elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 0601-1200
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: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Propeller Blade
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were doing our run ups before take off along side Runway 29 outside the markers and lost track of their location. The damage done to the prop was only one blade tip and I was able to fly back to my airport. Lowering the markers or having a designated run up area might have helped.




Synopsis: PA-28 pilot reported that during engine runup; propeller struck a runway marker; resulting in damage to one blade.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Approximately 30 minutes after takeoff; the #1 Flight Attendant called me to notify me that the passenger with the seat assignment XX had a portable oxygen generator. None of us knew this until then. The Flight Attendant checked that the passenger had enough batteries to last for the flight. I also instructed him to check if the device was approved for inflight; which it was. I have no idea if the gate agent forgot to tell us about the oxygen generator or if the passenger smuggled it in. But this is not the first time this has happened to me. With more and more handicapped passengers traveling it would be a good time to remind the gate agents to be vigilant and notify the crew about oxygen generators and lithium batteries in the cabin.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported undocumented Hazmat transported by passenger carrying a portable oxygen generator. Gate Agent did not notify flight or cabin crew before gate departure. Flight crew was not provided NOTOC prior to pushback.
Date: 201402
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Icing; .5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb; Descent; Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ZZZ; Class D ZZZ; Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ; Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Aerofoil Ice System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Weather
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During takeoff we received an ANTI-ICE DUCT WARNING MSG. We continued the takeoff; finished the Climb Check Checklist. Captain ran the QRH while the First Officer was pilot flying and handling the radios. First Officer called Dispatch and Maintenance Control to inform them of the situation. We were directed by Dispatch to continue to our filed destination due to weather at other airports. Captain finished the QRH and requested an altitude of 14;000 feet to get out of icing. We were able to turn off the Wing Anti-ice and keep the Cowl Anti-ice on. While descending into our destination we received and ICE DETECT MSG and turned on the Wing Anti-ice switch to STBY. The Wing Anti-ice was heating the right wing on and off during the approach phase. Captain decided for safety to declare an emergency. We were given a clearance for the ILS. We never picked up any ice during the approach phase and landing phase of flight. QRH directed us to land with flaps 20 and flaps OVRD button on. Once we decided to declare the emergency; we didn't have enough time to notify the Flight Attendant due to the workload and flight conditions. We landed safely; told ATC to secure the Fire Rescue Equipment and taxied safely to our gate. Wrote up the discrepancy in our Maintenance Log and contacted Maintenance again to confirm the discrepancy.




Synopsis: A CRJ-200 ANTI-ICE DUCT WARNING MSG alerted during takeoff which was continued; but after completing the QRH; Dispatch directed that the flight continue to the filed destination with Wing Anti-ice OFF. During descent an ICE DETECT MSG alerted so the Wing Anti-ice was turned ON and emergency declared while the flight landed uneventfully.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BKV.Tower, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D BKV
ATC / advisory: Tower BKV
Second aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Recip Eng
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Tower cleared us for a midfield left downwind for a touch and go on Runway 09. After turning on the downwind; we were cleared to land without any traffic warning. After established in stable conditions on short final; I looked out front and realized there was an aircraft on about a 200 ft low approach. We were way too close to them. I asked Tower if we were still cleared to land and the response I received was lackadaisical. He told us 'ummm yes you are.' I chose to go around with a left side step to avoid getting any closer to the aircraft on final. The rest of the flight was uneventful.




Synopsis: Flight instructor reported taking evasive action because of ATC's failure to separate BKV pattern traffic which resulted in NMAC.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; 25
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Baron 55/Cochise
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During GPS 24 practice approach the flying pilot lost situational awareness and started to descend rapidly thinking he was at the descent point. At first I thought he had a change of plan and was planning to land at a nearby airport. After a confusing conversation with ATC I realized he did not know where he was. At that point I took control of the aircraft and started a climb. Due to the confusion in the cockpit and windshear we got lower than I liked; about 500 FT AGL. A more complete briefing on the approach could have prevented this.




Synopsis: Instructor pilot; flying as a safety pilot in a BE55; describes a loss of situational awareness by the pilot flying and an attempt to descend to minimums early. The reporter assumes control and returns to a safe altitude.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-900
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing; Initial Approach; Descent; Takeoff / Launch; Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Rotten egg smell in aft galley during taxi; takeoff; descent; and landing. Only in aft galley.




Synopsis: B737-900 Flight Attendant reported a 'rotten egg smell' during takeoff and landing. Odor was localized in aft galley.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CCO.Airport, GA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: DA42 Twin Star
Operator: Other Training
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class G X
Second aircraft: Vans Aircraft Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: It was a training flight with a student. We finished run-up and taxied to the hold short line of Runway 14 on [Taxiway] B1. Runway 32 was in use so we scanned for potential traffic. The only traffic was Aircraft Y midfield downwind. I instructed the student to cross from [Taxiway] B1 to A1 on the departure end of Runway 32; on the ground. The student made the radio call and we began to cross. Suddenly we heard radio calls coming from Aircraft Y who was suddenly on final at about 600 ft. AGL. We were surprised because this plane had not been making radio calls except to announce he was on downwind. The student froze with confusion. At this point we were already on the runway so instructed the student to hurry and finish crossing the runway to get out of the way of Aircraft Y. Aircraft Y was then at 400 ft. AGL and continued to yell at us. Aircraft Y went around and everything was fine.I think this could've been avoided if Aircraft Y had made better/ more frequent radios call; if he had flown a normal traffic pattern; or if he had announced he was making a short approach. We would not have entered the runway if we knew a plane was on base or final.




Synopsis: Flight instructor reported entering a runway while another aircraft was on final; resulting in a ground conflict and a go-around.
Date: 202011
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Workload
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While taxiing out to Runway XR at ZZZ I might have failed to hold short at the hold short line. The FO and I recognized the error at the same time. He yelled stop as I hit the brakes. Looking out at the line; it was difficult to tell if the nose of the aircraft had crossed over the line. The Tower was informed immediately. The Tower then cleared us for takeoff. No other issues. Both the FO and I had reviewed the bulletin for ZZZ about this problem and it still may have bitten us.  Other issues that may have affected our situational awareness was a last minute weight and balance issue that required us to stop on the taxiway to move passengers and get our numbers. Another issue is that I and the FO are starting to fly again after three months. It is taking time to re-acclimate to line operations. Even being aware of this and taking our time to get it done right; we may have still gotten bit by the error.


Second narrative: Approaching Runway XR hold line Captain began to apply brakes; so I thought he was coming to a stop. I looked down to bring up the legs page on my FMC and when I looked up again it was apparent he was not going to stop short of the hold line. I told him to stop and he brought the plane to an immediate stop. We had crossed the line by a few feet. Captain told the Tower we may have crossed the hold line and they asked if we could take an immediate takeoff; we said yes and proceeded to takeoff on XR without incident.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported a runway incursion.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: FSD.Airport, SD
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Helicopter
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Ambulance
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E FSD
ATC / advisory: TRACON FSD
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: While in cruise profile approximately 5NM N-NE of FSD; crew identified a blue & red drone passing by the right side of the aircraft. Aircraft Radar Altimeter was indicating 1100 [AGL]. Drone passed within [estimated] 200 feet of the aircraft at the same altitude. No previous recognition of the drone and no evasive action was initiated.  Event reported to FSD TRACON and subsequent followup with FSD ATCT personnel. No further information available to the crew.




Synopsis: Helicopter pilot reported a NMAC with drone.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZOB.ARTCC, OH
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZOB
ATC / advisory: Center ZOB
Aircraft component: Radio Altimeter
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During the initial descent into BUF approximately 100 miles west of the field at FL290 the radio altimeter briefly gave an erroneous indication of 300-400 ft. lasting 2-3 seconds. After a conversation with the Captain we both thought this was due to the 5G interference given that the RA had not shown any other signs of malfunction and the incident did not re-occur. We made a report to ATC so that they could file it and other pilots in the area could be made aware. Because we did not believe this was an aircraft Maintenance issue we did not consider a Maintenance write up in BUF. The flight continued and landed without further irregularity. If the 5G interference had not been such a recent point of issue and discussion within the industry we would have more than likely concluded that there was an issue with the RA and written it up at BUF; but with 5G in the forefront of our minds we assumed that it was to blame. In hindsight as pilots we are not qualified to determine what is and what is not 5G interference and should have written it up; if even only as a precaution. We had no intention of hiding a Maintenance discrepancy and of course in the moment if we had thought the airplane needed Maintenance we would have taken proper action. Going forward I will ensure that all erroneous RA indication are brought to the attention of Maintenance regardless of the situation.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported that during initial descent the radio altimeter displayed erroneous indications. Reporter stated they did not complete a maintenance write up because they believed the event was due to 5G interference.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Police / Security Involved
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: This was a [long] cross country flight [with] an overnight stay planned [near the midpoint] at airport ZZZ. I was PIC flying right seat and my brother; a post solo student pilot; was at the controls in the left seat. About 3.5 hours into the flight and approximately 30 miles short of a planned fuel stop at airport ZZZ1; the engine lost power and did not restart on subsequent attempts. With the help of my co-pilot brother; we identified and then I landed on a gravel road. The airplane was not damaged and both occupants uninjured. Inspection of the fuel tanks revealed no fuel. Cell phone calls to the County Sherriff's office resulted in a deputy bringing auto gas (plane has STC for 87 unleaded) and we fueled the plane and made it safely to ZZZ1. We stayed overnight and proceeded to our final destination the next day without further incident. Cause of error was my failure during preflight to question the dipstick readings which indicated less fuel than I normally expected after a 'top off'. I have learned a hard lesson rather cheaply and I will never again let 'get there itis' override sound judgement. I hope this could be a valuable cautionary tale for others as I thought something like this could only happen to other pilots. I owe a debt of gratitude to my commercial flight instructor for helping me to develop the skills that saved our lives. Another deserving of mention was an aviation mechanic who went over the aircraft and enhanced the safety of our continuation.




Synopsis: A general aviation pilot reported having to make a forced landing on a public road; due to fuel starvation resulting from inadequate preflight planning. No injuries or aircraft damage was reported.
Date: 202006
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: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Other Arrival Unload
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Per build up team at the company cargo warehouse; they received a PMC [large pallet] containing 2 boxes of non DG (dangerous goods); 6 boxes of excepted quantities and 131 total individual boxes of dangerous goods in limited quantities (totaling 139 boxes) was loaded on board the aircraft in one LD7 in one compartment in ZZZ over-exceeding pit limit for DG.




Synopsis: Airline Ground Personnel reported Dangerous Goods quantities loaded in cargo compartment exceeded compartment Dangerous Goods limit.