Idiot pulls out in front of landing airplane

[Wolfala]

http://thescoopblog.dallasnews.com/2012/11/small-plane-hits-car-as-it-lands-in-roanoke-skids-off-runway.html/

And not to completely absolve the pilot - but dragging it in has its downsides.

[ozrocker]

HT posted a video. Also said Airport has 500' displacement.
It's looking like both at fault. Pilot came in rather low.


                                                                                                                        Oz

[Slate]

HT posted a video. Also said Airport has 500' displacement.
It's looking like both at fault. Pilot came in rather low.


                                                                                                                        Oz

  Thats what I thought when seeing the Video. The "Student Pilot" only wanted to use the first 20' of runway. 

[Dragon]

Quitting flying because you bounced off a car?  Really?

[B4Buster]

The airport is 52F for those who want to look it up...3,500' long with a good-sized displaced threshold. It looks like the pilot, as well as the drivers, ignored the runway/road markings.

No reason why the pilot should have been dragging it over the threshold like that but he is just a student and can't be expected to execute perfectly every time (nobody can).

[GScholz]

Quitting flying because you bounced off a car?  Really?

Read between the lines... He wants to keep his wife and kids.

[CAP1]

HT posted a video. Also said Airport has 500' displacement.
It's looking like both at fault. Pilot came in rather low.


                                                                                                                       Oz

 she should've stopped. she most likely was familiar with that airport, and should've know. she was being complacent.

 i would think the pilot should've seen her approaching the threshold as he was on final, and been ready for a go around. it didn't look like she was going fast enough to be a surprise to him.
 to me, that runway setup, would have me flying short final a bit higher than it looked like he was flying it. he looked too low to begin with.

 it's ashame he's not going to fly anymore. he should look at that as a lesson learned, and continue on.

 EDIT::
just saw buster post stating 3500' long runway. definitely should be high on that approach. more than enough room to land a bit long.

 i just re-edited some of my stuff above, as it looked as if i could've been criticizing the pilot, which was/is not my intention of this post. i still remember my first solo like it was yesterday, flying N46FW.

[cpxxx]

I think criticism of the pilot for the accident is a little unfair. For one he is a student pilot, very inexperienced. For another any pilot is entitled to expect that the end of the runway is clear. The car driver is clearly at fault. It's not as if it wasn't signposted. They were extremely lucky, inches lower and everyone dies.

The biggest issue is having a road directly at the end of the runway. It was an accident waiting to happen.

[B4Buster]

I think criticism of the pilot for the accident is a little unfair. For one he is a student pilot, very inexperienced. For another any pilot is entitled to expect that the end of the runway is clear. The car driver is clearly at fault. It's not as if it wasn't signposted. They were extremely lucky, inches lower and everyone dies.

The biggest issue is having a road directly at the end of the runway. It was an accident waiting to happen.

I'm trying to not be too critical of him because as you said, he is just a student. He should have been at a point in his training where if he was doing a solo cross country he should of had a basic knowledge of airport markings though.

[RedBull1]

Wow! Both are at fault IMO, Driver saw how low the plane was, could've stopped, could've read the warnings, etc. The pilot also came in far too low, as stated above by everyone else, but like buster said, he was a student, he made a mistake, and he's completely stopped flying because of it. As long as there were no injuries all is good IMO, Im sure insurance can pay for most of the damage. 

 

[Gustav]

The people in the SUV claiming they did not see the plane. They must be blind and deaf.

However, I am glad everyone came out of that ok. (I personally feel the SUV was more at fault in the accident but that is just my two cents.)

[MiloMorai]

The SUV ran a stop sign > its totally at fault. Doing a rolling 'stop' and you hit another car > your fault.

[zack1234]

 
The "STOP" were very high tech, would a thing called a fence have stopped this
 

Where about's in South America was this?

Cars driving in the same airspace as a Plane, bit daft really.

[Spikes]

Driver was definitely more at fault. Number one, you are driving next to a runway, you ought to be very careful regardless. Number two, he must have no situational awareness to see an object that big flying at him. It would have been no different if it was an 18 wheeler except for the fact that he would be dead.

Granted the approach was low, however had there not been a car there a word would have never been spoken about that landing. A tad low, yes, but more fault to the driver.

[ImADot]

The SUV ran a stop sign > its totally at fault. Doing a rolling 'stop' and you hit another car > your fault.

I watched the video that Hitech posted. There is no stop "sign". The word "Stop" is painted on the ground. Partially driver's fault for poor SA near an airport...partially pilot's fault to poor approach technique...partially airport's fault for poor signage for cars on the road.