roccoangelella/AeroGraph huggingface dataset:
The pilot of the tailwheel-equipped airplane reported that, during landing on grass adjacent to a runway, he reduced the power to glide for landing. He added that the airplane then "dropped" and landed hard and that the right landing gear collapsed. He also stated that he should have "kept more power" and chosen not to glide.The airplane sustained substantial damage to the fuselage and right wing.The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.
The pilot reported that he was conducting skydiving operations and that the airplane was on final approach to the runway, about 80 ft above ground level and a "few feet before the threshold," when the airplane's windshield became "foggy" and he could not see the runway. He did not attempt to go around because the skydivers were in the area, and he did not want to hit them or trees surrounding the runway. Review of a witness video recording of the landing revealed that the airplane's nose landing gear contacted the runway first, followed by the main landing gear. The airplane bounced, and the nose landing gear impacted the runway again and then collapsed. The pilot reported no preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. The airplane was equipped with a defrost system for the forward cabin windshield. However, the system was likely not being used at the time of the accident.
The pilot was on a cross-country flight in a twin-engine airplane.  A witness, located at the destination airport, reported that the accident airplane approached the airport from the south and then headed northeast, as if to enter the airport traffic pattern. He added that the airplane appeared to climb and then started a left turn.  After starting the turn, the airplane flipped inverted, the nose dropped, and the airplane disappeared from view behind terrain.  Examination of the wreckage site, located about 1 mile northeast of the airport, revealed that the airplane had impacted terrain on its bottom fuselage, and came to rest upright. A post-crash fire consumed a majority of the cabin and the inboard sections of the wings. The wreckage was confined to one area and all major components were accounted for on site.Though the examination was limited by thermal and impact damage, no pre-impact abnormalities were observed during the airframe or engines examinations that would have precluded normal operations. A review of the pilot's autopsy and medical history did not identify any evidence of an incapacitating event. The airplane's roll to an inverted attitude is consistent with an inflight loss of control event. The ground scars and damage to the airplane are consistent with a probable attempted recovery from the loss of control; however, the reason for the loss of control could not be determined based on the available information.
The pilot reported that, during the third landing that day, the biplane landed hard and veered off the left side of the runway. The airplane ground looped, and the left main landing gear collapsed. The pilot added that he thought the tailwheel was swiveling but not turning with the rudder. While working on repairs, he observed that the shear pins on the tailwheel had sheared off. The airplane sustained substantial damage to the lower right wing. The airplane was not made available to the National Transportation Safety Board for examination, so the reason for the anomaly reported by the pilot could not be determined.
The pilot reported that he usually flies with two seat cushions, but he gave one cushion to his passenger. He added that, during the takeoff roll on the narrow grass surface, private airstrip, the missing cushion distorted his visual perception. Using his peripheral vision, he felt the airplane had drifted left, so he applied right rudder and brake. The left wing struck bushes, but he continued the takeoff. The tail lifted, and the airplane veered left into the bushes. The right wing sustained substantial damage. The pilot reported that there were no mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.
The crew of the helicopter air ambulance flight was approaching the airport for landing in dark night instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) after delivering a patient to the hospital. The reported weather conditions about the time the pilot initiated the instrument landing system (ILS) approach included 1/2-mile visibility with haze, which then deteriorated to 1/4 mile, which was within the operator's approved visibility approach minimums. The paramedic onboard reported that he saw the runway environment through a thin layer of fog as the helicopter descended toward the decision height (DH) of 200 ft above ground level during the approach. After descending below the DH, with a power setting below 30% torque, the helicopter's pitch attitude increased from -3° (nose-down) to +20° (nose-up), its airspeed decreased from 100 to 50 knots, and the pilot declared a missed approach, likely due to a loss of visual contact with the runway environment. The pilot's increased collective input and the helicopter's decreasing airspeed resulted in an increase in torque, and the helicopter entered a right rotational yaw that accelerated into a spin. The helicopter subsequently impacted terrain near the runway. The dark night conditions at the rural airport resulted in little to no visual references during the pilot's transition to landing and the attempted missed approach. It is likely that the pilot became spatially disoriented, which led to the excessive pitch attitude, slow airspeed, his failure to recognize and arrest the right yaw, and the subsequent loss of control.
The pilot reported that he switched the fuel selector while taxiing for takeoff. During takeoff, about 150 ft above ground level, the engine lost total power and impacted trees. Postaccident examination revealed that the fuel selector was between the right and left tank positions. No fuel was found in the carburetor bowl and about 1 ounce of fuel was found in the accelerator pump cavity. No other anomalies were found with the engine. Therefore, the loss of engine power was likely due to the pilot's inadvertent placement of the fuel selector between the two tanks, which resulted in fuel starvation and a total loss of engine power.
The pilot reported that, upon touchdown on the soft end of a private, turf airstrip, the airplane nosed over. The airplane sustained substantial damage to the right-wing lift strut. The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. The pilot added that he should have overflown the airstrip to verify its condition.
The pilot reported that, during the takeoff roll from a backcountry airstrip, about midpoint, the airplane failed to lift off, so he aborted the takeoff. He reduced the throttle and applied the brakes. As the airplane slowed and while the pilot was reaching for the mixture lever, the airplane nosed over. The airplane sustained substantial damage to the right-wing lift strut, vertical stabilizer, and rudder. The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.
The pilot reported that, during landing, the airplane bounced hard. He applied full power and aborted the landing. He recalled that he "must have allowed the front end to come up too high," which led to the airplane stalling and veering left. The left wing and then the right wing struck the ground. The airplane sustained substantial damage to both wings. The pilot reported that there were no mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.
According to the pilot, upon touchdown in the float-equipped airplane, the seaplane skipped, and the right float dug into the water. A video recorded by a cruise ship passenger captured the accident sequence and revealed that the airplane was landing parallel to an ocean swell and touched down in a relatively flat pitch attitude. After touchdown and encountering the swell, the airplane veered to the left, water looped, nosed down, and began to submerge. The airplane sustained substantial damage to the left wing, left lift strut, and fuselage. The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical malfunctions or anomalies that would have precluded normal operation.
The pilot reported that, shortly after rotation from a private, grass runway, a wind gust pushed the airplane to the left. The airplane continued left, the left wing struck a tree, and the airplane impacted terrain. The airplane sustained substantial damage to both wings. The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.
The pilot was practicing takeoffs and landings in the airport traffic pattern when the engine lost all power as he was turning onto the base leg of the pattern. He turned the airplane toward final approach, but it landed hard short of the runway, struck an airport perimeter fence, and nosed over, coming to rest inverted.  A postaccident examination of the airplane revealed metallic debris on the oil dipstick tube and cap, with significant oil residue on the belly of the airplane.The pilot, who performed the engine overhaul 25 hours before the accident flight, performed a cursory examination following the accident and found a broken piston and metal fragments in the intake tubes that caused the intake valves to stick open. The cause of the piston failure could not be determined based on the available information.
Radar data indicated that the pilot departed around dusk and proceeded over the ocean, paralleling the coastline for about 20 miles before radar contact was lost about 3 miles offshore. Several persons in a campground that overlooked the ocean, witnessed an aircraft impact the water a few miles offshore; although they immediately notified law enforcement, who in turn notified the US Coast Guard (USCG), based on the lack of any reported missing or distressed aircraft in the region, the USCG did not initiate a physical search of the reported impact site at that time.The airplane was leased by a flying club and was discovered missing the following day when it could not be located by a club member who had scheduled to fly it. A USCG search several days later in the area of the last radar contact revealed no evidence of the missing airplane or pilot.  According to the flying club president, the pilot was not authorized to fly any of the club airplanes solo at the time of his disappearance, although he had been previously. To date, no subsequent traces of either the missing pilot or the airplane have been located; the airplane is presumed destroyed by impact in the ocean, and the pilot is presumed to have been fatally injured.
The pilot reported that, while landing with gusting winds, the airplane bounced several times. During the last bounce, the nose landing gear and the right main landing gear collapsed, and the airplane veered right, exited the runway, and came to rest in the adjacent grass. The airplane sustained substantial damage to the fuselage and the right wing. The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.
According to the private pilot, he was practicing stop-and-go landings, and after the second landing, he taxied the airplane back to the east end to prepare for a third takeoff. While making a wide right turn, he was looking in the direction of the turn and failed to see an estimated 4 1/2-ft-tall utility pole. The left-wing lift strut contacted the pole and separated from the fuselage at the lower attachment point. The pilot stated that there were no markings or warnings placed nearby, which allowed the dark-colored pole to blend into the background. Following the accident, the National Transportation Safety Board investigator-in-charge contacted the airport owner who agreed to paint the pole to make it more visible to prevent a reoccurrence.
The flight instructor reported that, while returning to the departure airport after an instructional flight, she noticed that the weather was deteriorating and decided that she would perform the landing. She added that she felt wind shear during the approach, and she flew the airplane about 5 to 10 knots faster than normal. During the landing, she "felt a strong push from behind that accelerated the [air]plane tremendously." She applied full brakes, but the airplane continued moving forward and exited the end of the runway. Concerned the airplane would impact a deep ditch, the instructor turned the airplane left. The airplane came to rest in grass, and the main landing gear collapsed. The airplane sustained substantial damage to the left and right wings. The instructor reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.
During an night instructional flight in a helicopter, the flight instructor was demonstrating a straight-in autorotation to landing following a simulated engine failure. At touchdown, the heels of the landing skids touched first and the helicopter “rocked” forward, which was followed by several more “throws” in a counterclockwise motion that became progressively more “violent.” The instructor described that the helicopter was experiencing pylon whirl and continued to manipulate the flight controls during the ground run until helicopter came to rest. The helicopter’s tailboom was substantially damaged during the accident sequence.
The pilot reported that, during landing and upon touchdown, the airplane encountered a very strong left crosswind. The wings started to lift, and the airplane started to climb. He corrected by pitching the nose down and positioning the ailerons to counter the crosswind. The airplane encountered a second crosswind gust, all corrections were ineffective, and the airplane veered off the runway to the right. Upon leaving the runway, the airplane encountered thick vegetation and nosed over. The airplane sustained substantial damage to the right and left wings. The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.
The pilot stated that the final approach and touchdown were uneventful, but then the airplane's right wing “dipped,” the nose veered left, and the airplane departed the runway surface. Witnesses reported that, during the landing, the nose gear contacted the runway first and then the airplane became airborne again. After the second touchdown, the airplane veered left into the grass. Examination of the airplane revealed that the right main landing gear sustained damage consistent with an excessive side load during landing. There was no evidence of a preimpact mechanical malfunction that would have precluded normal operation. Based on the available information, the accident is consistent with the pilot’s improper landing flare, which resulted in touchdown on the runway with a side load on the landing gear, failure of the right main gear, and a loss of control.
The student pilot reported that, during takeoff, a flock of birds crossed the runway from the right. He tried to climb and turn the airplane to the left to avoid striking the birds, but some of the birds continued in front of the airplane. The airplane drifted beyond the left side of the runway about 10 to 15 ft above ground level. He aborted the takeoff, landed on the soft grass adjacent to the runway, and the airplane nosed over. The student added that, "the grass was so muddy that [it was] very hard to control the plane," and "too much friction made my airplane flip over." The airplane sustained substantial damage to the right wing. The student reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.
The pilot departed on a local flight in a light sport airplane. Video showed the airplane's departure from the runway surface and the beginning of a left turn during which the bank increased until the airplane traveled out of the frame. The airplane’s engine was heard throughout the accident sequence and no engine power changes were noted. A witness reported that the airplane reached an altitude of 40 ft before crashing.An examination of the airplane did not reveal any preimpact abnormalities that would have precluded normal operations. Based on the available information, the investigation could not determine why the pilot lost control.
The pilot reported that he performed a wheel landing on the concrete runway surface. During the landing roll with the tailwheel on the ground, the airplane swerved right, and he corrected with left rudder and left brake. The left wing and left elevator struck the ground. The pilot was able to regain control of the airplane and taxi to the parking area. The airplane sustained substantial damage to the left wing. The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.
About 15 minutes into the air tour flight, the pilot heard a loud “crack/bang” from the front of the airplane, followed by a total loss of engine power. The pilot performed a forced landing to wet, marshy terrain, during which the left wing impacted a tree and the airplane nosed over and came to rest inverted, resulting in substantial damage to the wings.One of the radial engine’s cylinders was fractured at the barrel head joint, which resulted in the loss of engine power. The airplane was operated without engine cowling installed. According to the airplane’s owner, the cowling assists with engine cooling in vintage radial engines. The airplane was not examined after the accident and the reason for the cylinder failure was not determined.
The pilot was about midway to his destination airport in a light sport airplane when he detected the odor of hot oil, so he elected to return to his departure airport to land. While on approach to land, the airplane experienced a total loss of engine power and its propeller stopped turning. After determining a nearby road was unsafe to land on due to vehicles, the pilot elected to land in a pond short of the approach end of the runway. The left wing separated from the fuselage during the landing. Examination of the airplane's engine showed no anomalies, and the source of the odor could not be determined. Examination of the cockpit showed that the fuel control was in the ON position and that the carburetor heat was off. Weather conditions at the airport were conducive to serious carburetor icing at glide power. It is likely that, during the approach, the pilot failed to use carburetor heat and the engine experienced carburetor icing, which led to the loss of engine power.
The pilot reported that, during takeoff from a soft field, the airplane veered left then began to bounce as it went over soft and rough ground. He tried to steer the airplane back toward the runway and abort the takeoff, but the airplane continued to bounce sideways, which resulted in a ground-loop. The airplane sustained substantial damage to the left elevator. The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.
The pilot fueled the airplane to capacity by adding about 5 gallons of aviation fuel to the tank, which had previously been serviced with non-ethanol automotive gasoline. The pilot and passenger then departed on the 25-nautical-mile flight to their destination airport. On final approach for landing, the engine became unresponsive to throttle inputs and subsequently lost total power. The pilot performed a forced landing in a grass field about 600 ft short of the runway, during which the airplane impacted a ditch, resulting in substantial damage. Subsequent maintenance conducted by the pilot’s mechanic revealed that the carburetor bowl contained an unidentified “milky white” substance. Given the lack of other anomalies, it is likely that the fuel contamination resulted in the loss of engine power. The source of the contamination could not be determined based on the available information.
The pilot reported that, before attempting to take off, he tied a rope to the airplane's tail and then hand propped the airplane. The engine started, and "the rope snapped." Subsequently, the unmanned airplane started moving and then impacted a fence. The airplane sustained substantial damage to the right aileron. The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.
The pilot reported that, while landing with gusting winds, the airplane porpoised on touchdown, so he chose to go around and "shoot the approach again." During the second landing, the airplane porpoised on touchdown. The pilot regained control of the airplane and taxied to the ramp without further incident.The airplane sustained substantial damage to the firewall.The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.The airport's automated weather observation station reported that, about 26 minutes after the accident, the wind was from 360° at 5 knots. The pilot reported that the wind was from 020° at 8 knots, gusting to 14 knots. The pilot was landing the airplane on runway 5.
The pilot reported that, during the approach and just before landing, he aborted the landing because he felt that the airplane was too high above the runway to land safely. As he configured the airplane to go around, the airplane flew about 150 ft beyond the runway, and the right wing struck treetops and then impacted terrain. The pilot added that quicker power application and flap configuration would have prevented the accident. The airplane sustained substantial damage to both wings, the fuselage, and the empennage. The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.
The pilot reported that, during a test flight, he landed on an 800-ft-long off-airport, sand-and-gravel surface, and the airplane nosed over. The airplane sustained substantial damage to the rudder and right wing. The pilot reported that there were no mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. The pilot added that the accident could have been prevented by landing on a surface that "would not [have] require[d] the use of much braking until I more fully acclimated myself to the toe brake setup in this plane and to sort out any braking pressure issues a little more thoroughly."
The pilot reported that, during takeoff, he rotated around 55 knots and that the gyroplane instantly yawed left about 45°. The pilot reported that he was "behind the power curve" and that the gyroplane could not climb or gain airspeed. The gyroplane began to descend, the pilot turned left, and the gyroplane landed hard and rolled to the right side.The pilot added that he believed that the gyroplane initially yawed left during the climb because of the "P-factor due to [a newly installed] more powerful engine" and that he failed to add right rudder input to correct. He added that it was his first test flight with the new engine.The gyroplane sustained substantial damage to the tailboom.The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the gyroplane that would have precluded normal operation.