brakes approaching the hold short line.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SBN.Airport, IN
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Regional Jet CL65; Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C SBN
ATC / advisory: TRACON SBN
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were descending and being vectored toward SBN from the southwest relative to the airport. Approach Control cleared us to descend and maintain 3000 feet. Upon reaching the altitude; Approach Control asked if we can see the airport. We were approximately 12 miles southwest of the airport and had visual contact of the airport so we advised Approach Control about it. Approach Control cleared us for the visual approach for 27L. Since we were positioned on an angled left downwind of the runway; I elected to continue on the current heading and descend to 2000 feet; which is the glideslope intercept altitude for the ILS. I selected 2000 feet in the altitude preselector and initiated a 500 FPM descent. Upon reaching approximately 2500 feet; we received a 'Caution; Obstacle' EGPWS aural caution. Upon looking forward out of the window; we both saw multiple antenna in the proximity. I disconnected the autopilot and initiated a climb back to 3000 feet; flying above the antennas. Once clear of the antennas; I continued my descent and commenced the visual approach. The approach and landing were uneventful.During the arrival brief; I briefed the MSA (3000 feet) but failed to point out the highest obstacle in the area; which were the antennas we encountered. I also falsely believed ATC [had] vectored us on a course free of high elevation obstacle and omitted taking caution when approaching the airport.Always locate and brief the highest obstacle shown in the approach plate; and correlate to the potential scenarios which could become a threat during the approach. Fully understand that accepting a visual approach puts all traffic and obstacle clearance responsibility on the pilots; and not on ATC.


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


Synopsis: Regional jet flight crew reported setting off a ground proximity warning event while executing a visual approach into SBN.