elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202110
Local time of day: 0601-1200
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: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class D ZZZ; Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Reciprocating Engine Assembly
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Weather; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was conducting an introductory flight in a Cessna 172 in day VFR conditions. I felt like the sound of the power was fluctuating on the climb-out but not enough to decide if it was real or in my head. The RPM gauge had a typical gentle wiggle from turbulence. It was my first time flying this particular 172. I had flown all the others in the flight school by this point but this one. I brushed the sound off as a quirk of the particular airplane. During one phase of the flight I demonstrated to my adept intro student a stable approach descent from 7;500 ft. MSL (2;000 ft. AGL). Carburetor heat on; power reduced smoothly to 1500 RPM; and I established the stable descent at 65 kts. with 30 degrees flaps. I then recovered by about 7;300 ft. MSL by going full power and turning carburetor heat off; and changing flaps to 20 degrees. A few seconds later the engine power started waning; which I was already on alert for. I immediately turned back toward the airport. By the time I completed the westbound turn the engine started shaking and losing power. 400 RPM drops with noticeable shaking every 10 to 20 seconds. I pulled carburetor heat for 30 seconds with no appreciable increase or decrease in power. I called 3 times over Tower frequency and told them I was returning to the airport. I went mixture rich; verified primer locked and fuel selector on both. Mixture rich seemed to help. I adjusted the carburetor heat and mixture several times on the flight back and neither seemed to make any difference. The engine would run smoothly for about 20 seconds and then shake and lose power for 5-10 seconds before coming back to life. I used the available power to climb up to 7;800 ft. until I was within gliding distance of the Runway and glided the airplane back. The airplane ran smoothly after I reduced the power and it kept running all the way in to Parking. I checked the weather conditions after landing and the relative humidity was 32% and the outside air temperature was approximately 65-70 degrees F.




Synopsis: C172 Flight Instructor reported engine power loss and returned to the departure airport and made a successful landing.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Cessna 210 Centurion / Turbo Centurion 210C; 210D
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Gear Extend/Retract Mechanism
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: When I put the gear handle down nothing happened. I checked the circuit breaker; which was still in; and recycled the gear handle but still got no response. I pulled the breaker; placed the gear handle in the down position; and pumped the gear down; per the emergency extension procedure. I still did not have a safe gear indication. I could see the left main gear in the pilot's window; and I could see the right main gear by opening the right door slightly.I informed the Tower of the problem; and they suggested a low approach. I overflew the runway at approximately 200 AGL. The Tower and the crew of an ERJ on the taxiway advised that my gear appeared to be down. The Tower activated the emergency crews. While flying around the pattern; I tried pumping the gear a few more times and got a safe gear indication. I landed softly; and carefully taxied to the ramp.I advised my company of the situation and switched to a different airplane.




Synopsis: When the C-210's landing gear failed to extend via the normal system the pilot utilized the emergency gear extension to pump it down. A safe landing monitored by CFR ensued.
Date: 201912
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Passenger; Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Approximately 10 minutes before landing; I could smell an odor resembling wet socks (a malodorous sweet smell) from my jumpseat at 1L. At the same time I received a call from Flight Attendant 4 at 3L saying she smelled an odor at her door too. The fumes dissipated when the pilots were informed and made changes to cabin temperature/air. After landing and while taxiing I smelled acrid and pungent odor resembling fuel at 1L. All three other flight attendants smelled it at their jumpseats and pilots were informed. I experienced a dry cough and dry itchy eyes. The fumes dissipated as we reached the gate. A few passengers commented on the fume smell during deplaning; with one passenger saying he noticed it at both takeoff and landing. I had a dry cough yesterday that has gotten worse today; and I have started to lose my voice tonight. My eyes have been exceptionally dry as well. I am fatigued and generally don't feel at 100% healthy. No one met our flight from Flight Service; only Maintenance/ Maintenance Supervisors. I received a phone call that evening inquiring of it from Flight Service; which I attempted to return upon arrival in ZZZ; but did not get an answer. We did not feel so symptomatic yesterday to the point of requesting medical treatment upon arrival.




Synopsis: A321 Flight Attendant reported a fume event in which she experienced physiological issues.
Date: 201412
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: Construction in the area severed a line that provided all communications; radar data and NAS connectivity to the facility leaving the facility with only 4 radio frequencies and no means of communication with the outside world.  The CIC at the time the event occurred determined the only way to communicate the status of the facility was via the use of personal cell phone.  A call was placed to the TRACON and the FLM was notified.  By the time the FLM arrived in the cab the decision was made; with coordination with the TRACON Supervisor that all coordination between the TRACON and Tower would be accomplished by personal cell phones and appropriate numbers were exchanged.  After a lengthy discussion the FLM finally decided to call an ATC ALERT and did so via his personal cell phone.  This condition continued for the next 14 hours; involving 10 employees; 4 personal cell phones and one FLM.  After 6 hours of searching the cut line was located and phone company was notified.  Phone company advised at approximately XA30L that the line would be repaired by XD30L.  Full service was not restored until [a day later].  During all this operations continued with little to no delay to the flying community.The next day an informal discussion among those involved came up with some ideas as to how to handle this situation in the future.  The item that has been banned from the operations is what helped both the IFR facility and us continue normal operations was a cell phone.  Granted the policy of not having cell phones in the operations is a good thing and events like this are very rare; we believe each facility should be assigned a cell phone and a wireless device that connects to the FAA network as an emergency means of communication (the FAA has the means and the capability). This could also be part of the facility evacuation plan in the event ATC service are relocated on the airport.  I think it would be a good idea for each VFR Tower to evaluate their procedures to see if they cover a total loss of NAS connectivity.




Synopsis: Tower Controller describes a situation where a line is cut that provides all data from adjacent facilities.  Use of cell phones were used to coordinate and move traffic.  The scenario lasted for 14 hours.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Champion Citabria Undifferentiated
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Ground
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working low volume traffic. There was a tour of three people in the tower cab which may have been a distraction. I had coordinated approval for a vehicle to work on Runway X/XY. A Citabria called ready to go Runway X/XY. I gave a quick scan of the runway and cleared the aircraft for departure on a runway heading forgetting about the vehicle that had been working for several minutes. Shortly after the aircraft had started his takeoff roll both the Ground Controller and one of the visitors said the vehicle was still on the runway. I cancelled the Citabria's takeoff clearance and held his position on the runway. He resumed his departure roll once the vehicle had cleared the runway and I had given him a takeoff clearance. I would recommend a thorough scan of the runway prior to clearing anybody for takeoff. I had just done a quick scan and missed the vehicle because it was parked along the edge of the runway. The runway in use memory aid was on the podium; but I did not glance at the podium when clearing the aircraft for takeoff. If I had been holding it instead it could have been prevented.


Second narrative: The Facility Manager was giving a tour to 2 people. I was working Ground Control (GC) and had coordinated a vehicle (C25) onto Runway X to fix a light. While C25 was on the runway; I taxied a Citabria to Runway X for a VFR departure. I had turned around to talk with the tour; we were discussing the towers South East of the field and their impact on our Conflict Alerts. I turned back around and scanned Runway X and noticed the Citabria was starting his takeoff roll. I pointed to him to ask if he was rolling because the vehicle was still on the runway; as I did that one of the people in the tour said there is a truck on the runway. As the Local Controller was cancelling the Citabria's takeoff I was telling C25 to exit the runway. Reduce the length of tours in the operating quarters. Have vehicles that will be operating on the runway monitoring both GC and LC frequencies.


Synopsis: Tower Controller cleared an aircraft for takeoff failing to note a previously coordinated vehicle still on the runway and necessitating a cancellation of the takeoff clearance.
Date: 202110
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Time Pressure; Distraction
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During preflight we received a planned DG printout (6 pieces/198.42lbs). I secured the printout to the glare shield above my Electronic Attitude Direction Indicator as a reminder. With two jumpseaters and a pushback operator difficult to hear/understand; I was distracted. Once we turned the dome light off I really didn't notice my reminder on the glare shield. We pushed back without the DG final; which usually prints up automatically with final weights. Apparently the ramp agent was unable to send his final report. We realized our mistake after engine 1 startup. We cleared a very congested ramp area at [ramp spot X] and had the final DG report sent to ACARS from dispatch while parked safely on the taxiway.


Second narrative: During preflight; we received a planned Dangerous Goods summary. The Captain reminded me that we needed a final dangerous goods summary before we departed. The final dangerous goods summary did not automatically print like it usually does; and the Captain and I both forgot about it before we pushed back. We contacted Operations to resolve the issue; and we were advised that the ramp was having a technical issue. We exited the ramp area since it was congested and we were unable to sit there and wait for the final DG summary. While on the taxiway; dispatch sent our final DG goods summary.


Synopsis: Air Carrier flight crew reported gate departure without required Final Dangerous Goods Summary.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SET.Airport, MO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZKC
Second aircraft: Amateur/Home Built/Experimental
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While practicing ground reference maneuvers with my pre-solo private pilot student; I noticed a plane flying on a course that would intercept our maneuvering area. My ADSB-in noticed the plane and soon after I had visual contact. I made announcements of my position on the local CTAF that is used in that area; due to the proximity of the airport that the flight training is conducted out of. No response was made by the incoming aircraft. Due to my position I took controls from my student and altered our course to the right in an attempt to clear the area. Aircraft Y flew towards me as indicated by my ADSB equipment; as well as the small amount of visual contact I had as the aircraft moved to a chasing position. Slow controlled turns were made to try to get the aircrafts attention (I did not know if Aircraft Y had me in visual contact) as well as vacate the area due to this aircraft. The collision avoidance sounded multiple times that Aircraft Y was on a direct collision course with me; and indicating on my screen that we had less than 100 ft. of vertical and horizontal clearance. In the closest proximity I was unable to maintain visual contact due to the other aircraft being behind me; and slightly above me. This continued on for a period of somewhere between 3-5 minutes. No matter the direction I flew to try and vacate the area Aircraft Y stayed on my tail. All attempts to establish radio contact failed. The traffic eventually vacated the area to the south of our position.Looking back I should have called St. Louis Approach and let them know of the situation; giving them the opportunity to try to establish radio contact and let the pilot of Aircraft Y know we were a training flight that was not comfortable flying in formation as well as let ATC know that this aircraft was breaking the law and creating a dangerous situation for themselves as well as others.




Synopsis: C172 pilot reported an NMAC with another light aircraft.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZFW.ARTCC, TX
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZFW
ATC / advisory: Center ZFW
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Undershoot; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was the pilot monitoring on this flight as the first officer (FO) was flying. On the SEEVR2 arrival Fort Worth center gave us a clearance to descend via the arrival with no speed restriction until BRDJE. I asked the FO what he wanted to do. I didn't get a clear response and I said we could delete the speeds on the FMC by typing '/' and the altitude crossing restrictions. He did this; however in verifying the crossings we both missed that he put the THEMM restriction on SEEVR. During this time the relief pilot was busy putting entries in the log book and didn't witness it. It wasn't until reaching SEEVR that we saw that we were too high. At this time center handed us off to approach control; who then told us to expedite to 6;000. Nothing was said other than this. We were able to get down and make a normal approach to 17C. Of course that is not to say we weren't wrong. I am not sure why I suggested deleting the speed restrictions in the FMC and not using speed intervene; especially considering the number of crossing restrictions on the arrival. I will never touch crossing restrictions in the FMC in the future and will always use speed intervention when the speed restrictions are lifted.




Synopsis: B777 Captain reports being cleared to descend via the SEEVR2 Arrival and delete the speeds until BRDJE. The speeds are deleted in the FMC legs page; but the crossing restriction for THEMM is inadvertently placed on SEEVR.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: F45.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 150
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: CTAF F45
Second aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Takeoff roll
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airport
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While training a student in the pattern at F45; a Cessna 172 taxied across our runway while we were executing a touch and go. I noticed the aircraft as the student was setting takeoff power at approximately 35 KTS. I yelled stop over CTAF with no response. I didn't have time to be more specific. The C-172 was taxiing west along Taxiway K paralleling Runway 8R/26L and we had heard no prior radio call. I was executing a touch and go on Runway 13. Winds were reported at 120/7 on AWOS. I was the only other airplane operating in the pattern at the time. A helicopter was also doing air work in the area; two other airplanes had recently landed on Runway 13. My student had made all of the appropriate radio calls; including a final call about one mile final. I did de-brief that the landing light was not on for the landing. At the time the aircraft crossed in front we were at a speed that a continued takeoff would have used less runway than an abort. The aircraft were not at risk of a collision as the crossing aircraft was moving at about 10-15 KTS and was about 1;500 FT down the runway. We rotated prior to Taxiway J. I believe the C-172 was taxiing to Runway 8R; but then later on taxied to Runway 13 as multiple airplanes were arriving into the pattern for Runway 13.I believe that F45 is in need of a Tower. It is one of the busiest uncontrolled airports in Florida. The runway layout and weight restrictions they have make it so airplanes are required to use intersecting runways regardless of the wind. There are frequent near-misses and various aircraft using non-standard traffic patterns. This all added in with the high volume of training is making F45 a very dangerous place.




Synopsis: A flight instructor training a student on touch and go landings on Runway 13 at F45 was alarmed when a C-172 crossed their runway westbound on Taxiway K as the student was applying takeoff power. The reporter cited this event as common at the non-towered airport and a demonstration of the need for an Air Traffic Control Tower to be opened.