Author Topic: Crash at an untowered airport (katama) - whos to blame? (Read 745 times)

moose · « **on:** June 26, 2005, 05:22:43 AM »

The other day I was flying a cross country when we heard emergancy traffic heading to Katama airpark over on Martha's Vinyard. Here's the associated story.

Quote

Three people injured in single-engine craft
By ERIC GERSHON and DAVID SCHOETZ
STAFF WRITERS
EDGARTOWN - A four-seat, single-engine aircraft flown by a deaf pilot crashed yesterday under clear skies while trying to land at Katama Airpark, tainting a weeklong convention of deaf aviators in Plymouth.

Rescue workers aid the victims of yesterday afternoon's crash at Katama Airpark on Martha's Vineyard yesterday afternoon. Three people were injured.
(Staff photo by VINCENT DEWITT)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No one was killed in the early-afternoon crash, but all three people aboard the 1979 Cessna Skyhawk were injured, at least one seriously. The victims, two men and a young woman, were taken to Martha's Vineyard Hospital and later to Boston, where they were being treated for broken bones and lacerations.

The pilot was identified as Alec Naiman. One passenger was Jeffrey Willougby and the other was a minor female and so not identified.

The aircraft, registered to a private flying club in New Jersey, was one of nearly a dozen Vineyard-bound planes to carry people attending the 12th annual Deaf Pilots Association Fly-in at Plymouth Municipal Airport.

As many as 100 deaf pilots, family and friends were expected in Plymouth by the weekend, according to Chris Hyldburg, who helped coordinate trips by the deaf pilots to several local airports, including Katama.

A hearing-impaired person must pass standard flight tests plus a special medical examination to earn flight certification from the Federal Aviation Administration. A deaf pilot may then fly alone into airports that don't require radio communication between the pilot and the airport, such as Katama.

Heading to Vineyard
The Skyhawk was among 10 to 12 planes that departed Plymouth for the Vineyard at various times yesterday. At about 1 p.m., as the Skyhawk approached the all-grass strip, just north of South Beach State Park, Naiman reacted to a biplane on the runway that was preparing to take off, witnesses said. Naiman began what Airpark Manager Mike Creato called a ''go-round,'' basically an attempt to abort a landing.

But somewhere between 50 and 100 feet above ground, the Skyhawk stalled.

''It looked like it was going to make it,'' said Kris Hauck, a lifeguard who witnessed the incident from South Beach, less than half a mile away, and rushed to the crash site. ''But then it just fell.''

Hauck found the plane on its belly, propped on its right wing. The windshield was shattered and the engine exposed. Gasoline streamed over the fuselage and spurted into the cabin, where the three passengers were conscious and moaning.

''There was gasoline everywhere,'' said Hauck, who used his shirt to plug the fuel leak. ''We were really worried about it exploding or catching fire. We were trying to talk to the people, telling them to be calm and relax, but they couldn't understand.'' Fire and rescue crews arrived at 1:18 p.m. After prying open the cabin door, they carried away all three victims on backboards.

Meanwhile, at least three other planes piloted by members of the Deaf Pilots Association landed at Katama, unable to hear radio broadcasts that the airpark had been closed due to the emergency. The planes landed without incident, one narrowly missing a fire truck, according to a witness, but increasing the confusion on the ground.

''I'd like to think people with handicaps should be able to do what other people can do,'' said Creato, the airpark manager. ''But the radio communication thing was kind of bad. We closed the airfield after it happened, but we weren't able to keep these guys from stopping.''

No pilot, with or without hearing, is required to communicate by radio with an uncontrolled airport.

Pilot blames Skyhawk
Paul Santopietro, the pilot of the biplane and a witness to the crash, blamed the accident on the Skyhawk.

''If there's an airplane on the runway, you don't try to put (another) airplane on the runway,'' said Santopietro, a veteran pilot and instructor. ''This is, like, Flying 101.''

Information about the crash victims was scarce last night, as police were trying to reach relatives out of state.

Mark Stern, secretary of the Deaf Pilots Association and the local organizer of the Plymouth convention, waved off a reporter at the Plymouth airport.

But Jim Barrett, president of the New Jersey flying club that owns the Skyhawk, said the Skyhawk pilot is from the New York area and is the only deaf pilot among the Paramus Flying Club's 45 members.

Barrett said Naiman was a ''relatively new member'' of the group with no known accident history.

Eric Gershon can be reached at egershon@capecodonline.com. David Schoetz can be reached at dschoetz@capecodonline.com.

Staff writers Conor Berry and Emily Dooley contributed to this report.

http://www.capecodonline.com/archives/7days/fri/threepeople24.htm

I think this is total crap. What the article fails to mention is that the 172 that crashed was 1 of a formation of 3, and the other two had just landed. The biplane pilot pulled onto the runway when the 172 was on final.. I think he is the one who needs flying 101 because last time I checked landing traffic has right of way over taxiing traffic.

Kinda ticks me off and I hope the FAA report gets it right.

Furball · « **Reply #1 on:** June 26, 2005, 05:57:48 AM »

i blame Bush. Its all his fault.

Nilsen · « **Reply #2 on:** June 26, 2005, 07:41:46 AM »

Ahhh... thats sooo 2004 Furby

Furball · « **Reply #3 on:** June 26, 2005, 07:42:15 AM »

ok. i blame you, its all your fault.

you have a track record of crashing things.

Nilsen · « **Reply #4 on:** June 26, 2005, 07:44:42 AM »

Thats more like it

<--- lookie.. all good now

cpxxx · « **Reply #5 on:** June 26, 2005, 08:45:18 AM »

Just based on the the article. I can't agree that the biplane pilot is totally to blame. He was wrong to taxy onto an active runway with a landing aircraft. But with all those struts and wires maybe the Cessna was obscured. It happens, nearly did it myself once.
He was dead wrong to try to pin all the blame on the 172 pilot though. His duty was to ensure there was no aircraft on finals. Whatever the reason he failed to do that and taxyed onto an active runway.

Go arounds are common for that very reason. But it looks like the 172 pilot botched it. I'm not sure how because it's damm hard to stall a 172. Perhaps he retracted all the flap at once. The 172 will sink like a stone if you do that. I've seen it happen once or twice. Whatever happened it seems the pilot mishandled the go around and crashed. It's hard to get away from that conclusion.

Heater · « **Reply #6 on:** June 26, 2005, 10:26:31 AM »

Like the man said...."Flying 101" no radio in use.... then only one plane on a runway at a time.....

Hawklore · « **Reply #7 on:** June 26, 2005, 10:37:08 AM »

Landing aircraft have right of way, always, who knows if it's an emergency landing if you don't have radio contact with it!

Chairboy · « **Reply #8 on:** June 26, 2005, 11:00:16 AM »

The bi-plane pilot that pulled out caused the sequence of events to start, it's pretty rich that he blames the Skyhawk driver. It's unfortunate that the 172 pilot botched the go-around, and for that, he's completely responsible, but the bi-plane clearly initiated the chain. Expect a NASA letter from him at the least, I'm betting.

Casca · « **Reply #9 on:** June 26, 2005, 11:57:26 AM »

FAR 91.113
(g) Landing. Aircraft, while on final approach to land or while landing, have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or operating on the surface, except that they shall not take advantage of this rule to force an aircraft off the runway surface which has already landed and is attempting to make way for an aircraft on final approach. When two or more aircraft are approaching an airport for the purpose of landing, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-of-way, but it shall not take advantage of this rule to cut in front of another which is on final approach to land or to overtake that aircraft.

moose · « **Reply #10 on:** June 26, 2005, 01:57:33 PM »

thanks casca, i was going to look up the FAR myself to quote it

the pilot of the 172 is still in critical as of yesterday. it really bothers me that the biplane pilot (im pretty sure its a stearman which operates out of that field pretty regularly as a commercial enterprise) said that stuff. i wrote my paper and told them at least to get the damn story right and not bias it one way

DJ111 · « **Reply #11 on:** June 26, 2005, 02:07:22 PM »

I blame Furball...

Furball is evul...

lada · « **Reply #12 on:** June 26, 2005, 02:10:33 PM »

I think that key question is... whitch of the pilots were better evangelist ?

Rafe35 · « **Reply #13 on:** June 26, 2005, 06:01:08 PM »

I'm surprised to see that news, Moose.

I'm also deaf (Cochlear Implants user) and taking flying school likely in 2007 or 2008 since I'm still College to finish up basic classes.

I think I probably blame the pilot, not the plane, not Furball, and not even Deej111......oh crud.

DJ111 · « **Reply #14 on:** June 26, 2005, 07:59:48 PM »

Rafe AND Furball did it!

Ha!