The International Cessna^® 170 Association

The pilot could not have seen them coming, but was too low on the approach to start with like you mention. He was a student just hours away from his private pilot check ride and has quit flying altogether. A real shame, another potential pilot that will not contribute to the future of aviation. The idiot driver and passenger in the car didn't even see the plane coming or bother to heed the stop sign but sure were quick to deny they drove in front of the plane. If the plane had been about 3' lower, they all probably would have died.

I have flown into this airport dozens & dozens of times (good restaurant there too) and am always concerned if I notice a vehicle on that street that crosses the north end of the runway. Unfortunately there are many drivers who cross that approach end of the runway that aren't pilots or aviation savy folks and have no clue what can occur if an approaching aircraft fails to see them in time (and is low on the approach). To them its just another street! Not sure of the solution, but there needs to be some modification to the crossing street or this will occur again. There is a hill on the approach as well. Hasn't been all that long since one plane landed on top of another one attempting to take off.

There is a legend at Freeway (W00) that a cub lost a gear to a truck on RT 50 years back on on 18.
That may be possible if it's a really tall truck, the airport fence wasnt there and the trees across the highway were a little shorter.
Today, you can certainly feel the trucks buffet the airplane if you come in 'just right'.

But,in the case of the video, it looks like a bad landing gone real bad.
I see a lot of people come in a little too low and a little too fast (afraid of the dreaded stall?) and float half way down the runway before touch down. A 172 will float a long way in ground effect with an extra 5 or 10 knots of speed. Perhaps that was how he was going to make the threshold.

Its a shame he's quitting airplanes tho. If anything this shows how safe planes can be. You just hit a truck while flying and walked away!

I also thought he was low, but at some airports there are signs warning that "low flying aircraft" can be a hazzard. The vehicle just didn't look due to complacancy of using this road often.

John

Perhaps the driver was looking to his right at all the parked airplanes at ......"HEY! THIS is an AIRPORT!"....
While the pilot couldn't see the car approaching from his lower-right, because it was blanked out by the cowling.

In any case, this particular runway threshold leads into a downward-sloping, not excessively-long runway, and if the student pilot was planning a touch-and-go, he may have desired to touch down as early as possible. IN any case, doubtless he thought he was at at airport where airplanes operate.....
....and the DRIVER doubtless thought he was at an airport where airplanes operate....

The problem is that non-pilot drivers often do not realize the limited visibility and limited manueverability inherent to airplanes operating with reference to a runway. As pilots we have to remain ever vigilant that drivers are like deer....they often do not look UP, and often cannot fathom why they don't have the right-of-way wherever they desire to go.

Even on my private ranch-strip, I have occasions to avoid visitors who are oblivious to the presence of an airplane on a runway.

I always thought the only way to do a "gear up" landing in a fixed gear aircraft was to land upside down. Actuelly, this guy no longer had a "fixed gear" aircraft - it was a "broken gear" aircraft.

Flaps were up -- one reason for the flatter approach. Windsock didn't seem to indicate a need for a 0 flap landing.

n2582d wrote:Flaps were up -- one reason for the flatter approach. Windsock didn't seem to indicate a need for a 0 flap landing.

The flight school at that airport is locally notorious for teaching it's pre-solo students ONLY no-flap approach/landings. Rumor has it they once had a near accident due to a solo-student having to go-around and forgetting to retract the flaps, so their chief instructor instituted the no-flap rule for student pilots.
(I'm not trying to start anything....I'm just explaining why that student likely made a no-flap approach.)

This also helps explain the "flat/low" approach ..... there's little allowance for last-minute steep approaches and slips are not taught pre-solo. (Again....not trying to start any debate about the merits, etc...... merely shedding some light on the matter of this event.)

Also, no flaps keeps the nose up at a higher angle of attack, reducing forward visibility.

I think signs on the road with a big arrow pointing up the approach path and the words, "Look This Way for Planes" might help reduce the gawlker instinct to look toward the airport.

The pilot seemed fairly young. Has a mishap flying, quits flying. Will he quit driving when he gets into a car accident? Then quit walking when he gets hit in a crosswalk?? Suck it up and fly on! We all have our setbacks, to some degree or another!

KS170A wrote:The pilot seemed fairly young. Has a mishap flying, quits flying. Will he quit driving when he gets into a car accident? Then quit walking when he gets hit in a crosswalk?? Suck it up and fly on! We all have our setbacks, to some degree or another!

I"m also disappointed he has sworn off flying, as that seems short-sighted. I'll bet that if his story is followed, he'll realize that and return, if only to prove to himself it wasn't his fault.

Video of us landing on 18 at Freeway airport.
I guess if one was WAY low and it was timed just right, a tall truck could snag your gear.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=43 ... tif_t=like

I sometimes see low, flat approaches over the road at my airport (Lake Elmo, MN, 21D). Why scare the people in cars and trucks like that? Our 170B and later model Cessnas have wonderful slotted flaps that permit a relatively steep approach, followed by a landing at minimum speed. We should use them! [/soapbox]