Plane hits car on approach

[Great Ozzie 101]

I think if that road is private then it should have been gated off to the public.

 

Then you would have no roads around shopping malls.... many businesses etc...

[jeroen79 0]

How?

Depends on how much you want to invest and the level of danger.

The safest would be to set it up like a railroad crossing.

Red lights, bells and barriers to make it very clear that the road is closed.

If that is too much than a set of traffic lights can also be enough.

The minimum would be a sign explicitly warning of aircraft and an official STOP sign.

 

No one in their right mind would pull a stunt like that... it's not an aircraft carrier w/ an LSO.

It wouldn't have to be a 'stunt'. (like some guy running onto the runway with a red flag)

You can place (red) signallinglights by the runway so that the pilot can see them during the approach.

Then you appoint someone as safety-official and tell him to turn on the lights when he thinks that an accident is about to happen.

The safety-offical can sit somewhere safe.

If you also give him a radio then he can verbally warn the pilot as well.

[RWFeldman 159]

Wonder if she ever found the soccer field?

[Matthew Kane 1,343]

Then you would have no roads around shopping malls.... many businesses etc...

 

This is different then a shopping mall or many business' because this is an airport we are talking about.

 

The two airports I went to school were gated off and only vehicles allowed on airport property had to have permission from the owner and a two way radio, other then the parking lot that is.

[Great Ozzie 101]

It wouldn't have to be a 'stunt'.

 

It is because then you become an air traffic controller... except with zero training... and if someone does this from the airport... the owner will be liable.

 

This is different then a shopping mall or many business' because this is an airport we are talking about.

 

No not so different... because as Fr. Bill pointed out... there is a business (a restaurant) open to the public.

 

So gate it off... and now you can only fly into that airport to eat?

[jeroen79 0]

It is because then you become an air traffic controller... except with zero training... and if someone does this from the airport... the owner will be liable.

Depends on how you look at it.

'Warning' pilots of danger is not the same as 'controlling' them.

Or is it?

[Matthew Kane 1,343]

No not so different... because as Fr. Bill pointed out... there is a business (a restaurant) open to the public.

 

So gate it off... and now you can only fly into that airport to eat?

 

 

Just having a gate at the entrance to the property before the runway would force a vehicle to stop, force the driver to get out of the car and open it

 

On the gate you could post a set of warnings that their is a runway and to proceed only when clear...etc. This would be better then just having cars drive across like that.

 

This is a nice low-tech solution and works on many farms actually.

 

Cheers

[Great Ozzie 101]

'Warning' pilots of danger is not the same as 'controlling' them.

 

I wonder what lawyer would like to argue this...

 

Btw... it's the fault of both here... who pays... who knows... But the car operator negligent for not looking for low flying aircraft when passing so close to a runway... and the pilot for operating so low...

 

Just having a gate at the entrance to the property before the runway would force a vehicle to stop, force the driver to get out of the car and open it

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrfeT8_aWJU

 

This is a nice low-tech solution and works on many farms actually.

 

Know what city-folk do when they have to open a gate? (Hint: they don't close it)

[Matthew Kane 1,343]

Know what city-folk do when they have to open a gate? (Hint: they don't close it)

 

 

Exactly, and that is how the cows get out - LOL :lol:

[n4gix 4,947]

Having examined closely the current Google satellite image for this airport, there are several very odd things that stand out, beginning with this short portion of "road"...

 

1. Beginning from the turn off from County Road 338, there is a very short section of road named "Kelly Drive." At the junction with what appears to be a combination taxiway and access road curiously named "Boeing Way," the continuation of this same road is named "Airport Road." It just seems quite odd that such a short section of road is owned by a third-party and not by the airport's owner.

 

2. Even had the pilot not had the SUV get in his way, it is patently obvious that he would have touched down somewhere just past the first yellow arrow and the second yellow arrow, FAR short of the actual rwy threshold.

 

3. The STOP markings are nearly illegible.

 

4. An interesting bit of trivia about this field. Apparently it is the largest privately owned airport in the United States, at least according to the owner.

 

5. Here is a link to The Blue Hangar Cafe: http://www.thebluehangar.com/

[Great Ozzie 101]

Thanks Fr. Bill for that info. Hard to believe it's the largest privately owned... but I guess the private ones continue to disappear / be bought up by govt. agencies.

 

"Come and enjoy a relaxing meal while watching general aviation aircraft take off and land right in front of you!"

 

Or on top of you - for select few...

 

 

The safest would be to set it up like a railroad crossing.

 

I have seen this in operation at Kaneohe MCAS (Marine Corp Air Station) where a simple wooden gate would come down and some lights would flash when the F-4s would come roaring out of nowhere. For us boneheaded marines... it worked.

 

But in the civilian world... now you have to worry about who does the maintenance on it and ensures proper working order 24/7. And who is legally responsible for its operation... when it breaks down... and when there is an accident.

 

It will be interesting to see if any changes actually take place.

 

Edit:

 

5. Here is a link to The Blue Hangar Cafe: http://www.thebluehangar.com/

 

Need help deciphering the "Daily Specials" please.

[ZachLW 37]

I was just about to open a topic on this!. I'm from the dallas suburb of flower mound just down the road from this airport. Here is video:

 

 

Just listen to the audio at the end. The people in the car sound like idiots. Shocked, surprised idiots, but idiots none the less. If you google map it, you can see the word "stop" on the road before crossing the north side of runway 17. Use that to compare what happened in the video, and you can see that the car did not stop.

Fyi, according to the article, the land that road is on is private property. The airport has offered money for it so they can improve the safety on that side, but the owner has turned them down. Maybe this will get a deal done

Idiots? They were hit by a flippin' aeroplane! I challenge you to stay calm and collected after having a prop and landing gear nearly decapitate you.

 

let's also remember that the pilot is not licensed, he is a student, and he was returning from his first cross country solo flight, so that means he may be under 25 flight hours. Coming in low and slow like he was is just the sort of thing you may see from a student pilot.

 

Most likely the Pilot didn't see the car because he was looking down the end of the runway and watching out to flare the aircraft. I don't see fault in the pilot or the driver of the car, I see fault in the placement of the road and lack of signs posted to warn drivers of the runway. Painting 'Stop' on a road doesn't mean anything.

 

According to road laws you must come to a complete stop at a stop sign, their was no stop sign or any warning signs of a runway or approaching aircraft, etc.

 

Road laws or not, the pilot was attempting to land on a displaced threshold. That is to say he was landing in a yellow arrow marked zone "not intended" for landing. Had he been aiming for a correct touchdown zone beyond the displaced', this accident never would have happened. I would wager he's solely responsible for the insurance deductible on both the rental aircraft and the car for his willingness to land on the yellow arrows. I came to this unofficial conclusion with the video linked and Google Maps.

 

Now in practicality, I would definitely place some fault on the driver of the SUV. Who, in their right mind, crosses the approach zone of an active runway without looking? But I would also argue they couldn't observe the approaching aircraft because of it's shallow, off glide slope approach with the hill in the way. Obviously the airport authority should have kept the road markings more "official" plus some more visible signage.

 

We do things as pilots to cover our own hides. We keep the nose gear on center lines, we stay at or above VASI/PAPI glide slopes, we land on surfaces approved for landing, etc, etc. Doing otherwise puts us at risk of litigation when things get bent up -- the above is a prime example.

[LHookins 3,103]

Need help deciphering the "Daily Specials" please.

 

Lorem Ipsum placeholder text! Possibly from Adobe Dreamweaver. You may be able to get a partial translation from wikipedia's "Lorem Ipsum" entry, although the Latin is garbled.

 

The problem with this accident is, everyone is at fault: the pilot, the SUV driver, the airport, the owner of the private road, the pilot's CFI. Possibly even the county for not requiring better warning signs. I'm not gonna point fingers and attempt to assign blame. I'm only interested in how the accident happened, and how it could be avoided.

 

As for gates, how about an electric gate that opens with a button, then closes automatically after a set time. A warning light for pilots could be set up when the gate is open. Edit to add: gates on both ends of the road would open at the same time.

 

Hook

 

PS. My current quit message in IRC is "Lorem ipsum dolor sed amet"... placeholder text! Previous was "NO THIRTY" (yes, all caps) from the days of filing news stories by teletype. It means "not the end of the story, more to follow", i.e. "I'll be back." I love getting people to ask what my quit message means, especially since they only see it after I've left.

 

H.

[mgh 89]

If, as it appears the road is outside the airfield boundary and not under the contol of the airport, then the pilot was at fault.

 

It's the pilot's responsibily to avoid hitting things on the ground under the approach.

[Matthew Kane 1,343]

Road laws or not, the pilot was attempting to land on a displaced threshold.

 

This is true, I didn't see that until looking at the Google map runway further. The runway doesn't start until quite a ways down the sealed surface. To touchdown at the numbers or markers he would have been much higher over that fence. Makes me wonder if he was trying one of those 'Navy' landings knowing his GF was filming.

 

 

He is a student so that is where many mistakes can happen. I guess he is saying he is throwing in the towel and not flying anymore.