Interesting video...thanks Adam...

Steve M wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 7:37pm:



What scares me is how stupid are the people in the SUV that they do not stop to look to see if a plane is about to land ON THE RUNWAY....I just lost a little more faith in mankind.

hahahaha

"We didn't pull out in front of an airplane!"

"Yes, you did."

well, there goes all hope for the human race

wahubna wrote on Nov 5^th, 2012 at 5:53pm:


The driver is not "driving across a runway". They are driving over an uncontrolled access road which is approximately 440ft from the marked (displaced) runway threshold. There were apparently warning signs, but no active control. You'd be relying on a person, who may or may not be an aviator, seeing and possibly hearing an aircraft on final approach. In a car with a radio, aircon/fan, etc, it'd quite easily drown out the noise of a light piston on final with a low-ish power setting. On my way to and from work I drive under short final of a runway with heavy light piston use. You can't always hear them coming.

Northwest Regional Airport, Roanoke, Tx. RW "17" threshold


Quote:



I have a lot of sympathy for the pilot. Due to the direction the SUV was travelling, combined with a student pilot probably working quite hard an concentrating on the runway ahead, it would have been almost impossible to stop the collision as he'd have been unsighted of his 1-2 o'clock low viewpoint. But what he was doing at that height (440ft from the displaced threshold, about 40-50ft from the beginning of the runway surface)? That is another matter, and probably one that his flight school and the airport management will have to answer. Use the full length of the tarmac = close the road. Use the road = use a displaced threshold, or put traffic control lights on the road.

Easy to attempt to apportion blame, but it's not as clear cut as people think.

Looking at what has been reported, I suspect the majority of the fault will be held by the airport and school; those involved were potentially the victims of bad procedures, on the ground and in the air.

Mictheslik wrote on Nov 6^th, 2012 at 2:55pm:



It will make for a good insurance claim that will end up in the courts being argued that the aircraft was undershooting the runway, mind you, that's why we have an undershoot in the first place.....

Matt

C wrote on Nov 6^th, 2012 at 3:12pm:


Yeah I have to agree with the airport layout issue. It sounds like the airport has repeatedly tried to resolve that issue but the owner of the drive is not being cooperative. Hopefully after this incident the owner of the drive will change their tune 

expat wrote on Nov 6^th, 2012 at 4:02pm:


Both the pilot and vehicle occupants should sue. The airport can then sue the pilot for making a mess, who can in turn sue the flying instructor. The flying instructor can then sue the airport again.