Dramatic video/ airplane into car

[SSDriver]

http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/su ... rport.html

Ouch!

[ussyorktown]

I'll just leave this here.

[ct4me]

Tim - would your opinion still hold if the runway itself started 400' farther south so that the pilot was flying 5' AGL over a road more than 440' from the runway?

But, in this specific case, it didn't. The signage was there for a purpose... regardless the reason, there is a possibility of low aircraft at the end of runways. It could have been a Semi-Truck. Unfortunately, it looks like the car was in a blind spot for they pilot, so "see and avoid" was an unlikely outcome.

FWIW, the official website for the airport does not mention the displaced threshold, or show it on their airport diagram. Without getting into a p1$$1ng match over what aviation regulation was current, it's obvious that the threshold, and it's current status, shouldn't be in the purview of the driver.

[FastEddieB]

Pointed out on another forum...

1) No flaps

2) No landing light

If this student was taught that full flaps landings were "normal", why would he choose not to use them on a training flight? Flaps normally require a steeper approach, and may have avoided this accident. I hold that he should not have been practicing no flap landings on his first solo cross country, and if it was so gusty as to call for less than full flaps, the flight should not have been made.

We've discussed flap usage and the Law Of Primacy here before. Just wondering if this pilot was just "more comfortable" without flaps.

Was this student taught checklist discipline, and is "LANDING LIGHT - ON" on his "Before Landing" checklist? If the driver was simply not looking, it may not have made a difference - but it certainly couldn't have hurt!

As I said earlier, accidents rarely have a single cause. This one had many.

Oh, and the only one talking legalities is the lawyer*. Surprise! When all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail!

*edited to add: and now ct4me. Are you a lawyer too?

[FastEddieB]

1) Being discussed at length in another thread.

2) Might I suggest the "View Active Topics", "View New Topics" or "View Unread Topics" as default views - prior threads on the same topic will pop up and you'll be sure not to miss any valuable (?) threads!

[designrs]

This incident may be showing another factor that comes into play on solo... emotion!

Everybody remembers their first solo or first solo cross-country. For the first time the right seat was empty. You knew that you were ready. You knew that you could do it. Your brain was full with all the normal piloting procedures that you have to remember and execute. Your brain then had to process all emotional factors of confidence, fear, excitement and self-suffiency as well... which are a big part of the purpose of the solo.

Even if your ego consiously thinks that you are the next Chuck Yeager, there is still extra stuff going on in your brain that needs to be processed. Thinking "ok... I can do this..." You're making radio calls while watching your airspeed and the pattern, hopefully remembering flaps, fuel pump, landing light, etc. Did you really check the field 100% reliably for possible obstructions?

OK... the guy was way too low, and he would have have had to drag it in. Maybe his instructor tought him better? Maybe he didn't?

The point is that a first solo pilot is probably "minimally qualified" and under max multitasking ability combined with emotional load and may not have checked the field properly.

Chances are that he woud have made the runway had the vehicle stopped. Unfortunate accident. Hope the pilot gets back in the airplane and does many better approaches with proper flaps and landing light!

[FastEddieB]

You're making radio calls while watching your airspeed and the pattern, hopefully remembering flaps, fuel pump, landing light, etc.

The entire concept of checklists is that human memory is fallible.

You should not ever have to rely on memory for any of the items you listed.

Of course, you have to remember to use the checklist - but this should be so ingrained from day one as to be SOP.

Unless you forget it, of course - and it happens.

The point is that a first solo pilot is probably "minimally qualified" and under max multitasking ability combined with emotional load and may not have checked the field properly.

Since his girlfriend was filming, I was under the impression this was his home field. Am I mistaken? In any case, even if he had not checked the field at all he should know what a displaced threshold is, why it would be there and how to deal with it.

[drseti]

Might I suggest the "View Active Topics", "View New Topics" or "View Unread Topics" as default views - prior threads on the same topic will pop up and you'll be sure not to miss any valuable (?) threads!

This is a great suggestion, Eddie. I've already consolidated two threads on this topic. Now, I will try to incorporate this third one.

[3Dreaming]

An other thing to remember is this is a private road. Are you required to legally to follow the signs on a private road?

[ussyorktown]

In Oregon the law on traffic devises is "public road or open to the public." Don't know Texas law but I would expect they are similar. (Cop can give you a ticket for reckless driving, careless driving, speeding at the shopping mall parking lot as it is "open to the public" for example)

[3Dreaming]

Good subject.....

We have an RC club at our field. they use the taxi way as thier road, or is it we use the road as our taxi way, depends if you ask a pilot or driver. Pilot says its a taxi way, driver says its a road. Anyway I say all planes have the right-a-way.

Now this RC membership has doubled over just a few years, with almost 100 members there will be an accident. its not if but when. I wonder who will be blamed and I hope I am not in my bird when it happens.

A friend almost was in one of these accidents. The car kept going and he had to avoid the wreck. It could have been really bad. He was taxing in his bird.

I told the owner of the airpark to put signage up saying planes have all right-a-way.

Tony

You keep your airplane at Holmes?

[Torque]

You keep your airplane at Holmes?



yes I do and its now where I live. I have been here about 6 weeks now.

Tony

[Jack Tyler]

For me the lesson to be learned is not who is at fault in a legal sense. In fact, I think that obscures what is to be learned. The analogy that applies to me is the typical strip mall parking lot we are all familiar with. It's where cars are driven and where pedestrians are walking. Small & slow cars, cars with powerful engines, old folks pushing their walking carts, young kiddies - the expectation is that we all adjust our behavior somewhat, from how we might otherwise choose how and where to walk, or how to drive and where to park. Whatever motor vehicle laws might be relevant to a parking lot, they alone will not make that environment safe for everyone under all conditions. The onus isn't exclusively on the pedestrians, and it isn't on the drivers either. Like it or not, we are interdependent and have to work together - as pedestrians & drivers - to make things work for everyone

"I know that airport quite well and there were (at least) two judgement errors in play."

Said a bit differently, the runway environment was created in such a way that no single failure would result in an accident. The displaced threshold is there - quite obviously, we now see - for a reason. As is the vehicle signage. As a number of prior posts demonstrate, it is easy to make the point that the aircraft was not being operated in a safe manner per the FARs. It's also easy to impeach the '...but we didn't see the plane' excuse of the driver. However the insurance adjusters wrestle with the claims - and whether an enforcement action is taken against the pilot or a traffic citation is issued to the driver - that's not where the learning exists for those of us interested in making flying safe (whether we're driving a car on an airport perimeter or flying over it).

[Torque]

A couple years ago a man hit my car in a parking lot. I called the police. They said nothing they could do about it for this happened in a parking lot, got in their car and drove off.

When I first met my wife she said she had to go to court over an accident she had.

I said..Oh..where was the accident?

She said in a parking lot....

I asked...What parking lot?

She said the city police parking lot.

I asked what did she hit?

She said 10 parked police cars....

I gave her driving lessons and she has not had another incident since...lol

[FastEddieB]

Torque,

What state was that in?

In FL, parking lot accidents get an accident report. Lots of "private property" accidents fall under police jurisdiction. The key is generally whether the area is public access or not, as most parking lots clearly are.

By extension, in your example, if someone were run over and killed in a parking lot, would the police again just get in their car and drive off? I think not.