elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201409
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LAS.Airport, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B LAS
ATC / advisory: TRACON L30
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On downwind to runway 25L at LAS we were cleared the visual approach. A left turn and descent was initiated toward the final approach course and while on dogleg to final a 'terrain; terrain' was issued by the GPWS.  A climb was initiated and once clear of terrain by reference to the ND the approach was resumed.


Second narrative: ATC vectored the flight off the KEPEC 3 arrival very early in the arrival procedure. Eventually the flight was given a 050 heading and descent to 6800 feet well south of the field. While on that vector; ATC cleared the flight for a visual approach to runway 25L. The flight left the last vector heading and altitude and started a series of heading changes towards the final approach course. While descending the EGPWS gave a 'caution terrain' followed almost immediately by a GPWS 'terrain; terrain.' The flight path was aggressively changed by selecting TOGA and pulling up. The warning stopped immediately and upon confirming terrain clearance on the ND; the flight leveled off and proceeded towards the final approach fix. The remainder of the approach was uneventful. While debriefing the event; the pilot monitoring stated that he did see some yellow on the ND prior to the warning. As the pilot flying; I was not aware of the yellow on the screen due to looking towards the runway while flying the visual.


Synopsis: A319 Flight Crew experiences an EGPWS terrain warning at 6;500 feet while on a night visual approach to LAS Runway 25L from southeast of the airport. An immediate climb is initiated and the approach is continued to a normal landing.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp DEN
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Equipment / Tooling; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was assigned to be the wing walker on flight. We were positioned behind the aircraft before departure time and the push tug driver motioned us to come to the push tug. He said the pilot needed about ten minutes to get the paperwork done. After only about 2 to 3 minutes the pilot was ready to go. As we started to walk back to get in position; the push tug driver started to push the aircraft. I was still in front of the wing when I heard the pop of the shear pin breaking because there was a bus driving behind the aircraft and the push tug driver hit the brakes. I was trying to motion to the bus to stop; but he didn't see me. Maintenance came out and inspected the aircraft and everything was OK.




Synopsis: Wing walker reported a B737's pushback was abruptly stopped as a bus passed behind the aircraft; the tug driver had to stopped rapidly causing the tow bar shear pin to brake. No aircraft damage.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SAN.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B SAN
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During initial contact SoCal cleared us direct to VYDDA for a LOC 27 approach in VMC conditions. At 6;000 FT ATC reported traffic above us and gave us 5;000 FT at the same time the traffic appeared on our TCAS. We then received a TCAS RA to descend followed by a climb RA. We notified ATC and cleared the conflict. We landed with no further incident. After the conflict ATC apologized and informed us the traffic had been instructed to maintain an altitude above us.


Second narrative: SoCal approach cleared us...to descend from 6;000 to 5;000 and to expedite descent for traffic at 12 o'clock descending to 500 FT above our altitude....when we visually acquired the traffic that was descending and it appeared to be a Cessna. TCAS reported the traffic at 200 FT above our altitude and descending and was soon followed by an RA to descend. As I watched the aircraft descend through our altitude in what appeared to be a diving or spin maneuver; the RA changed to a climb command. While complying with the RA; the pilot flying turned left approximately 20 degrees to avoid the aircraft descending through our altitude....ATC also reported that it was a common sky diving aircraft.


Synopsis: An A319 flight in descent with SOCAL Approach responded to a TCAS RA generated by another aircraft who failed to comply with its clearance to maintain a higher altitude.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: UGN.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Recip Eng
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D UGN
ATC / advisory: Tower UGN
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was on an IFR flight to UGN. Chicago Center had handed me to the Tower at UGN. I was cleared for the visual approach to Runway 5; directed to report midfield left downwind for Runway 5. My TCAS alerted me to traffic; both audible and visual; and I then saw a single engine out the right side; approximately 300 FT away at my altitude. There was no warning of the traffic. I did report that I had observed traffic; but did not report a near miss to the Tower. I reported the midfield position and was cleared to land. There was no further incident. On the ground I played back several times the Tower transmissions to listen for advisory I might have missed; but there were none given.




Synopsis: An pilot reported a near miss at 2;000 FT while in the UGN traffic pattern with no traffic alert from ATC.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
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: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airport; Weather; Procedure; Company Policy; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Initially; in the descent; ATIS was reporting winds 220 at 17 gusting to 22; or in that ballpark. Getting the ATIS was a challenge; as our ACARS was MEL'd and we had no internet connection to compute [weight and balance] on our iPads. We did calculate Runway XXL and XYC performance at Top of Descent at a moment when the internet was functioning. Despite winds right down Runway XXL; ZZZ was not using Runway XXL; instead; they were using Runway XYC. For the following; I obtained a recording of our ATC transmissions from an internet website. Upon check-in with Approach; I said; 'We'd like XXL; I mean we can do a circle if we need.' The Controller advised that he'd check with the boss who makes that decision; or something to that effect. A minute later; the Controller said that there was too much traffic; they were using Runway XYC; and the boss 'didn't feel comfortable issuing circle-to-lands on XXL.' This is not their decision to make. Runway XXL was open; the winds were reported right down the runway; and I'm sorry that he didn't 'feel comfortable!' Low to the ground; I tuned the ATIS in radio #2; and it reported winds out of 220 gusting to 22; but variable between 180 and 270; or something like that. This told me to expect a tailwind on Runway XYC. We landed Runway XYC; using maximum braking; and our G/S readout showed a direct tailwind of 7 knots on touchdown. The wind arrow was right at our back! Upon clearing the runway; I told the Tower; 'That's a 7-knot tailwind on XYC.' The Controller said; 'Thank you;' but I have no idea if he passed that information to the stream of landing aircraft behind us.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported their request to use a runway better aligned with the wind rather than the runway in use for other traffic was denied.
Date: 201709
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Autopilot
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During descent on arrival. ATC became very backlogged and gave us a late descent from FL380 to FL350 putting us about 1000 ft high on profile. We had to ask for further descent below FL350 to stay on profile. We were switched to the next sector and given descent to FL240. The FO (First Officer) was flying and used speed brakes to get us on path again. We both recognized that the FO's VNAV path indicator showed on path and my indicator showed us 1000 ft high on profile; both FMAs (Flight Mode Annunciators) showed PATH and usually if the aircraft is off of path more than 400 ft the FMA with show VNAV speed and neither one did this. We were again given a late descent out of FL240 to descend via the arrival. When the FO set 6000 ft in the altitude window he pushed the altitude knob to start the descent and again had to use speed brakes to get down on profile. This time when joining the profile the FMAs and Path indicators all were correct however the aircraft descent rate shallowed out to 1000 fpm and the throttles kept advancing toward a higher setting even though the speed was approx 295 knots. The FO first mentioned that he thought the plane would be high on the ZZZZZ crossing. FO selected FLCH (Flight Level Change) and when he did; the magenta path indicator showed we were 5000 ft high and the throttles kept advancing. FO selected a lower form of automation and attempted to make the restriction. We were about 400 ft high at ZZZZZ and we stopped the descent at about 9700 ft to continue slowing from 275 knots to 250. The remainder of the flight the FO used FLCH and shut off autothrottles to control the continual advancing of the throttles beyond the commanded speed. After landing I made a very detailed write up concerning the VNAV anomalies.




Synopsis: B757 Captain reported that during descent the aircraft would not respond to automated inputs to stay on profile.
Date: 202109
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small UAS (At or above 0.55 lbs and less than 55 lbs)
Operator: Commercial Operator (UAS)
Operating under: Part 107
Flight plan: None
Mission: Photo Shoot / Video
Flight phase: Climb
Reporter organization: Commercial Operator (UAS)
Reporter function: Person Manipulating Controls (UAS); Remote PIC (UAS)
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Remote Pilot (UAS)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person UAS Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While shooting drone footage of the street construction; I accidentally hit a cable line while piloting the small UAS. I was flying the drone along with a required [Visual Observer]; in a closed off portion of the street that remains blocked from vehicular traffic due to past construction activity. This area was not an active construction zone at the time of the incident. From both of our perspectives; it looked as though I was clear to safely rise the drone; however as the drone went up; the back end of the drone hit a low hanging cable line. The drone immediately fell to the street directly below and two propellers were damaged as well as some of the plastic protective shell of the drone's legs; and wiring within. There was no damage to any vehicles; persons; or equipment other than the UAS.

Callback: Reporter had no additional information.



Synopsis: Two person UAS crew reported striking a wire during flight causing damage to the propellers and other components.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Nosewheel Steering
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon completion of required engine start up checklist; my student took over control and started out of [the] ramp to Runway XX. While student started to taxi aircraft to Taxiway; he told me he was having a difficulty to taxi with his left rudder with power setting at [approximately] 800 RPM. I told the student to readjust his seat to forward to allow him to proper steering the aircraft on the ground. After reaching to Taxiway; student had a very hard time to maintain taxiway center line and started to yaw to the right with power idle. I immediately took over the control and applied full left rudder pressure with left brake but it did not work well on my side either. Aircraft started to yaw off taxiway and stopped on the grass area.After this incident occurred; I was told by my student that both of us were applying full left rudder pressure to prevent aircraft steering to the grass; but it failed to respond and aircraft went straight to the grass; Prop strike hitting taxiway light.




Synopsis: C172 flight instructor reported the aircraft was uncontrollable using rudder pedal steering resulting in a prop strike.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy; Manuals
Primary problem: Manuals

Narrative: While putting the flight plan into the FMS; I received an unfamiliar DP [departure procedure] which did not appear with my selected runway. I then looked through my charts and noticed that I did not have the chart for the DP. I had received communications from the union about making sure our charts were up to date due to impending changes. I checked my file prior to beginning my trip and found only the winter ops guide. I did receive an email later around XA30 stating that a new revision was in our file (see attached). I contacted dispatch and told them we did not have current charts but that we could probably print off the changes if we had the electronic Jeppesen login information. His initial reaction was to refile us for a DP we did have; but I expressed that we would not know if those were now current or not. I proceeded to SFO operations and printed off all of the changes for our day and checked the other airports to make sure there were no changes. Some had no changes; but all of the departures in SFO changed; and all of our charts for ZZZ (where we would go later) had changed including new procedures for all the instrument approaches. We left late due to the amount of time it took me to print off all of the charts. How can we be expected to have current charts when they arrive the day before they are effective?!? I have been told previously by the chief pilots office that we are covered legally for the late charts; but being legal isn't much help if you are flying into an airport where the instrument approach procedure you need to land has changed. At my previous base; our Jepp revisions were almost always received 2 weeks before they were effective; so my recommendation would be to ship them to this base sooner. Or have Jepp send them directly . We haul around the monthly magazine all the time (which is always seemingly inserted right at the start of the month); so I would think we could haul some navigation charts around.




Synopsis: During FMC programing an Air Carrier Captain discovers that the filed SID does not exist in the FMC; nor in his chart manual. The company is contacted and it is learned that the new procedures are effective this day but were not available in base the day prior.
Date: 201709
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Engine
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: After chocking the nose gear; the jet way began moving forward. I then noticed engine number 1 still running; beacon lights off; and jet way started to move forward. Then I stopped jet way and I made sure that my wing walkers were still in position outside stopping traffic due to the fact that engine number 1 still running. At which I called control center to notify them that the engine number 1 was still running. Maintenance witnessed that the engine was still running while the beacon lights are off. They later did an engine run and discovered that the engine had issues.




Synopsis: Ramp agent reported the aircraft engine remained running after arrival at the gate; possibly associated with an engine problem.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Distraction; Communication Breakdown; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: I was relieving another controller. He was getting off position to take the CIC position. I listen to him brief. I turned up the overhead lights. Before I sat down; two aircraft were flashing. I sat down. Turned one 40 degrees right and the other 30 degrees left. My recommendations are; even though COVID is a factor of why I was distant from the sector to give both controllers room and space; I will have to get closer to see the scope to see what is going on.




Synopsis: ATC Controller reported during a position change with another controller; two aircraft entered into an airborne conflict situation. The conflict was not immediately noticed because the ATC personnel were social distancing.