OWLS HEAD, Maine — The pickup truck being driven across the Knox County Regional Airport Friday night — which collided with a small airplane taking off — had no beacon light as is customary.
National Transportation Safety Board safety investigator Shawn Etcher said Monday that the 1994 GMC pickup truck driven by Stephen Turner, 62, of Camden had no beacon light that would make it more visible to aircraft. Etcher said the investigation will look at whether this was required at the airport.
The crash claimed the lives of two University of Maine students and a UMaine alumnus.
Knox County Regional Airport Manager Jeffrey Northgraves said Monday that the runway lights were on when the accident happened. He said those lights automatically turn on when a pilot activates the radio in the plane.
The airport manager said, however, that the truck did not have a lighted beacon on it. He said while it technically is not required, trucks that cross the runway should have one. He said he did not know why a truck was used that had no lighted beacon on it.
The Knox County Sheriff’s Department said over the weekend that just before the runway collision, Turner assisted with putting a plane away in a hangar near the airport terminal, a practice that occurs daily.
Northgraves said pilots and vehicle drivers are supposed to communicate by radio to alert each other of their movements. Northgraves said during the weekend that it was unclear what communication occurred between the pilot and driver before the crash.
Etcher said Monday that the truck driver said he had a radio and that he heard no communication from the airplane.
Before someone is authorized to have a vehicle on the runway, the person receives training, Northgraves said.
Allison Rogers, manager of the Hancock County-Bar Harbor Airport in Trenton, said vehicles are not allowed on the runway there unless the driver has received training and the vehicle has a lighted beacon to make it visible.
Northgraves said he expects to hold a meeting soon with all users of the Knox County Regional Airport to discuss any changes needed to improve safety in the wake of the Friday evening crash.
“We will sit down with everyone inside the fence and look over our procedures and how to tighten them,” Northgraves said.
He said he can take steps on his own as airport manager to increase safety requirements. He said airports can have tighter restrictions than required by the Federal Aviation Administration but not less strict than FAA rules.
Etcher said that the man believed to be the pilot of the airplane that crashed had certification to fly both day and night and to fly with visual observations alone. Investigators say they cannot confirm the identities of the victims until DNA testing is completed by the Maine Medical Examiner’s Office.
But University of Maine officials and members of the Lambda Chi Alpha fraternity on campus over the weekend identified the three men killed in the crash as William B.J. Hannigan III, 24, of South Portland, who is believed to have been the pilot of the Cessna; David Cheney, 22, of Beverly, Mass.; and Marcelo Rugini, 24, of Muliterno, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. The three men were members of the fraternity and had left Bangor International Airport at 11:30 a.m. Friday for a day of flying.
About an hour before the crash, the plane flew over Spear’s Vegetable Farm in Nobleboro, which Rugini has called home since coming to the United States six years ago through a program called Communities for Agriculture.
It is not clear yet why the plane later landed at the Knox County Regional Airport. But according to investigators, the airplane was taking off on the 5,000-foot runway at that airport and had just gotten off the ground at about 4:44 p.m. Friday when it struck the front end of the truck driven by Turner.
The plane continued on, reaching an estimated altitude of 150 feet, when it banked to the left and then nose dived in the woods about 200 yards off the runway. The plane burst into flames.
Northgraves said the debris field was small.
Turner was not injured in the crash. The truck had minor front-end damage and was impounded by investigators on the evening of the crash.
Etcher said Monday that the on-site investigation would conclude Tuesday, but that the NTSB likely won’t issue a probable cause of the crash for six to 12 months.
The wreckage of the Cessna 172 single-engine plane was loaded onto a flatbed Monday morning and was to be taken to a secure storage facility in Biddeford used by the insurance carrier for the plane, Etcher said.
Jake Barbour Inc. of Owls Head was hired to remove the wreckage for the NTSB and to transport the pieces to Biddeford.
Etcher said once the investigation is completed by staff, the findings will be passed on to the NTSB members to vote on a probable cause of the fatal crash. He said a preliminary report will be issued in a few days but will include only information that is already known.
The airport has seen 16 crashes either involving planes at the airport or flying from or into the airport in the past 40 years.
The worst was the 1979 crash that killed 17 people aboard a Down East plane originating from Boston. That plane crashed in fog at night on May 30. Only one passenger survived.
The airport has undertaken several safety improvements since 1979, Northgraves said Monday.
The most important was the installation in 1995 of the instrument landing system that allows planes to land in fog and lower visibility. Equipment on the ground in the ILS system shows pilots their positions and that of the runways.
In 2008, the airport erected gates at points where vehicles could access the runways and also constructed a parallel taxiway for planes. This allows planes to get off the runway quicker upon landing and also to get on the runways just before takeoff.
The county’s plan for improvements in 2013 include a $1.2 million fence to keep deer, turkeys and other animals off the runways. Northgraves said earlier this month at a meeting of the Knox County Commissioners and Knox County Budget Committee that there had been five instances in the past year of contact between aircrafts and wildlife. He said that amount in one year was more than in all the time since he became airport manager in 2004.
The airport has two runways. One is 5,000 feet long and is used by jets and larger planes and the other is a 4,000-foot runway that is mostly used by smaller planes.
The plane that crashed Friday was using the 5,000-foot runway.
Northgraves said there is a point of no return when a plane is taking off based on its speed and the amount of runway remaining. He said in this instance, the plane struck the truck at about the 1,000-foot mark and that there was about 4,000 feet of runway left.
my 6 year old daughter can tell/report to you what happened in this plane crash in like 5 minutes. The Government must do everything correct and follow the due process sooo getting straight to the point takes a curtain about of time, i guess…I’m sure it has alot to do with lawyers. but sometimes it’s just a no-brainer!
Your joking right?
If your 6 year old daughter was in that plane crash you bet you’d be wanting answers by the book.
why are these unfortunate young men’s families any different?
I hope for your daughter’s sake you are not home schooling her.
Hey BDN: A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT RUNWAY????
Impossible!
A 5,000 foot LONG runway yes.
In this case, runway 13/31 is 5007′ long x 100′ wide . Runway 3/21 is 4000′ x 100′.
According to investigators, the airplane was taking off on the 5,000-foot runway at the airport and had just gotten off the ground at about 4:44 p.m
That would have been 13/31. And since the aircraft impacted terrain just in the woods adjacent to Dublin Road, that would indicate that the aircraft was taking off from runway 13.
Instead of complaining in the comment section why don’t you simply e-mail the author of the story? I have done it many times and they will correct the story when they realize an error has been made.
Simple answer:
BDN needs to realize, through it’s readers comments, their glaring errors in reporting, need to be announced. And this is the medium for that.
And that comment, of a 5000 square foot runway, is absurd. No who had even a rudimentary knowledge of airports would make such a remark.
Again, make them aware of it via e-mail. If you truly think complaining in the comment section is going to correct the news story you are wrong.
It was not a complaint. It was a factual statement, I am not wrong.
End of converstation.
I could care less if you reply but it is not the end for me.
You made a factual statement, that is not the problem.
The problem is how you are going about addressing the solution. Complaining in the comment section will not get a news story corrected. Sending an e-mail to the author will but for some unknown reason you are missing that important part.
It will let less-informed readers know there’s a problem.
While this maybe true, anyone with just a little thought won’t be confused by this and understood the intent and mistake and moved on with life.
Reporters or editors who don’t read feedback from readers are reporters or editors who don’t want to improve their craft. Sure, most comments are not germane to the ins and outs of the story. But the fact remains, there are readers who know a thing or two more.
In my experience, corrections are almost impossible to come by, no matter which avenue you take.
Also, consider that some readers may not even realize a story contains errors until another reader points out the errors.
I have been interested in aircraft investigation for many years and have read numerous NTSB investigation reports on aircraft accidents in that time. 6-12 months is the normal window for an investigation to take. The analysis of the accidents often runs to many pages and any pertinent exhibits that may be needed. One can go to the link and check them out. http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/reports_aviation.html
From reading some of these reports one can become considerably impressed with the thoughtful work that goes into such an investigation. I can guarantee that the wreckage of the aircraft will be examined as thoroughly as possible, along with a thorough look at the truck, questioning of all witnesses who were in the area, a look at the qualifications of the pilot, weather conditions, available light and on and on. No stone will be left unturned before a conclusion is published. The conclusions contain an ample line of reasonng for the conclusion and are written in such a way that any reasonable reader could understand the conclusion.
It will be determined what the condition of the aircraft and all its systems were in, what lights were on, what lights may have been off and so on. Forensic investigators can derive a tremendous amount of helpful information from a pile of wreckage that most of us would feel would yield little.
Obviously the pilot and the driver of the truck did not have adequate communication between them. Why this happened will be a big part of the investigation, along with the ability of the pilot to be flying in the exact conditions that existed that night.
Those who believe that the insurance industry and lawyers are behind this are mostly correct. It also benefits the aviation community to know what went wrong here, that might prevent such a thing in the future. Disaster is an unfortunate element of flying, just like driving a car. More things that contribute to future safety, come from the investigations of these kinds of accidents, than any other way!
We will know, eventually, what happened as best as can be determined by careful analysis.
A very well written and informative post. Thanks for sharing.
What you say is true of all airplane crash investigations, but in many crashes most of the areas they look at and report on turn out to have nothing to do with the cause of the accident. For example, in this scenario it wouldn’t have mattered whether the pilot had no license or he had and ATP and 10,000 hours. You’re right that the pilots qualifications will be duly documented, but when a truck pulls onto the runway just when your downward/forward vision is obscured as you raise the nose to rotate, your license or lack thereof becomes meaningless. The cause of this accident was that a truck that didn’t belong on the runway while an airplane was taking off WAS on the runway. The reason WHY that truck was in that position at that time is where the primary focus of the investigation will be.
The NTSB is one of the few government agencies that actually does what they are intended to do.
Hey National Transportation Safety Board-the “probable” cause is the plane hit a truck during takeoff! There, case solved. No need to spend millions of dollars investigating this unfortunate accident.
You have just publicly announced that you do not understand the meaning of the term cause.
Wow, 6 months for the Feds to figure out what it only took the BDN comment section probe 30 minutes to conclude…..
Right on! We need to shift from an archaic jury system to a newspaper comment consensus system for trials! Our laws are written for a prehistoric time! It’s time we started “if it walks like a duck” type justice and saved Me the People’s money! Rah rah Less Government!
We’re wicked smart
The VillageSoup which is a local pper has a interview with a 11 yr old girl who witnessed the plane in the tree above the trees then crash. She said the plane had no lights on. Is it possible the truck driver didnt see the plane taking off because of this?
Any pilot who would fail to turn on the marker lights might be just as likely to have his radio on the wrong channel. No lights would explain a lot because an airport employee told a reporter he could see the silhouette of the plane in the low sky when it took off. That would mean it came from the opposite direction of the setting sun. It would be very hard to see a plane without lights coming from the dark end of the runway. I know what it’s like because I’ve worked out there after dark in my younger days. I’ve been out there driving vehicles and on foot. Things like runway lights can make it even harder to see what’s further down the runway. It’s those flashing beacons on the aircraft that I could see first.
Eyewitness are often horrible witnesses.
Right on, Kevin…..an 11 year old didn’t see lights, and this is now the authoritative account? I don’t think so. Things happen so fast, that it would be literally impossible to recall this accurately. The plane was only airborne a very short distance. I’m amazed that so many people are trying to blame the pilot. What’s with that? Every fellow pilot I know leaves the light switches in the cockpit on, so when the Master Switch is thrown the lights come on automatically.
I wouldn’t give much credence to an 11 year old “witness” who only could see that plane (if she even did) for a few seconds.
The plane had already struck the truck at that point thus may have caused the electrical failure? Just saying, even if the eye witness is correct it means little without more forensic analysis done be the investigators, not the BDN forum.
You can SPIN this any way you want. The cause of this shameful “accident” was a TRUCK driving across the airport runway. The aircraft belonged on the runway, the truck did not. Pretty clear to most anyone reading the paper. If the truck had not been on the runway(without a lighted beacon) the airplane would have flown away. The fact that people are allowed to drive across the runway is what killed those 3 young men. You can tell the story any way you want but those are the facts.
s talking on her cell phone and rear ended us big time. Had substantial injuries and huge medical bills so filed against the woman’s insurance company. Was told by her insurance lawyers if I pursued this, and took it to court they would make certain the jurors knew I caused the accident because I was looking for money. I asked how it could have been my fault as a passenger and they replied that it wasn’t. But once they planted that idea in the jury’s heads….So it is with the spin doctors on here who do not believe the truck was at fault. They are putting their version out there for some to cast doubts that a truck on an airport runway could be at fault in any way for a horrific air accident after the plane hit the truck. That “walks like a duck” is actually not a bad theory!
And you “fell for this”? Sure these ambulance chasing lawyers will say anything, but if you don’t follow through… Not to mention the local police investigating a motor vehicle accident and the NTSB are so far from the same it isn’t even funny.
Apples, oranges. Was just making an analogy that came to mind.trying to rationalize why anyone could even think the pilot was at fault when runways are his domain. Perhaps i’m wrong but haven’t noticed any trucks flying lately.
We do not have the facts. Obviously the plane impacting the truck was the result of errors, but we do not know what events transpired for this to occur. The truck had permission for surface operations at RKD, and crossing a runway can be done without incident. We may learn that it was a horrible mistake made by the truck driver, or it may have been a chain of errors that tend to be part of aviation accidents.
For instance, was the aircraft communicating on CTAF? If so, did the pilot communicate the correct information (like the correct runway)? Did the aircraft have functioning nav, strobe and landing lights and were they in used during the departure? The answers to all of these things may be yes, but we don’t know that yet. This could be the result of the aircraft, the truck, or both could have made mistakes.
The NTSB will do its job to find out as much information as possible. The goal isn’t just to place blame, but it is to learn from the mistakes and improve safety for those of us still flying.
This all comes down to poor airport management. Anyone want to do some investigative reporting, go to the airport and count how many gates are open that will allow you direct access to the runways. I counted 2 today.
The airport manager should be fired immediately he’s a poor excuse of a manager.
If I recall correctly. The pickups at alot of the regional airports dont have beacons around here. Its not just Owls Head. What they do have is a large orange and white checkered flag mounted in the bed. The flag is about 3 feet square.
I’m staying away from that airport…too dangerous. I’m sure the number of accidents at the airport is directly proportional to the “safety education” of the people that work there.
If he had a radio tuned to the tower frequency he’d have heard that they were given a takeoff “Go ahead” and the fool would have held or backed up. Maybe it’s an unattended airport. I’m not sure of this eaither. If the rules call for a beacon he should be to blame as they were not followed. Either way 3 people are dead which is terrible!
“Technically a rotating beacon wasn’t required but the truck should have had one”? If the truck “should have had one” it should have been an enforced airport requirement. Given the lay-out of the airport, why weren’t there any designated vehicle roadways between the various service locations? As airport with commercial passenger services “routine” vehicle runway crossings are entirely unacceptable.