elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201309
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LKP.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: UNICOM LKP
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Object; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After a normal approach and landing; the aircraft suddenly veered left across the runway. I momentarily recovered control of the aircraft again and again it suddenly veered to the left off the runway. I was unable to recover control of the aircraft back onto the runway. The aircraft struck a taxi identifier sign and a taxi light. The aircraft received some minor damage to the left wing and the propeller.Since a glider service was towing gliders aloft from that runway and other aircraft were landing/departing that same runway; I assumed this runway would be the active runway for the airport. A windsock is located on the terminal building and showed a minimal crosswind at the airport. After the incident the pilot and passenger could feel no crosswind after disembarking from the aircraft. At the time; we were told that an aircraft had landed minutes before and had a similar runway incident.I would appear that a gust of wind off nearby hills caused my aircraft and others to be pushed left across Runway 32. It would probably help others; in the future; to have a windsock located near the touchdown point of Runway 32.




Synopsis: General aviation pilot reports losing control during landing roll and departing the runway; possibly due to an undetected crosswind.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning Distribution System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Around 1;500 feet AGL on arrival into ZZZ; a very strong odor filled the flight deck (and later found out it filled the forward galley and cabin). It was close to unbearable--a strong burning plastic smell. After touchdown and roll out; we received an ECAM for the ventilation system blower fault. We accomplished the ECAM actions; called the FAs to ask about the status of the cabin; and other SOPs--and taxied to the gate. Upon arrival; we opened the flight deck window. As the CA; I grabbed the logbook and called the duty chief. I was unable to get through. I then called Dispatch and got patched with [Maintenance Control]. [Maintenance Control] was helpful in confirming the two together. He stated that it is a terribly strong plastic odor. He was extremely helpful through the night. He stated this could take quite some time to clear the cabin and flight deck. We wrote up the fault and fumes. We filed the fume form. After several hours the fumes were still present. We eventually agreed to depart close to XA:00 pm local time. Unknown as to why the blower faulted. Unknown whether there were any indications that this blower was on its last leg.




Synopsis: A319 Captain reported a strong 'plastic burning' odor during arrival. In-flight Maintenance Control guidance significantly improved the air quality.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 150
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Reporter is a new pilot with no previous canyon flying experience and had not been warned during training about analyzing a canyon prior to entry. Reporter described the climbing maneuver used in an attempt to exit the rising terrain; and how he had no airspeed left for the last 20-30 feet prior to the rim. He instead stalled a few feet above a snow covered sloped field and was able to walk out of the situation. The only damage during landing was a bent propeller blade. However; the fuselage was damaged during the attempted recovery with a helicopter and sling.

Callback: Reporter is a new pilot with no previous canyon flying experience; and had not been warned during training about analyzing a canyon prior to entry. Reporter described the climbing maneuver sloped field and was able to walk out of the situation. The only damage during landinused in an attempt to exit the rising terrain; and how he had no airspeed left for the last 20-30 feet prior to the rim. He instead stalled a few feet above a snow covered g was a bent propeller blade; however the fuselage was damaged during the attempted recover with a helicopter and sling.



Synopsis: The pilot of a C150 reported entering a canyon that did not provide an escape route; and resulted in an off-field landing just short of the canyon rim.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Sport Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Nose Gear
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action; General Police / Security Involved
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After completing a local sightseeing flight in my Paradise P-1 (PAR1) on a beautiful clear day; I returned to my home airport for one touch n go and then a planned full stop. I made a very good stable approach with the aircraft properly configured; airspeed correct over the threshold; and aligned with the runway centerline. I made a normal flare and I sensed that the aircraft had touched down on the main gear first. When the nose came down the nose strut collapsed; the prop hit the pavement and I slid about 100 feet. I immediately shut everything off including fuel flow and called on the CTAF for assistance to remove the airplane from the runway. There were NO injuries; NO fuel leaks and NO damage to airport property. It was an unfortunate incident as describe in 49 CFR Part 830. However; several people near the runway had seen the incident and called 911. Soon police and firetrucks responded. I refused medical examination but the bureaucracy ball had been in motion. When the police were notified that there was a disabled aircraft on the runway; they immediately notified Center and the NTSB! The airport manager issued a runway closed NOTAM for several hours. The police would not let us move the airplane until they heard back from the NTSB that it was OK to move it. I told them over and over it was an incident and did not need to be reported; but they had already notified NTSB. I finally talked to an FAA Representative and got permission from him to move the airplane to my hangar for insurance assessment and hopefully repairs and return to service.This was an unfortunate incident of possible material failure of the nose gear strut causing the nose landing gear to collapse. NO injuries to personnel; NO damage to airport property and NO fuel leaks. Just embarrassment and frustration at the way it was handled by local authorities with a report to the NTSB.




Synopsis: A Paradise P-1 pilot reported that after a stabilized approach and normal main wheel landing; the nose strut collapsed when he lowered it onto the runway.
Date: 201504
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Powerplant Fire Extinguishing
Component problem: Design; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure; MEL
Primary problem: MEL

Narrative: I was told that the 'O' ring was non-deferrable and the purpose was to keep the Fire Handle secured in the stowed position in the event of turbulence.  So I'm filling out a report to find out if that is the case as I question the deferral.  To be corrected in 6;000 Flight Hours (FH) seems excessive if the purpose is to keep the handle stowed.   The engine will shut down if that handle falls.  This is the second aircraft I found with a damaged 'O' ring in the last three weeks.During the flight from ZZZ I scanned the Overhead panel.  I noticed the rubber 'O' ring on the Fire Extinguisher handle was broken- missing a chunk of it. I wrote it up.  Maintenance Control deferred it under an Administrative MEL.  The Corrective Action was that they removed the remaining damaged 'O' ring. That rubber 'O' ring supposedly helps keep the fire extinguisher handle stowed. The engine will shut down if it falls. That 'O' ring should not be deferrable if that's the case.




Synopsis: A Captain questions Maintenance Control's long term MEL administrative deferral of a damaged and removed O-Ring used on EMB-145 aircraft Engine Fire Extinguishing 'T' handles. The O-Rings secure the overhead fire handles in the stowed position during possible turbulence. The pilot notes the engine will shut down if the fire handle falls from the stowed position.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: Cloudy; 10
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Baron 55/Cochise
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Reciprocating Engine Assembly
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon climb out; I contacted ATC and received Squawk code and clearance at approximately 2;000 feet MSL. Was given direct ZZZ intersection and approved for climb to 8;000 feet MSL. Upon reaching 5;000 feet MSL I attempted to lean the mixtures. Left engine responded appropriately; Right engine did not lean. At 6;000 feet MSL I asked ATC for 6;000 feet to investigate engine issue; which was granted. Immediately following approval for 6;000 feet Right engine lost power. I asked for vectors for nearest airport. I was given heading for ZZZ. I momentarily became disoriented; informed ATC that I needed to stabilize the aircraft. I was able to stabilize aircraft shortly thereafter. I then requested vector to ZZZ and was given appropriate heading; runway length; and airport conditions. While descending from 6;000 feet I attempted engine restart without success. I then feathered and secured the right engine. I broke out of the bases around 2;000 feet MSL approximately 5 miles from airport. I advised ATC that I had the airport and runway in sight. ATC asked me to call when I was on the ground; which I did through Flight Service. I stayed on the line while the briefer spoke with ATC. Briefer indicated that ATC had no additional questions for me at that time. The aircraft was secured in a hangar at the local FBO. Aircraft is currently being inspected by a mechanic.




Synopsis: BE55 pilot experiences an engine failure at 6;000 feet during climb. Vectors to a suitable airport are requested and a restart is attempted during descent unsuccessfully. A single engine landing ensues.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise; Descent; Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
Component problem: Malfunctioning
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: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: The entire crew noticed a musty/moldy/melted crayon smell. It was present in the entire cabin; and flight deck. The smell was present on climb out; and descent. The odor seemed to become apparent in the flight deck before the cabin. On descent; I deselected the number 1 pack; and the odor seemed to weaken substantially. I feel confident in saying that the odor was emanating from the environmental system. I wrote it up as a persistent level 1 occurrence.




Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported a 'musty/moldy/melted crayon' fume event during flight. Flight crew deselected number 1 pack which weakened the odor.
Date: 201601
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Aircraft: SR22
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: PFD
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Just before liftoff avionics started giving me false information. At approximately 500 feet had avionics failure in moderate to heavy turbulence. Avionics showed aircraft at a different heading than what I saw visually. While working a solution PFD went solid red. Tower informed me I was headed in the wrong direction and not on runway heading. Tower told me to correct and switched me to departure. Departure gave me a new heading and told me I was over my assigned 3000 feet altitude and to correct.I told ATC I was in heavy turbulence and was getting it corrected. ATC took me up to 5000 feet over the clouds. Turbulence stopped and avionics came back on. ATC asked me what my assigned altitude was. I told him it was 3000 feet but I had lost avionics on takeoff and was trying to get the plane altitude and heading corrected. He asked me if everything was working now and I told him yes it was. The flight continued with no more issues. The plane went to avionics repair as soon as we landed. Avionics shop confirmed that they could see the failure but could not duplicate it and did not know why it happened.




Synopsis: SR22 pilot reported on an intermittent avionics problem and a PFD failure.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LAS.Airport, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Balloon
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: TRACON L30
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Lighter-Than-Air; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Made street landing in residential west side area. Complaint from home owner because he believes I didn't know what I was doing; even though I have over 40 years of experience. I said nothing to the home owner because that would have made his rage worse. We packed the balloon in 5 minutes and promised we would never return. Weather was too calm which prevented us from going farther to open dirt area. This resident must have had a bad night at the casino.




Synopsis: A balloon pilot reported having to land on a residential street due to inability to safely continue to an open area.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: After our touch and go; we were told to extend upwind for spacing and our crosswind would be called. Tower called our crosswind over point defiance. The student and I were mid field downwind; right close traffic for Runway XX in ZZZ. The student and I were in the middle of our before landing checklist when we noticed another plane on what looked like a crosswind flying directly at us. We banked left away from traffic and descended; but still continued to fly the pattern. I was not sure if they were closed traffic of just east bound departure. The other traffic continued to fly pattern as well but they were a couple hundred feet above us. I believe Tower became over saturated with aircraft and forgot about us or vice versa. At this point Tower had me perform a left 360 which placed me closer to the other aircraft followed by a right 360 over the approach end of Runway XX. Once spacing was obtained we were both told to land but no number was given to us to contact. This occurrence was not due to pilot error. I spoke with the other pilot and she agrees. Both PIC (Pilot in Command) in each plane were CFI and I believe that helped the situation.




Synopsis: C172 flight instructor reported taking evasive action to avoid another aircraft while in the VFR pattern and talking to Tower. A subsequent ATC instruction placed the reporter closer to the other aircraft.
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ICT.Airport, KS
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C ICT
ATC / advisory: Tower ICT
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Completed practice aerial maneuvers with student in Wichita west practice area. [I] announced intention to return to ICT for landings to Wichita Approach. [I] understood Approach's instruction to enter left base for Runway 01R. [I] flew ground track for left base to Runway 01R which resulted in slight crossing Runway 01L south end of runway. Approach advised us to contact Tower. We announced to Tower on initial contact 'Wichita approach; Cessna X; left base for one right.' Understood Tower instruction to be 'Cessna X; Runway 01R; cleared for the option.' [I] continued ground track for left base to Runway 01R; subsequently turning final. Onboard TIS provided traffic alert; 600 FT below and closing. [I] sighted traffic; T-6; passing directly underneath us; coming slightly in front. Closest miss distance estimated at 400 FT. Tower questioned 'Cessna X; are you lining up for one right or one left?' [I] responded 'Cessna X we're lining up for one right.' Tower advised 'Cessna X go-around begin left turn.' [I] responded 'Cessna X turning left; traffic in sight.' It appeared as though Tower's intention and understanding was a landing on Runway 01L; while my intention and understanding was a landing on Runway 01R.




Synopsis: C172 Instructor pilot reports being told by ICT Tower to enter a left base for Runway 1R. On final TIS indicates traffic overtaking from below and Tower issues a go-around to the C172. ATC believed they had issued a clearance to land on Runway 1L to the C172.