Friday, March 30, 2018

Piper PA-28-161 Warrior II, N533CA: Incident occurred March 30, 2018 at North Perry Airport (KHWO), Pembroke Pines, Broward County, Florida

http://registry.faa.gov/N533CA



PEMBROKE PINES, Fla. - A small plane ran off a runway Friday in Pembroke Pines, Federal Aviation Administration spokeswoman Arlene Salac said in an email.

Salac said the Piper PA-28-161 Warrior II ran off the end of Runway 1R at North Perry Airport at 12:05 p.m.

She said the aircraft had departed the airport via another runway, the pilot declared an emergency and the plane returned to land.

Sky 10 was above the scene as a fire rescue truck was parked near the plane in a grassy area near the runway.

It's unclear what led to the emergency or whether anyone was injured.

The plane is registered to Aero Lease and Trading LLC in Corona, California. 

The Federal Aviation Administration is investigating the incident. 

Original article can be found here ➤ https://www.local10.com




PEMBROKE PINES, FLA. (WSVN) - An airplane made an emergency landing at a Pembroke Pines airport.

7Skyforce was over North Perry Airport Friday afternoon where a Piper PA-28-161 Warrior II carrying three people made an emergency landing in an open field inside the airport.

The plane reportedly had engine problems as soon as it took off, causing the pilot to turn around and make the rough landing.

Fire rescue is evaluating the three people, who are expected to be OK.

This comes after Piper Arrow aircraft made an emergency landing at the same airport Thursday.

Original article can be found here ➤ https://wsvn.com

Piper PA-28R-180 Cherokee Arrow, N3848T: Incident occurred March 29, 2018 at San Bernardino International Airport (KSBD), California



Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Riverside

Aircraft on landing gear collapsed.

NextGen Flight Academy Inc: http://registry.faa.gov/N3848T

Date: 29-MAR-18
Time: 17:50:00Z
Regis#: N3848T
Aircraft Make: PIPER
Aircraft Model: PA 28R 180
Event Type: INCIDENT
Highest Injury: NONE
Aircraft Missing: No
Damage: MINOR
Activity: PERSONAL
Flight Phase: TAKEOFF (TOF)
Operation: 91
City: SAN BERNARDINO
State: CALIFORNIA

Piper PA-28R-200, N33305: Incident occurred March 29, 2018 at Lee Airport (KANP), Edgewater, Anne Arundel County, Maryland

Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Baltimore

Aircraft landed gear up.

Aquila Aviation LLC: http://registry.faa.gov/N33305

Date: 29-MAR-18
Time: 20:13:00Z
Regis#: N33305
Aircraft Make: PIPER
Aircraft Model: PA 28R 200
Event Type: INCIDENT
Highest Injury: UNKNOWN
Aircraft Missing: No
Damage: UNKNOWN
Activity: UNKNOWN
Flight Phase: LANDING (LDG)
Operation: 91
City: ANNAPOLIS
State: MARYLAND

Mooney M20B Mark 21, N74513: Incident occurred March 29, 2018 at Portland-Hillsboro Airport (KHIO), Washington County, Oregon




Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Portland

Aircraft on landing had gear collapsed.

http://registry.faa.gov/N74513

Date: 29-MAR-18
Time: 20:52:00Z
Regis#: N74513
Aircraft Make: MOONEY
Aircraft Model: M20B
Event Type: INCIDENT
Highest Injury: NONE
Aircraft Missing: No
Damage: MINOR
Activity: PERSONAL
Flight Phase: LANDING (LDG)
Operation: 91
City: PORTLAND
State: OREGON

Cirrus SR22, N915TD, registered to ESPBC LLC of Scottsdale and operated by Scottsdale Executive Flight Training: Incident occurred August 27, 2015 at Scottsdale Airport (KSDL), Maricopa County, Arizona

The National Transportation Safety Board did not travel to the scene of this incident.

Additional Participating Entities:
Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Scottsdale, Arizona
Cirrus Aircraft Design Corp; Duluth, Minnesota

Aviation Incident Final Report - National Transportation Safety Board: https://app.ntsb.gov/pdf

Investigation Docket  - National Transportation Safety Board: https://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms

http://registry.faa.gov/N915TD

Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Incident Number: WPR15IA252
Date & Time: 08/27/2015, 1405 MST
Registration: N915TD
Aircraft: CIRRUS SR22
Aircraft Damage: Minor
Defining Event: Landing gear collapse
Injuries: 3 None
Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General Aviation - Instructional

Analysis 

While the pilot receiving instruction was landing the airplane, the main landing gear touched down first; as he was slowly lowering the nose landing gear (NLG) to the runway, he felt a "shimmy" in the NLG. Despite applying back pressure to lift the weight off the NLG, the airplane's nose slowly started falling forward, and the nosewheel collapsed.

Postincident examination of the airplane revealed that the NLG was fractured through the strut tube adjacent to the forward edge of the gusset tube attachment welds. Metallurgical testing revealed that the NLG resulted from high-stress fatigue cracking due to sideways bending from one side. No mechanical or metallurgical anomalies were noted with the NLG.

After the incident, the airplane manufacturer conducted structural testing of the NLG, which revealed that shimmy events or nonstandard towing could result in cracks and the eventual separation of the NLG. As a result, the airplane manufacturer issued two service advisory letters, which outlined appropriate towing and inspection procedures. The airplane manufacturer also issued a series of service bulletins, which, in part, recommended that all NLG on the affected airplanes be inspected for cracks in the welds between the strut tube and the gusset tubes and that postshimmy inspections also be conducted to look for cracks in this area. Additionally, the airplane manufacturer changed the design of the NLG to increase the strength of the NLG weld.

Probable Cause and Findings

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this incident to be:
The failure of the nose landing gear (NLG) due to high-stress fatigue cracking due to a shimmy event. Contributing to the accident was the design of the NLG, which allowed fatigue cracks to develop during nonstandard towing and shimmy events.

Findings

Aircraft
Nose/tail landing gear - Fatigue/wear/corrosion (Cause)
Nose/tail landing gear - Capability exceeded (Cause)
Nose/tail landing gear - Failure (Cause)

Nose/tail landing gear - Design (Factor)

On August 27, 2015, about 1405 mountain standard time, a Cirrus SR22, N915TD, experienced a nose landing gear collapse during landing roll at Scottsdale Airport (SDL), Scottsdale, Arizona. The certified flight instructor (CFI), the pilot receiving instruction, and one passenger were not injured. The airplane received minor damage. The airplane was registered to ESPBC LLC of Scottsdale, and operated by Scottsdale Executive Flight Training as a 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 instructional cross-country flight. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and a flight plan was not filed. The flight originated from Flagstaff, Arizona about 1300, and was destined for SDL.

According to the CFI, the pilot receiving instruction made the landing. The main landing gear touched down first, and slowly the nose gear was lowered onto the runway's surface. The CFI reported that at this time they felt a shimmy in the nose gear, during which the pilot receiving instruction applied back pressure on the stick to lift the weight off the nose gear. As the nose gear came down a second time, it appeared that the shimmy had stopped, and that they were level on all three wheels. However, after a few seconds the nose slowly started falling forward until it had completely collapsed.

The nose landing gear consists of a main strut tube and two gusset tubes near the top portion of the main strut tube. The landing gear was observed fractured through the strut tube adjacent to the forward edge of the gusset tube attachment welds.

The National Transportation Safety Board Materials Laboratory examined the nose landing gear strut and determined that the failure of the landing gear was the result of high stress fatigue cracking due to sideways bending from one side. No mechanical or metallurgical anomalies were noted with the landing gear.

On March 7, 2016, Cirrus Design Corporation issued Service Advisory Letter SA 16-03, entitled "Nose Landing Gear Strut Assembly Inspection, which denoted the following:

Cracks have been discovered on the nose landing gear strut assembly at the welds between the strut tube and the LH and RH gusset tubes.

A visual inspection of the welds between the strut tube and the LH and RH gusset tubes for cracks must be performed every time the engine cowling is removed.

If cracks are found, the aircraft is prohibited from flight until the nose landing gear strut assembly is replaced. (Refer to AMM-32-20)

On April 12, 2016, Cirrus Design Corporation issued Service Advisory Letter SA 16-05, entitled "Aircraft Towing Guidance." The SA was based on the potential for damage to the nose landing gear due to loading from non-standard and abusive tug operation. The SA was released offering aircraft towing guidance. This guidance included the following;

When towing aircraft, do not stop/start abruptly, especially when the tow bar is at an angle greater than 45° either side of center.

When positioning the aircraft with a towing vehicle, the angle of the tow bar must be less than 45° either side of center for both pulling and pushing. Hand towing must be used if angles greater than 45° either side of center are needed for positioning.

Do not tow aircraft at speeds higher than 15 mph.

Additionally, Cirrus Design Corporation performed structural testing of the nose landing gear.

Based on the data provided by the NTSB metallurgy lab, and a video of an incident in Japan where an airplane experienced a nose landing gear shimmy, Cirrus explored two different methods of producing side loads in the nose landing gear. The first was through taxi and towing, the second through shimmy. Flight testing showed that significant side loads on the nose landing gear would develop during a shimmy event.

As a result of the testing, Cirrus did the following:

On April 12, 2016, Cirrus Design Corporation Service Bulletin SB2X-32-22, entitled "NOSE GEAR – Nose Landing Gear Strut Assembly Inspection," was issued. The bulletin, which Cirrus considers mandatory, was issued with instructions to inspect all nose landing gear in the field for cracks in the welds between the strut tube and the LH and RH gusset tubes. In addition to the one-time inspection required by the Service Bulletin, Cirrus added a post-shimmy inspection to Chapter 5-50 Unscheduled Maintenance Checks of the Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM). Similar to the hard/overweight landing inspection, this post-shimmy inspection would look specifically for cracks at the gusset welds exactly as noted in the Service Bulletin. (For additional information, refer to the Service Bulletin, which is appended to the docket for this report.)

On July 14, 2017, Cirrus Design Corporation Service Bulletin SB2X-32-22R1 was issued. The bulletin, which Cirrus considers mandatory, was revised to update Compliance, Effectivity, Purpose, Manpower Requirements, and Accomplishment instructions. The bulletin specifically states, "Operators who have successfully complied with the original release of this service bulletin, dated April 12, 2016, must complete Revision 1 of this Service Bulletin in its entirety, and must continue to perform this Service Bulletin every 50 hours thereafter until termination action occurs. (For additional information, refer to the revised Service Bulletin, which is appended to the docket for this report.)

On January 5, 2018, Cirrus Design Corporation Service Bulletin SB2X-32-22R2 was issued. The bulletin, which Cirrus considers mandatory, was revised to update Compliance and Effectivity. The bulletin specifically states, "Operators who have successfully complied with the original release of this service bulletin, dated April 12, 2016, must complete Revision 2 of this Service Bulletin in its entirety, and must continue to perform this Service Bulletin every 50 hours thereafter until termination action occurs. (For additional information, refer to the revised Service Bulletin, which is appended to the docket for this report.)

On July 14, 2017, Cirrus Design Corporation Service Bulletin SB2X-32-23, which Cirrus considered to be mandatory, entitled "NOSE GEAR – Nose Wheel Shimmy Reduction," was issued. The bulletin noted that on affected airplanes, nose wheel shimmy may exist on aircraft equipped with Beringer wheels. The bulletin states that a nose tire vibration due to imbalance or tire damage can be mistaken for NLG shimmy. However, it is advisable that both conditions be examined closely and considered tandem during aircraft inspection. The bulletin contains instructions for the adjustment of the nose tire pressure and force required to rotate the nose wheel fork. (For additional information, refer to the Service Bulletin, which is appended to the docket for this report.)

On January 5, 2018, Cirrus Design Corporation issued revised Service Bulletin SB2X-32-23R1. The bulletin, which is considered mandatory, was revised to update Effectivity, Purpose, and Accomplishment Instructions. The bulletin states that operators who have successfully complied with the original release of this Service Bulletin, dated July 14, 2017, must complete Revision 1 of this Service Bulletin in its entirety. The Service Bulletin contains instructions for the adjustment of the nose tire pressure and the verification of the force required to rotate the nose wheel fork. (For additional information, refer to the revised Service Bulletin, which in appended to the docket for this report.)

On July 14, 2017, Cirrus Design Corporation issued Cirrus Service Advisory (SA) SA17-08, entitled "Possible Cracking at Nose Land Gear Fillet Welds." The SA revealed that cracks had been discovered on some nose landing gear (NLG) strut assemblies at the fillet welds between the strut tube and the LH and RH gusset tubes. These cracks had led to the collapse of the NLG assemblies. The SA further revealed that each of the aircraft involved had a history of excessive nose wheel shimmy following touchdown of the nose landing gear. The SA defined "nose wheel shimmy" as "a lateral oscillation or wobble of the NLG resulting in a shaking feeling throughout the cabin of the aircraft that can vary in intensity." This is normally encountered during the landing roll-out and will subside as speed is reduced. Cirrus noted in the "Actions" section of the SA that nose wheel shimmy can be reduced or eliminated by lowering the tire pressure. Prior to the next flight, adjust the tire pressure on the nose landing gear to 40 – 50 psi (276 – 344 kPa). (For additional information, refer to the Service Advisory, which is appended to the docket for this report.)

On January 5, 2018, Cirrus Design Corporation issued revised Service Advisory SA17-08R1 (revision 1). The Advisory was issued to update Effectivity and the NLG tire pressure as outlined in SA17-08, dated July 14, 2017. Cirrus noted in the "Actions" section of the SA that nose wheel shimmy can be reduced or eliminated by lowering the tire pressure. Prior to the next flight, adjust the tire pressure on the nose landing gear to 30 – 35 psi (207 – 241 kPa). (For additional information, refer to the Service Advisory, which is appended to the docket for this report.)

Cirrus Aircraft also incorporated specific emphasis and recommendations on how to further discourage shimmying on landing and actions to be taken if the situation occurs on landing in their pilot training program. These incorporations are included in the Landing Standardization Course. Maintenance guidance is also available to mechanics following a shimmy event.

To increase the strength of the weld in the critical area on the nose landing gear, the thickness of the main strut tube was analyzed with an increased wall thickness from 0.125-inch to the full thickness of 0.156-inch. The result of the analysis was an increase (3-5%) in the local stress levels in the static analysis. This design change has been made for all new and replacement gear. 

Flight Instructor Information

Certificate: Flight Instructor; Commercial
Age: 29, Male
Airplane Rating(s): Single-engine Land
Seat Occupied: Right
Other Aircraft Rating(s): None
Restraint Used: 3-point
Instrument Rating(s): Airplane
Second Pilot Present: Yes
Instructor Rating(s): Airplane Multi-engine; Airplane Single-engine; Instrument Airplane
Toxicology Performed: No
Medical Certification: Class 3 With Waivers/Limitations
Last FAA Medical Exam: 06/11/2014
Occupational Pilot: Yes
Last Flight Review or Equivalent: 01/20/2015
Flight Time:  783 hours (Total, all aircraft), 60 hours (Total, this make and model), 699 hours (Pilot In Command, all aircraft), 326 hours (Last 90 days, all aircraft), 88 hours (Last 30 days, all aircraft), 2 hours (Last 24 hours, all aircraft) 

Student Pilot Information

Certificate: None
Age: 52, Male
Airplane Rating(s): None
Seat Occupied: Left
Other Aircraft Rating(s): None
Restraint Used: 3-point
Instrument Rating(s): None
Second Pilot Present: Yes
Instructor Rating(s): None
Toxicology Performed: No
Medical Certification: None
Last FAA Medical Exam: 06/11/2014
Occupational Pilot: No
Last Flight Review or Equivalent: 01/20/2015
Flight Time: 500 hours (Total, all aircraft), 365 hours (Total, this make and model), 17 hours (Last 90 days, all aircraft), 9 hours (Last 30 days, all aircraft), 2 hours (Last 24 hours, all aircraft) 

Aircraft and Owner/Operator Information

Aircraft Manufacturer: CIRRUS
Registration: N915TD
Model/Series: SR22
Aircraft Category: Airplane
Year of Manufacture: 2014
Amateur Built: No
Airworthiness Certificate: Normal
Serial Number: 4098
Landing Gear Type: Tricycle
Seats: 4
Date/Type of Last Inspection: 05/27/2015, 100 Hour
Certified Max Gross Wt.: 3600 lbs
Time Since Last Inspection: 93 Hours
Engines: 1 Reciprocating
Airframe Total Time: 391.4 Hours at time of accident
Engine Manufacturer: Continental Motors
ELT: C126 installed, not activated
Engine Model/Series: IO-550
Registered Owner: ESPBC LLC
Rated Power: 310 hp
Operator: On file
Operating Certificate(s) Held: None 

Meteorological Information and Flight Plan

Conditions at Accident Site: Visual Conditions
Condition of Light: Day
Observation Facility, Elevation: SDL, 1510 ft msl
Observation Time: 1353 MST
Distance from Accident Site:
Direction from Accident Site:
Lowest Cloud Condition: Clear
Temperature/Dew Point: 40°C / 14°C
Lowest Ceiling: None
Visibility:  10 Miles
Wind Speed/Gusts, Direction: 3 knots, 70°
Visibility (RVR):
Altimeter Setting:  29.93 inches Hg
Visibility (RVV):
Precipitation and Obscuration: No Obscuration; No Precipitation
Departure Point: Flagstaff, AZ (FLG)
Type of Flight Plan Filed: None
Destination: Scottsdale, AZ (SDL)
Type of Clearance: VFR Flight Following
Departure Time: 1300 MST
Type of Airspace: Class D

Airport Information

Airport: Scottsdale (SDL)
Runway Surface Type: Asphalt
Airport Elevation: 1510 ft
Runway Surface Condition: Dry
Runway Used: 210
IFR Approach: None
Runway Length/Width: 8249 ft / 100 ft
VFR Approach/Landing: Traffic Pattern

Wreckage and Impact Information

Crew Injuries: 2 None
Aircraft Damage: Minor
Passenger Injuries: 1 None
Aircraft Fire: None
Ground Injuries: N/A
Aircraft Explosion: None
Total Injuries: 3 None
Latitude, Longitude:  33.622778, -111.910556 (est)

Kitfox S7 Super Sport, N141AB: Accident occurred March 29, 2018 at Silver Bay Municipal Airport (KBFW), Lake County, Minnesota

Additional Participating Entity:
Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Minneapolis, Minnesota

Aviation Accident Factual Report - National Transportation Safety Board: https://app.ntsb.gov/pdf

Investigation Docket - National Transportation Safety Board: https://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms

http://registry.faa.gov/N141AB

Location: Silver Bay, MN
Accident Number: GAA18CA186
Date & Time: 03/29/2018, 0930 CDT
Registration: N141AB
Aircraft: Terry G. Olson Kitfox S7 Super Sport
Aircraft Damage: Substantial
Defining Event: Loss of control on ground
Injuries: 1 None
Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General Aviation - Personal 

The pilot in the experimental amateur-built, tailwheel-equipped airplane reported that during landing with a slight right crosswind, he flared too early and the airplane bounced. He aborted the landing by adding full power, and the airplane drifted to the left. The left wing contacted the ground and he over corrected to the right. The airplane stalled and impacted the ground, and subsequently nosed over.

The airplane sustained substantial damage to the right wing and the empennage.

The pilot reported that the wind at the accident airport at the time of the accident was from 280° at 6 knots, gusting to 8 knots. The pilot aborted the landing on runway 25.

The pilot reported that there were no mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. 

Pilot Information

Certificate: Sport Pilot
Age: 60, Male
Airplane Rating(s): Single-engine Land; Single-engine Sea
Seat Occupied: Left
Other Aircraft Rating(s): None
Restraint Used: 3-point
Instrument Rating(s): None
Second Pilot Present: No
Instructor Rating(s): None
Toxicology Performed: No
Medical Certification: Sport Pilot
Last FAA Medical Exam:
Occupational Pilot: No
Last Flight Review or Equivalent: 10/15/2017
Flight Time: (Estimated) 965 hours (Total, all aircraft), 58 hours (Total, this make and model), 942 hours (Pilot In Command, all aircraft), 19 hours (Last 90 days, all aircraft), 17 hours (Last 30 days, all aircraft)

Aircraft and Owner/Operator Information

Aircraft Make: Terry G. Olson
Registration: N141AB
Model/Series: Kitfox S7 Super Sport
Aircraft Category: Airplane
Year of Manufacture: 2017
Amateur Built: Yes
Airworthiness Certificate: Experimental
Serial Number: KA13243271
Landing Gear Type: Tailwheel
Seats: 2
Date/Type of Last Inspection:
Certified Max Gross Wt.: 1320 lbs
Time Since Last Inspection:
Engines: 1 Reciprocating
Airframe Total Time: 30.5 Hours at time of accident
Engine Manufacturer: Rotax
ELT: C91  installed, not activated
Engine Model/Series: 912ULS
Registered Owner: On file
Rated Power: 100 hp
Operator: On file
Operating Certificate(s) Held: None 

Meteorological Information and Flight Plan

Conditions at Accident Site: Visual Conditions
Condition of Light: Day
Observation Facility, Elevation: KBFW, 1089 ft msl
Distance from Accident Site: 0 Nautical Miles
Observation Time: 1415 UTC
Direction from Accident Site: 241°
Lowest Cloud Condition:
Visibility:  10 Miles
Lowest Ceiling: Broken / 2700 ft agl
Visibility (RVR):
Wind Speed/Gusts: 3 knots /
Turbulence Type Forecast/Actual: None / None
Wind Direction: 290°
Turbulence Severity Forecast/Actual: N/A / N/A
Altimeter Setting: 30.06 inches Hg
Temperature/Dew Point: -4°C / -10°C
Precipitation and Obscuration: No Obscuration; No Precipitation
Departure Point: Silver Bay, MN (BFW)
Type of Flight Plan Filed: None
Destination: Silver Bay, MN (BFW)
Type of Clearance: None
Departure Time: 0925 CDT
Type of Airspace: Class G

Airport Information

Airport: SILVER BAY MUNI (BFW)
Runway Surface Type: Asphalt
Airport Elevation: 1088 ft
Runway Surface Condition: Dry
Runway Used: 25
IFR Approach: None
Runway Length/Width: 3200 ft / 75 ft
VFR Approach/Landing: Go Around; Traffic Pattern

Wreckage and Impact Information

Crew Injuries: 1 None
Aircraft Damage: Substantial
Passenger Injuries: N/A
Aircraft Fire: None
Ground Injuries: N/A
Aircraft Explosion: None
Total Injuries: 1 None
Latitude, Longitude:  47.249167, -91.415556 (est)

One of Lewiston-Nez Perce County Airport (KLWS) two runways could get shorter, narrower in reconstruction project



A frequently used secondary runway at the Lewiston-Nez Perce County Regional Airport likely will be shortened when it is reconstructed to eliminate a safety hazard.

That's the message a Federal Aviation Administration official shared at the airport Thursday as plans take shape for the project, tentatively scheduled for next year.

Right now the safety zones of the airport's primary and secondary runways overlap. The FAA won't provide money for the runway rehabilitation project if that problem isn't eliminated, said Gary Gates, an FAA project engineer from Helena, Mont.

The only solutions are to reduce the length of the 5,100-foot secondary runway or realign it at a significantly higher cost, Gates said.

The length may not be the only change to the runway during the project. As it allocates its limited amount of money, the FAA can only help pay for 75 feet of width, instead of the existing 100 feet, Gates said.

Airport users are just beginning to size up how much the potential changes could affect their operations.

Some business jets or turbo props that routinely use the shorter runway couldn't land or take off from it if it were shorter because of FAA and manufacturers' guidelines, said Gary Peters, a heavy equipment dealer who is building an aviation museum at the airport's southside business park.

Often the secondary runway is the safest option for some types of smaller airplanes because of prevailing wind patterns, Peters said.

Reducing the runway width would make it less safe for aircraft that have wheels on the back instead of the front because pilots rely heavily on their peripheral vision in landing those planes, he said.

Among them are vintage airplanes, tanker planes used in agriculture and aircraft that work in the backcountry.

But given the airport's financial situation, getting the reconstruction completed within the FAA's parameters could be the best way to go, Peters said.

"We may want to forgo the width and the length, because frankly we don't have any money," he said.

The FAA puts a priority on maintaining secondary runways when the number of flights exceeds capacity or prevailing winds often make use of one of an airport's runways unsafe, Gates said.

Neither one of those issues is in play in Lewiston, though the FAA recognizes that about 75 percent of pilots use the secondary runway.

Corporate jets, agricultural aviation and vintage aircraft are in that majority.

A partnership could enable the airport to maintain the width, Gates said. The FAA would allow the Lewiston airport to find other money for 25 feet of width, and the FAA could still contribute about 94 percent of the funds for the 75 feet, he said.

That solution will likely carry a hefty price tag at a time when the Lewiston airport is about to take a huge financial hit. The estimate for the runway rehabilitation project at 75 feet is about $6 million, said Dave Mitchell, aviation services manager at T-O Engineers, a firm working with the Lewiston airport on the project.

Horizon Air has announced it is withdrawing its services entirely from Lewiston on Aug. 25, eliminating Boise and Seattle flights. That leaves SkyWest and its Salt Lake City routes as the only commercial passenger service in Lewiston. Passenger fees are the single largest source of money for the airport. Those fees were budgeted to be about $350,000 this year before the airport knew it was losing Horizon.

Airport officials will look at the numbers to see what the entity can contribute, Manager Stephanie Morgan said.

Keeping the runway's existing length is even less likely. The FAA won't participate in reconstruction if the safety hazard isn't addressed, Gates said.

Doing nothing on the secondary runway won't work either.

"It works fine now, but I don't know how much longer it will last. ... I don't think overlaying it is a good idea," Mitchell said.

Its surface was rated as very poor prior to the 2016-17 winter, a step ahead of a rating of serious, which is followed by failed or not usable, Mitchell said.

Snow and ice only accelerate the deterioration.

"When the airport tries to plow that runway, it causes damage," Mitchell said.

Original article can be found here ➤  http://lmtribune.com

Thursday, March 29, 2018

Bahamian Attorney: 'I Want To Say Aircraft Registry Is Finally Happening'

The Government has been urged to fund a Bahamian international aircraft registry in the upcoming 2018-2019 Budget, an attorney saying: "I want to finally say this is happening."

Llewellyn Boyer-Cartwright, a Bahamian aviation law specialist, told Tribune Business his international contacts were suggesting the "window of opportunity" remains open for the Bahamas to attract significant business to a facility that could be established within nine-12 months.

Describing an aircraft registry as 'low hanging fruit' for the Bahamian aviation sector, the Callenders & Co attorney and partner said such a rapid set-up was "doable" provided this nation dedicated the necessary funding, training, legislative and regulatory reforms.

In particular, Mr. Boyer-Cartwright warned that the Bahamas "will not be taken seriously" unless it removes the 10 percent Stamp duty on imported planes - something he said has never actually been levied but remains on the books, causing significant market uncertainty.

And he added that efforts to establish an aircraft registry would receive a further credibility boost if the Bahamas became a signatory to the Cape Town Treaty (Aircraft Convention), which gives financiers and leasing companies confidence that their liens and charges over planes - and plane parts - will be recognised and secure whatever jurisdiction the craft is in.

Mr. Boyer-Cartwright, who at times has seemingly led a 'one-man crusade' to establish such a registry, said these essential reforms would build on the platform provided by the Civil Aviation Act 2016 and its accompanying regulations.

"It's not onerous, it's not tedious and will not cost us as much as we think," told Tribune Business of an aircraft registry's creation. "The main thing initially would be the appropriate number of administrative staff, which could be five people, the proper software and marketing and branding.

"The registry is doable. We could probably get it up and running anywhere from nine to 12 months, once we have everything in place. It's very doable, compact and contained, if you will."

Mr. Boyer-Cartwright said signing the Cape Town Convention and eliminating the 10 percent duty on imported planes/maintenance parts were essential for the Bahamas to demonstrate it intended to be a serious competitor to rival international financial centres (IFCs) in the aircraft registry business.

"If the Bahamas becomes a Cape Town member state it really does say something; that they're to be taken seriously," he explained. "The feedback I received on Stamp Duty recently was that no one will take us seriously if we have that on the books. You're going to have to offer some incentive."

Mr. Boyer-Cartwright revealed that Bahamas-based companies and residents typically have to pay more when leasing aircraft from US companies because this nation is not a Cape Town Convention signatory, and the owner wants extra compensation for the extra risk.

Apart from increasing cost, and reducing affordability for Bahamas-based interests, the Callenders & Co attorney said the reluctance of banks to finance purchases of "mobile assets" such as aircraft meant buying options were limited.

As a result, Bahamian parties frequently ended up leasing planes long-term, while being reluctant to entertain lease-to-purchase deals for fear of being hit with the 10 per cent Stamp Duty when the aircraft was brought to the Bahamas.

Mr. Boyer-Cartwright, meanwhile, said the Bahamas might also have to 'bite the bullet' initially by acquiring foreign expertise to help train Bahamians in the management and administration of an international aircraft registry.

"It's a given that the legislation is already in place. I know one of the concerns would be the staffing and the resources, and I'm hoping this is part of the next Budget, I really do. I will go out on a limb, Neil, and say that like other jurisdictions we might very well need outside help initially and have to outsource it [administration and related training].

"That's not a bad thing. You get the right people in to train the Bahamians. Whether you do it in-house or outsource it, both have advantages and disadvantages, but at the same time I don't think we should be afraid to ask for outside help."

Mr. Boyer-Cartwright, seemingly single-handed, has been pushing the creation of a Bahamian international aircraft registry for at least five years, viewing it as a significant 'value added' product that would enable this nation to offer a 'one-stop shop' when it came to services targeted at high net worth clients.

"It's reached a point for me personally, in terms of my involvement, where I can no longer do this alone," he told Tribune Business. "I don't want to talk any more; I want to be able to say this is happening. This is it. I've given it a good run, and still have some energy left in me."

Dionisio D'Aguilar, minister of tourism and aviation, confirmed to Tribune Business he had told Mr Boyer-Cartwright to go out and develop the strategy for an international aircraft registry, then come back and discuss it with him when he was ready.

"The window of opportunity I feel is still there," the aviation law specialist confirmed. "People are still interested in doing business in the Bahamas. We can take advantage by taking the most positive aspects of other jurisdictions and making ours even better.

"I'm truly hoping we are going to see legislation in the near future, and that includes the ratification of the Cape Town Convention."

Mr. Boyer-Cartwright suggested the Bahamas use its high-end resident base to build a registry with private corporate aircraft first, before targeting the "transitory" cargo market featuring planes "between sale and lease" where the owners did not want to bring them back home.

He said these niches would act as 'building blocks' so the Bahamas could "find its feet" before going after the private cargo transportation market and fleet business, "where the serious money is".

Other potential opportunities were identified as Brexit, the UK's exit from the European Union (EU), and the impact this could have on IFC dependencies such as Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man, the latter of which now has 1,000 planes on its 10-year-old registry and is adding more at the rate of six per month.

Mr. Boyer-Cartwright added that an aircraft registry would also create increased spin-off business for the likes of Nassau Airport Development Company (NAD), in terms of parking, landing and maintenance fees, not to mention fuel supply.

"It's not going to happen overnight, but we have to start somewhere," he told Tribune Business. "It's 2018. Now we have to look at being dynamic and more innovative."

Original article can be found here ➤ http://www.tribune242.com

Department of Transportation Workers’ Age Bias Claims Revived Over Ex-Attorney Misstep

Law360 (March 28, 2018, 6:40 PM EDT) -- A D.C. federal judge on Tuesday reinstated claims from hundreds of flight service controllers who were dismissed from a long-running age discrimination suit against the U.S. Department of Transportation, saying new evidence suggests their former lawyers misled them about their rights and obligations in the litigation.

U.S. District Judge Paul L. Friedman granted a motion from more than 600 flight service controllers to reconsider a pair of court orders from May 2008 and February 2009 that dismissed them from the suit for failing to respond to court discovery orders, reinstating their claims based on new evidence showing that their former attorneys didn’t properly represent them.

“Instead of holding the dismissed plaintiffs accountable for Gebhardt & Associates’ misleading communications and the firm’s failure to fulfill its ethical and professional obligations to them, justice requires that this court reconsider their dismissals,” Judge Friedman said.

According to the ruling, the plaintiffs had letters and correspondence from their former attorneys at Gebhardt & Associates LLP, a Washington, D.C.-based employment law firm, in early 2007 demanding that each individual plaintiff pay $10,000 each if they wanted the firm to keep representing them in the age discrimination litigation, which first kicked off in 2005 and was organized by the National Association of Air Traffic Specialists. The union had stopped paying the firm because it was no longer receiving dues from affected members who were laid off by the Federal Aviation Administration, according to the ruling.

But the Gebhardt & Associates’ February 2007 letter to clients was misleading because it suggested that the plaintiffs might have to go it alone as pro se plaintiffs, and risk recovering very little from the FAA as a result, if they didn’t pay the $10,000. It didn’t make it clear that Gebhardt & Associates already represented each of the individual plaintiffs and, as a result, the firm had ongoing obligations toward its clients.

The law firm then refused to offer further legal assistance to the several hundred plaintiffs that didn’t pay the $10,000 each, including denying them help with responding to the court’s subsequent discovery requests, according to court documents. Gebhardt & Associates led the court to believe that the firm couldn’t get in touch with the individual plaintiffs who weren’t responding to the court’s discovery and show cause orders. The court also denied the firm’s attempt to withdraw as their counsel. But ultimately, because of their unresponsiveness, the court booted the plaintiffs from the litigation.

But Judge Friedman said Tuesday that the court now has the full picture and those plaintiffs should be let back into the case.

“Now having seen the complete contents of these letters, the court more fully understands the context giving rise to the dismissed plaintiffs’ misunderstandings — for example, that they were not already represented by counsel, that the class action was no longer proceeding, or that they would have no realistic chance of success if they could not pay $10,000 (and possibly more) to Gebhardt & Associates,” the ruling said.“With a more complete view of the attendant circumstances, the conduct of the dismissed plaintiffs now is more understandable. In light of this new evidence, justice requires reconsideration.”

The flight service controllers were all over the age of 40 and accused the DOT of age discrimination after they were laid off when the Federal Aviation Administration outsourced thousands of flight service jobs to defense contractor Lockheed Martin Corp.

The plaintiffs’ attorneys and representatives for the DOT could not be immediately reached for comment on Wednesday.

The air traffic controllers are represented by Joseph M. Sellers, Shaylyn Cochran, Brian Corman of Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC and Gary M. Gilbert, Linda A. Kincaid, Stephanie M. Herrera and Michal Shinnar of Gilbert Employment Law.

The federal defendants are represented by Chad A. Readler, Joshua E. Gardner and Lisa Zeidner Marcus of the U.S. Department of Justice.

The case Kathleen Breen et al v. Elaine L. Chao et al, case number 1:05-cv-00654, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Original article can be found here ➤ https://www.law360.com

Former fire chiefs: Gerald R. Ford International Airport (KGRR) slow to react to PFAS foam



CASCADE TOWNSHIP, Mich. (WOOD) — Former airport fire chiefs are questioning why the Gerald R. Ford International Airport didn't act sooner to investigate the PFAS-tainted firefighting foam they say they used there.

Ford Airport CEO James Gill said he became aware of the potential for PFAS contamination a year ago as news of polluted Air Force bases started to spread.

"So we've been looking into it over the last year. We're really trying to recreate that history we don't have," Gill said.

Among the questions, he said: How much they used, where they used it, and which way the water flows.

Three former Ford airport fire chiefs, all tracked down by Target 8, said they haven't heard from airport officials. They were in charge of buying and using the foam.

The airport had yet to contact the state's Department of Environmental Quality, which oversees such investigations.

Longtime airport board member Ted Vonk said he knew nothing about the PFAS potential.

"It's brand new to me," Vonk told Target 8. "It hasn't come up to the board members yet, so it is new to me. But as of the other problems around the airport, we get a handle on it and we're going to take care of it."



CHEMICAL USED TO FIGHT FIRES FOR DECADES

The former airport fire chiefs told Target 8 they used AFFF firefighting foam at the Ford for decades, starting in the late 1970s, mostly for training — all required by the FAA. They say thousands of gallons drained untreated into the ground. The training ended in about 2000, but PFAS, a likely carcinogen, can stick around for a long time in the environment and in the human body.

"When the airport has the knowledge that know it's a hazard, it wasn't at the time, now it's a hazard and now you need to be proactive," said Glen Lathers, airport fire chief from 1979 to 1989.

It's the same PFAS-tainted foam, the former chiefs said, that contaminated Wurtsmith Air Force Base in Oscoda and other bases around the country.

"They need to identify the plume, if there is one, and they need to immediately need to advise the people downstream to stop drinking the water," Lathers said.

"If it was my well, and I was downstream from it, I would be very, very concerned," said Bryan Kimble, fire chief from 2004 to 2010. "I would want somebody to be responsible for it."

FOAM ON THORNAPPLE RIVER TRIBUTARY

Then there's the mysterious foam discovered by Target 8 on Wednesday on a stream near the airport. The stream leads to the Thornapple River.

The bright, white foam piled up at the end of a culvert that carries the stream under Oak Tree Drive SE.  Bubbles clung to a log above the water.

Target 8 reported it to the DEQ. The DEQ said it plans to investigate whether it's the same kind of PFAS foam found on a lake and stream near Wurtsmith Air Force Base.

"Certainly we'd be anxious to hear what the state has to say as well," said Gill, the airport CEO.



NEIGHBORS WANT WELLS TESTED

Some airport neighbors said they had no idea about the potential for PFAS. They called for well testing.

"The only way to find out if that's true or not is to actually test them," said Raul Alvarez, who lives on Forest Valley Drive SE. "To me, it just makes sense. It's just logical that that's the step you take."

Alvarez's family is among more than 400 in the neighborhood wedged between the airport and the Thornapple River.

"It's a family-friendly community, lots of kids," he said. "There's no sidewalks and no one has ever wanted them because it's just friendly and people just enjoy it, so it would affect a lot of families and it would affect kids, and that's probably one of the worst things we can do."

Most are on well water.

"It's unfortunate given what we've seen not only in Flint but closer to home here in Rockford," he said. "I'd hate for that to happen to any other residents in the community."

Scott Rissi, president of the Thornapple River Association, remembers seeing the black smoke from the practice fires at the airport years ago. He lives on the east side of the river, across from the airport.

"If I lived in that area (on the west bank of the Thornapple), I would have my well checked," Rissi said. "I know that the water runs in that direction, the groundwater's running in that direction, and if there's problems there, expose them, bring light to them."

The DEQ told Target 8 that it planned to work with the airport.

"We do not yet have any information regarding the use of PFAS containing firefighting foam at the Gerald R. Ford airport, but we are available to provide technical support to assist the airport to investigate any potential ground water contamination in the area," DEQ spokesman Scott Dean said in a written statement.

Cascade Township Supervisor Rob Beahan said it was the first he's heard of the possibility of PFAS contamination at the airport.

"We have reached out to the airport and to county and state officials to begin to gather information," he said in a statement released to Target 8 on Wednesday.

Original article can be found here ➤ http://www.woodtv.com

Salt Lake City International Airport (KSLC) fire training facility will close in June



SALT LAKE CITY -- A training facility used by thousands of firefighters to prepare for an aviation disaster will close at the end of June.

The Salt Lake City International Airport confirmed on Thursday it intended to close its Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting Training Center, located just west of the terminals. The facility has been open since 1997, providing a realistic experience for firefighters from across the country—and other places.

"Guys from Antarctica, that's probably the furthest away we've seen," said Ron Buckmiller, an aircraft rescue firefighter with the Salt Lake City Fire Department.

The ARFF training center has a replica aircraft where firefighters can train for anything from a small cigarette fire in a lavatory to a full-on disaster.

"It's trying to create a realistic scenario to help these firefighters get better," said Buckmiller.

When the aircraft is lit up for training, it startles passengers and locals alike, who call 911 and local news stations to report a plane crash.

"We do get occasional calls or emails asking if there's a plane on fire," said airport spokeswoman Nancy Volmer. "We always assure our passengers, 'No, it's not. It's training.'"

The facility's closure in June is because of budget reasons, Volmer said. It would cost millions to upgrade and keep up.

"It would be about $2 million and that would only get us through three to five years, and then we'd have to make another substantial investment in the facility," said Volmer. "As much as we hated to do it, we had to close the facility."

Salt Lake City International Airport said it is not connected to a multi-billion dollar project underway to build a new terminal and concourses, slated to open in 2020. No firefighters will lose their jobs, but Salt Lake City firefighters will have to now travel out-of-state for their annual training.

Volmer said it was possible a few years from now that the Salt Lake City International Airport could budget for a new Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting facility.

Original article can be found here ➤  http://fox13now.com

Beechcraft 99, N31TN: Accident occurred March 29, 2018 at King Salmon Airport (PAKN), Alaska

Additional Participating Entity:
Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Anchorage, Alaska

Aviation Accident Final Report - National Transportation Safety Board: https://app.ntsb.gov/pdf

Investigation Docket - National Transportation Safety Board: https://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms

http://registry.faa.gov/N1TN


Analysis 

The pilot reported that, after exiting instrument meteorological conditions during a circling approach, he was "a little above" the normal glidepath; as the airplane crossed the approach end of the runway, the airplane began to sink rapidly and drift to the left. He added power to initiate a go-around, but the airplane continued to sink and landed with the left main landing gear off the left side of the runway. As the airplane became airborne again, he attempted to retract the landing gear, "but the handle was locked in place." He noticed that the left and right main landing gear extension lights were illuminated, but the nose landing gear light was not. The pilot noticed a positive rate of climb and decided to fly to an alternate airport.

The pilot reported that, while en route to the alternate airport, a passenger reported that they smelled smoke, so he turned off electrical equipment. A pilot-rated passenger assisted with circuit breaker troubleshooting before turning on the battery again for communications. He instructed the pilot-rated passenger to visually examine the landing gear; the passenger reported that the left main landing gear was extended without damage and the right main landing gear was "bent back," with damage to the right flap with fuel leaking from the wing.

After contacting the alternate airport's tower, the pilot reported that he declared an emergency and provided a safety brief to the passengers. He added that, at the alternate airport, he performed an instrument landing system approach, and over the approach end of the runway, he reduced power, feathered the propellers, and moved both fuel levers to fuel cutoff. During landing, the right main landing gear collapsed, the right wing settled onto the runway, and the airplane began to pull to the right. The pilot added left rudder to maintain the runway centerline and the airplane came to rest on the runway.

The airplane sustained substantial damage to the right wing.

The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. 

Probable Cause and Findings

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be:
The pilot's failure to maintain an adequate approach path and runway centerline during the initial landing, which resulted in a hard landing to the left of the runway and damage to the landing gear and wing.

Findings

Aircraft
Descent/approach/glide path - Not attained/maintained (Cause)
Heading/course - Not attained/maintained (Cause)
Main landing gear - Damaged/degraded

Personnel issues
Aircraft control - Pilot (Cause)

Factual Information

History of Flight

Landing-flare/touchdown
Hard landing (Defining event)

Landing-landing roll
Runway excursion
Landing gear collapse

Location: King Salmon, AK
Accident Number: GAA18CA187
Date & Time: 03/29/2018, 1320 AKD
Registration: N31TN
Aircraft: BEECH 99
Aircraft Damage: Substantial
Defining Event: Hard landing
Injuries: 8 None
Flight Conducted Under:  Part 135: Air Taxi & Commuter - Non-scheduled

The pilot reported that, after exiting instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) during a circling approach, he was "a little above" normal glidepath and as the airplane crossed the approach end of the runway, the airplane began to sink rapidly and drift to the left. He added power to initiate a go around, but the airplane continued to sink, and landed with the left main landing gear off the left side of the runway. As the airplane became airborne again, he attempted to retract the landing gear, "but the handle was locked in place". He noticed that the left and right main landing gear extension lights were illuminated, but the nose landing gear light was not. The pilot noticed a positive rate of climb and decided to fly to an alternate airport.

The pilot reported that, while en route to the alternate airport, a passenger reported that they smelled smoke, so he turned off electrical equipment. He utilized a pilot-rated passenger to assist with circuit breaker troubleshooting before turning on the battery again for communications. He instructed the pilot-rated passenger to visually examine the landing gear, who reported that the left main landing gear was extended without damage and the right main landing gear was "bent back", with damage to the right flap with fuel leaking from the wing.

After contacting the alternate airport's tower, the pilot reported that he declared an emergency and provided a safety brief to the passengers. He added that, at the alternate airport, he performed an instrument landing system (ILS) approach and over the approach end of the runway, he reduced power, feathered the propellers, and moved both fuel levers to fuel cutoff. During landing, the right main landing gear collapsed, the right wing settled onto the runway, and the airplane began to pull to the right. The pilot added left rudder to maintain the runway centerline and the airplane came to rest on the runway.

The airplane sustained substantial damage to the right wing.

The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation. 

Pilot Information

Certificate: Commercial
Age: 31, Male
Airplane Rating(s): Multi-engine Land; Single-engine Land; Single-engine Sea
Seat Occupied: Left
Other Aircraft Rating(s): None
Restraint Used: 4-point
Instrument Rating(s): Airplane
Second Pilot Present: No
Instructor Rating(s): None
Toxicology Performed: No
Medical Certification: Class 2 Without Waivers/Limitations
Last FAA Medical Exam: 05/24/2017
Occupational Pilot: Yes
Last Flight Review or Equivalent: 12/29/2017
Flight Time: (Estimated) 4056 hours (Total, all aircraft), 103 hours (Total, this make and model), 3918 hours (Pilot In Command, all aircraft), 230 hours (Last 90 days, all aircraft), 69 hours (Last 30 days, all aircraft), 8 hours (Last 24 hours, all aircraft)

Aircraft and Owner/Operator Information

Aircraft Manufacturer: BEECH
Registration: N31TN
Model/Series: 99 UNDESIGNATED
Aircraft Category: Airplane
Year of Manufacture: 1969
Amateur Built: No
Airworthiness Certificate: Normal
Serial Number: U49
Landing Gear Type: Retractable - Tricycle
Seats: 10
Date/Type of Last Inspection: 03/21/2018, Continuous Airworthiness
Certified Max Gross Wt.: 10400 lbs
Time Since Last Inspection:
Engines: 2 Turbo Prop
Airframe Total Time: 39673.3 Hours at time of accident
Engine Manufacturer: P&W
ELT: C126 installed, not activated
Engine Model/Series: PT6A-20
Registered Owner: LAKE CLARK AIR INC
Rated Power: 550 hp
Operator: LAKE CLARK AIR INC
Operating Certificate(s) Held: On-demand Air Taxi (135)
Operator Does Business As:
Operator Designator Code: HXXC 

Meteorological Information and Flight Plan

Conditions at Accident Site: Instrument Conditions
Condition of Light: Day
Observation Facility, Elevation: PAII, 92 ft msl
Observation Time: 2130 UTC
Distance from Accident Site: 38 Nautical Miles
Direction from Accident Site: 218°
Lowest Cloud Condition:
Temperature/Dew Point: 0°C / -1°C
Lowest Ceiling: Overcast / 200 ft agl
Visibility:  
Wind Speed/Gusts, Direction: 6 knots, 270°
Visibility (RVR):
Altimeter Setting: 30.52 inches Hg
Visibility (RVV): 
Precipitation and Obscuration: Moderate - Mist
Departure Point: DILLINGHAM, AK (DLG)
Type of Flight Plan Filed: IFR
Destination: PILOT POINT, AK (PNP)
Type of Clearance: IFR
Departure Time: 1200 AKD
Type of Airspace: Class D

Airport Information

Airport: KING SALMON (AKN)
Runway Surface Type: Asphalt
Airport Elevation: 73 ft
Runway Surface Condition: Snow; Wet
Runway Used: 12
IFR Approach: ILS
Runway Length/Width: 8901 ft / 150 ft
VFR Approach/Landing: Full Stop 

Wreckage and Impact Information

Crew Injuries: 1 None
Aircraft Damage: Substantial
Passenger Injuries: 7 None
Aircraft Fire: None
Ground Injuries: N/A
Aircraft Explosion: None
Total Injuries: 8 None
Latitude, Longitude: 58.679722, -156.656111 (est)


Eight people on board a scheduled commuter flight are safe after an emergency landing in King Salmon Thursday afternoon, forced by a ground strike during an attempted landing at its original destination.

Lake Clark Air employees said the plane had been en route from Dillingham to Pilot Point at the time of the incident.

According to National Transportation Safety Board investigator Mike Hodges the Beechcraft 99 had been attempting to make a routine landing in Pilot Point at the time. One pilot and seven passengers were on board.

“During the instrument approach, the plane impacted terrain,” Hodges said. “After the airplane impacted terrain the pilot made a go-around and initiated landing at (the) King Salmon airport.”

Alaska State Troopers said in an online dispatch that they were told the plane was inbound to King Salmon just before 1 p.m. Thursday.

After touching down on the main runway, none of the occupants were injured but “damage to the Beechcraft was sustained on the right wing and the landing gear.”

“The main runway is currently closed for aircraft removal,” troopers wrote.

Another Lake Clark Air plane is en route to take the passengers to their original destinations, according to airline staff.

Original article can be found here ➤ http://www.ktva.com