louA340 From Canada, joined Oct 2005, 385 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 5037 times:
Wow, I'm surprised they would have a road cross right next to the runway. Thats a very serious safety issue since it doesn't seem like making cars stop is enforced. Was the aircraft approaching too low? . Glad everyone came out alright.
Flyer732 From Namibia, joined Nov 1999, 1367 posts, RR: 21
Reply 3, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 4965 times:
Quoting unattendedbag (Reply 2): You phrased that correctly. The student pilot was way too low on that approach. The aircraft can be seen setting down on the displaced threshold. Sorry, but pilot error.
Perhaps setting down on the displaced threshold because its forward momentum was suddenly brought to a halt by impacting a car?
MeanGreen From United States of America, joined May 2006, 142 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 4946 times:
I got my instrument raiting at this airport (52F) and I have flown the plane in question. This is a small uncontrolled strip and the road is the only way to get from the west side of the field to the east side. There are signs that tell drivers to give way to all aircraft. The SUV had no business being there.
iFlyLOTs From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 491 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 4935 times:
I know of two airports in similar situations to this, luckily they're both relatively small unused private airports but still, it wouldn't surprise me if something like this happened at one of them.
And regarding this situation, there is a lot of fault, the pilot was low, the car pulled out in front of the plane but the biggest thing of all is that this should have never been allowed to happen because either that road should have been moved or that runway should have. I think that the airport is at the most fault in this situation.
jetblueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 2807 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4812 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD MODERATOR
We have an airport like this in Larimore, ND 2L1. There is a road just short of the runway. If you are a little low and there is a truck on the road you're going to have a bit of a problem. Though one has to wonder why the pilot didn't anticipate the car crossing after seeing it. If I felt at any point it was going to be close I would just make a go around.
All of the opinions stated above are mine and do not represent Airliners.net or my employer unless otherwise stated.
louA340 From Canada, joined Oct 2005, 385 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4737 times:
Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 6): Though one has to wonder why the pilot didn't anticipate the car crossing after seeing it. If I felt at any point it was going to be close I would just make a go around.
The article said the pilot was on his first solo flight, I would have been fully concentrating on the runway and getting the plane down at that point of flight, and not tracking a vehicle along a road. To have his eyes tracking the car to see if it wasnt going to stop would take away the concentration needed to land the plane, especially on a first solo flight.
unattendedbag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2328 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 4689 times:
Quoting Flyer732 (Reply 3): Perhaps setting down on the displaced threshold because its forward momentum was suddenly brought to a halt by impacting a car?
Based on information from airnav.com, the displaced threshold is 400ft. long and the road is 30ft. from the end of the runway. So the pilot would have had to have been approximately 6 feet off the ground at 430ft from the threshold of the runway. Is that a proper approach descent?
Quoting louA340 (Reply 7): To have his eyes tracking the car to see if it wasnt going to stop would take away the concentration needed to land the plane, especially on a first solo flight.
If I remember correctly, during flight training they tell you, "If you're looking at it (a fixed position), odds are, you will fly to it." If the pilot was watching the car, then the pilot was going to fly into the car.
skywaymanaz From United States of America, joined May 2012, 538 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3971 times:
When I was doing my private pilot training at Falcon Field (FFZ) there was a road right across one of the busiest taxiways. There were stop signs, flashing red lights below the stop sign, a warning sign that aircraft do not stop and Bott's dots (raised bumps on the roadway seen in areas that don't need snow plows) warning drivers to stop. I can't tell you how many times I was taxiing in and cars drove right on thru without stopping. Sometimes I'd get honked at and given the finger. If a vehicle did stop a lot of times they treated it like a 4-way stop and took off right in front of crossing airplane traffic. I almost put the prop into more then one cars windshield that did that to me. The road is now closed across the taxiway which makes for a very long drive from one side of the airport to the other but unfortunately it had to happen before someone got killed.
don't see a problem if you land beyond the displaced threshold, the accident pilot obviously was low and short, so pilot error on this one. Even if you are concentrating on landing, you gotta see that you are low and are on collision course with something. Hope he had good insurance.
Quoting jalapeno (Thread starter): "Home video reveals a serious safety concern on a roadway that lets motorists drive under planes landing and taking off from Northwest Regional Airport. "
Here's a pic from the road, looks like something painted on road, "stop"? Maybe could be a little better signage here (is that car holding on the other side?).
Quoting kcrwflyer (Reply 9): I know the SUV didn't stop but what the HECK is the pilot doing 6ft. off the ground 430ft
Landing on their first solo.
A lot is happening on a first solo (mine was 30+ years ago, and I still remember how busy it was and I had 5000 feet and was the only plane in the circuit). Even for more experienced pilots a displaced threshold encourages a lower than normal approach (VFR) since the visual picture is that the runway is closer than it is. Landings on displaced threshold runways are much more frequently on the numbers than other runways and it's common to see power added in order to make it to the numbers in the fisrt place. It's not necessarily correct, but the visual is hard to overcome, and it does lessen the chance of overrun if the displacement has significantly reduce the runway length (no idea if that is applicable, but I guess that the displaced threshold was a reaction to the road traffic).
Considering that the driver did not consider the signs that MeanGreen reports plus the experiences of skywaymanaz plus the experiences we all have had with on road drivers not paying attention to rules, warnings, and road conditions, it looks like the driver chose not to consider the surroundings - and would possibly have driven through even if it was a 747 with a wing on fire.
Would suck to get that far through the solo and then having it end that way. I will not second guess his reasoning (didn't happen to me, personal choices, etc., etc.), but it is unfortunate for all of us that he has had to end his training.
bthebest From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2008, 510 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2958 times:
My 2 cents:
Pilot was too low, but he was a student - everyone learns at somepoint.
Car shouldn't have been crossing but the STOP signs shown in the video are barely visible - airport needs better safety measures.
As in all these cases it shouldn't get to the point where an accident has to happen for something to be done. Be interesting to see how the insurers wrangle this out. From what I can tell both had right of way due to the privately-owned nature of the road and it might actually come back to inadequate measures by the airport.
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12158 posts, RR: 51
Reply 18, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2721 times:
Quoting unattendedbag (Reply 8): Based on information from airnav.com, the displaced threshold is 400ft. long and the road is 30ft. from the end of the runway. So the pilot would have had to have been approximately 6 feet off the ground at 430ft from the threshold of the runway. Is that a proper approach descent?
If he wanted to land on the displaced threshold, yes. If the airplane is 6' above the road, that is measured at the static port for the altimeter, the landing gear is much below that level. Cars are 5'-6' tall,so there is a conflict there.
Quoting bthebest (Reply 17): Car shouldn't have been crossing but the STOP signs shown in the video are barely visible - airport needs better safety measures.
The airport doesn't own the roadway, so they cannot control it.
soon7x7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2721 times:
Quoting unattendedbag (Reply 2): The aircraft can be seen setting down on the displaced threshold. Sorry, but pilot error.
Negative!...Not pilot error!...Even if he was the runway was hot...(aircraft right of way over vehicular airport traffic) if the vehicle driver was aware of what he was doing and where he was doing it he would have "clearly" seen and ainticipated the potential of a landing aircraft. Pilot= Lucky, vehicle driver =blind/stupid.
That's probably the biggest problem - that the airport doesn't have control over the road. Maybe they should consider cutting the runway length, 3500ft could easily be cut down and still be available for most aircraft. Barring that, they do control the land right next to the road so could put plenty of signs up!
Quoting soon7x7 (Reply 20): Even if he was, the runway was hot...(aircraft right of way over vehicular airport traffic)
This wasn't airport traffic so no right of way exists.
: I am not an expert, but looks like 6 feet object 400 feet from displaced threshold is within FAA runway design requirements - http://www.faa.gov/docum
: I am guessing that the GPWS aural alert was ignored, as well as the glideslope waring alert. What? A 172 doesn't have them?? Ok. Let's put this one on
: The lack of flaps is normal for the flight school in question. When I trained there many years ago they required no flap landings. I can't remember th
: When landing - pilots often get 'tunnel' vision (especially when on solo) as they are solely concentrating on the runway on which they are to land. I
: The airport is busy enough that it has a pattern and flying with a slight tailwind is quite common. As an uncontrolled airport, turning the airport w
: A runway is more the just the paved area, it normally includes an unpaved area around the sides. They also say there is a 10' hill 200 ft on approach
: On Oct 11, an aircraft taking off at the airport had issues overran the runway end, crashed through one fence and flipped over after hitting another
: Did you guys watch the news report video? Amazing exchange after the crash... --- In the aftermath of the crash, airport manager Glen Hyde can be hear
: This reminds me another crash occurred in 2010 in UK between a small airplane and a Volvo (again)! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...CAR-near-Nor
: Vehicular route had STOP signs and copy painted on the asphalt. No matter if the pilot was short, flaps , no flaps...no vehicle that in such close pr
: Lets hope both never hang around Maho beach!
: How about a gate, much like a railroad crossing. I understand this was the pilots first solo landing, but if flying the approach properly was such an
: I wasn't in the cockpit, so I don't know what the altimeter read. By looking at the vehicle and the impact, the highest the pilot could have been was
: If you watch the article it has his view. That exchange blows my mind. Agreed, how does the airport manager possibly think this is their fault. I'm v
: At BNA, we have a runway with a blast fence on each end. The blast fence can't duck, it can't move out of the way, it can't stop at a stop sign and w
: In looking at StreetView (which is certainly not guaranteed to match real conditions today), I don't even see a stop sign, just paint on the pavement.
: I'm no aerospace engineer, so this is pure speculation on my part, but here's my question. Watching the video, the plane looks relatively stable on ap