Thursday, March 14, 2019

Runway Incursion - Aircraft: North American T-28B Trojan, N5440F and Cessna 152, N48962; fatal accident occurred March 13, 2019 at Compton-Woodley Airport (KCPM), Los Angeles County, California

Lukas Michael Swidzinski
~

Lukas Swidzinski, piano
~


Aviation Accident Final Report - National Transportation Safety Board

The National Transportation Safety Board traveled to the scene of this accident.

Additional Participating Entity: 

Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Los Angeles, California

Investigation Docket - National Transportation Safety Board: 

Tomorrow's Aeronautical Museum


Long Beach Flying Club

Candace A Larned Enterprises LLC


Location: Compton, California
Accident Number: WPR19FA095
Date and Time: March 13, 2019, 18:50 Local
Registration: N5440F (A1); N48962 (A2)
Aircraft: North American T28 (A1); Cessna 152 (A2)
Aircraft Damage: Minor (A1); Destroyed (A2)
Defining Event: Runway incursion veh/AC/person
Injuries: 1 None (A1); 1 Fatal, 1 Serious (A2)
Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General aviation - Personal (A1); Part 91: General aviation - Instructional (A2)

Analysis

The student pilot and flight instructor in the Cessna were landing at the non-tower-controlled airport when a North American T-28 collided with the Cessna from behind, fatally injuring the student. Radar data indicated that the T-28 overflew the airport before joining the downwind leg of the traffic pattern for the landing runway; about this time, the Cessna was on final approach. The pilot of the T-28 reported that the bright sun and the haze created a glare on the windscreen that obscured his forward vision, making it difficult for him to see directly ahead, and the glare became worse as he descended toward the runway on final approach. The T-28 pilot saw the Cessna ahead of him on the runway just before the collision occurred.

The instructor onboard the Cessna could not recall the details of the flight but reported that his student would have made radio calls on the airport's common traffic advisory frequency (CTAF) as they approached the airport for landing. The CTAF was not recorded, and the radio frequency settings of the Cessna could not be determined due to thermal damage. Examination of the T-28 revealed that its radio was not tuned to the airport's CTAF; therefore, the T-28 pilot was neither receiving position reports from other aircraft in the traffic pattern, nor was he broadcasting his position. The circumstances of the accident are consistent with the T-28 pilot's failure to see and avoid the Cessna while landing with reduced visibility due to sun glare, and it is likely that his failure to monitor and use the CTAF contributed to the accident.

Probable Cause and Findings

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be:
The failure of the T-28 pilot to see and avoid the Cessna while landing with reduced visibility due to sun glare, which resulted in a collision on the runway. Contributing to the accident was his failure to use the airport's common traffic advisory frequency during the approach and landing.

Findings

Personnel issues (A1) Monitoring communications - Pilot
Environmental issues (A1) Bright light - Contributed to outcome
Personnel issues (A1) Monitoring other aircraft - Pilot
Environmental issues (A1) Glare - Effect on personnel
Personnel issues (A2) Attention - Pilot of other aircraft

Factual Information

History of Flight

Landing-landing roll (A1) Runway incursion veh/AC/person (Defining event)
Landing-landing roll (A2) Runway incursion veh/AC/person

On March 13, 2019, about 1850 Pacific daylight time, a Cessna 152 airplane, N48962, and a North American T-28 Trojan (T-28), N5440F, were involved in an accident near Compton, California. The T28 sustained substantial damage and the airline transport pilot onboard was not injured. The student pilot onboard the Cessna was fatally injured, and the flight instructor sustained serious injuries; the airplane was destroyed. The T-28 was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91 personal flight; the Cessna was operated as a Title 14 CFR Part 91 instructional flight.

Review of radar data revealed two discrete secondary beacon code targets that were correlated to the two airplanes as they approached Compton/Woodley Airport (CPM); the Cessna from the south-southwest and the T-28 from the north/east. (See figure 1.) The instructor onboard the Cessna stated that he and the student were simulating a diversion to CPM. He was seriously injured during the accident and could not recall the details of the flight but stated that the student would have made all radio calls over the airport's common radio frequency. Radar indicated that the Cessna entered the airport traffic pattern on the downwind leg at an altitude about 950 ft above ground level (agl), then proceeded to fly the base and final legs of the traffic pattern for runway 25 left (25L). 

The T-28 pilot stated that he was returning the airplane to CPM following maintenance. As he approached the area at an altitude about 1,000 ft above ground level (agl), he began to become concerned, because the haze was extreme and the sun was low and bright, obscuring his forward vision. He was initially unable to find CPM but located an open area without buildings and thought that was likely the airport, which he confirmed as he got closer. In an effort to announce his presence at the airport, he overflew the runway from the southeast, crossing midfield then making left descending turns into the left traffic pattern for runway 25.

Radar data indicated that the T-28 approached CPM from the east, overflew the airport about 700 to 750 ft agl, then entered the left downwind leg of the traffic pattern for runway 25L. (See figure 2.)

The T-28 pilot stated that as he turned from the base to final legs, the bright sun and the haze created a glare on the windscreen that obscured his forward vision, making it difficult for him to see directly ahead. As he descended toward the runway, the glare became worse and he realized he was between runways 25L and 25R. He side-stepped to runway 25L and the airplane touched down on the runway surface. Several seconds later, the pilot saw the Cessna on the runway ahead of him. He applied hard braking and felt the impact with the other plane and resulting explosion immediately thereafter. The T28 continued about 1,000 ft before coming to rest off the right side of runway 25L. (See figure 3.)

Multiple video recordings captured the accident (see figure 4); review of the footage revealed that the Cessna touched down on runway 25L and continued its landing roll. The T-28 crossed the runway threshold about 10 seconds after the Cessna and subsequently touched down about 1850:36. On the landing roll, adjacent to the runway halfway point sign, the T-28 impacted the Cessna.

Pilot Information (A1)

Certificate: Airline transport; Commercial; Flight engineer; Flight instructor; Military 
Age: 84,Male
Airplane Rating(s): Single-engine land; Multi-engine land
Seat Occupied: Front
Other Aircraft Rating(s): None 
Restraint Used: 4-point
Instrument Rating(s): Airplane
Second Pilot Present: No
Instructor Rating(s): Airplane single-engine
Toxicology Performed: No
Medical Certification: Class 3 With waivers/limitations 
Last FAA Medical Exam: December 5, 2018
Occupational Pilot: No 
Last Flight Review or Equivalent: March 15, 2017
Flight Time: 24000 hours (Total, all aircraft), 400 hours (Total, this make and model), 18000 hours (Pilot In Command, all aircraft), 3 hours (Last 90 days, all aircraft), 1 hours (Last 30 days, all aircraft), 1 hours (Last 24 hours, all aircraft)

Flight instructor Information (A2)

Certificate: Airline transport; Commercial; Flight instructor
Age: 34,Male
Airplane Rating(s): Single-engine land; Multi-engine land
Seat Occupied: Right
Other Aircraft Rating(s): None
Restraint Used: Unknown
Instrument Rating(s): Airplane
Second Pilot Present: No
Instructor Rating(s): Airplane multi-engine; Airplane single-engine; Instrument airplane
Toxicology Performed: No
Medical Certification: Class 1 Without waivers/limitations
Last FAA Medical Exam: August 3, 2018
Occupational Pilot: Yes 
Last Flight Review or Equivalent:
Flight Time: (Estimated) 9542 hours (Total, all aircraft), 1674 hours (Total, this make and model), 9402 hours (Pilot In Command, all aircraft), 107 hours (Last 90 days, all aircraft), 55 hours (Last 30 days, all aircraft), 1 hours (Last 24 hours, all aircraft)

Student pilot Information (A2)

Certificate: Student
Age: 40, Male
Airplane Rating(s): None 
Seat Occupied: Left
Other Aircraft Rating(s): None
Restraint Used: Unknown
Instrument Rating(s): None 
Second Pilot Present: No
Instructor Rating(s): None
Toxicology Performed: Yes
Medical Certification: Class 1 With waivers/limitations
Last FAA Medical Exam: November 7, 2018
Occupational Pilot: No
Last Flight Review or Equivalent:
Flight Time: (Estimated) 22 hours (Total, all aircraft), 22 hours (Total, this make and model), 1 hours (Pilot In Command, all aircraft), 15 hours (Last 90 days, all aircraft), 5 hours (Last 30 days, all aircraft), 1 hours (Last 24 hours, all aircraft)

T-28 Pilot (A-1)

The 84-year-old pilot was issued a third-class special issuance Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) airman medical certificate with a limitation for glasses for near vision. On his most recent medical exam, his color vision and field of vision were normal, and his uncorrected distant vision was 20/30. At his November 2017 ophthalmology examination, the pilot was diagnosed with age-related cataracts that had both a nuclear and cortical component. He was noted to wear eyeglasses with prism correction, and his uncorrected distant vision was 20/30 in each eye. An ophthalmology exam on October 2019 found a worsening of his cataracts and distant vision.

Review of the pilot’s uncorrected vision results from exams spanning over thirty years for first or second-class medical certification showed some gradual decrement of distant vision with aging, which required him to wear corrective lenses when flying.

The T-28 pilot stated that he used his “Flight Guide” book for determining airport frequencies. Examination of the actual guide found at the airplane revealed that the page for CPM was missing; a paper note in place of the page read, “Pg 34, Aug 2017 Compton a/d removed.” 

Aircraft and Owner/Operator Information (A1)

Aircraft Make: North American
Registration: N5440F
Model/Series: T28 B 
Aircraft Category: Airplane
Year of Manufacture: 1956 
Amateur Built: No
Airworthiness Certificate: Experimental (Special)
Serial Number: 138294
Landing Gear Type: Retractable - Tricycle
Seats: 2
Date/Type of Last Inspection: Unknown
Certified Max Gross Wt.: 850 lbs
Time Since Last Inspection: 
Engines: 1 Reciprocating
Airframe Total Time:
Engine Manufacturer: Wright
ELT: Installed Engine Model/Series: R-1820-86B
Registered Owner: Rated Power: 1475 Horsepower
Operator: Operating Certificate(s)
Held: None

Aircraft and Owner/Operator Information (A2)

Aircraft Make: Cessna
Registration: N48962
Model/Series: 152 No Series
Aircraft Category: Airplane
Year of Manufacture: 1977
Amateur Built: No
Airworthiness Certificate: Normal 
Serial Number: 15281075
Landing Gear Type: Tricycle 
Seats: 2
Date/Type of Last Inspection: February 20, 2019 100 hour
Certified Max Gross Wt.: 1675 lbs
Time Since Last Inspection: 68 Hrs
Engines: 1 Reciprocating
Airframe Total Time: 20105 Hrs at time of accident
Engine Manufacturer: Lycoming
ELT: Installed, activated, did not aid in locating accident
Engine Model/Series: O-235-L2C
Registered Owner: 
Rated Power:
Operator:
Operating Certificate(s) Held: None

Meteorological Information and Flight Plan

Conditions at Accident Site: Visual (VMC) 
Condition of Light: Day
Observation Facility, Elevation: KHHR,63 ft msl
Distance from Accident Site: 5 Nautical Miles
Observation Time: 01:53 Local 
Direction from Accident Site: 293°
Lowest Cloud Condition: Clear
Visibility:  10 miles
Lowest Ceiling: None 
Visibility (RVR):
Wind Speed/Gusts: 11 knots / 16 knots
Turbulence Type Forecast/Actual:  /
Wind Direction: 270°
Turbulence Severity Forecast/Actual:  /
Altimeter Setting: 30.02 inches Hg 
Temperature/Dew Point: 17°C / 0°C
Precipitation and Obscuration: No Obscuration; No Precipitation
Departure Point: Los Angeles, CA (WHP) (A1); Long Beach, CA (LGB) (A2)
Type of Flight Plan Filed: None (A1); None (A2)
Destination: Compton, CA (CPM) (A1); Long Beach, CA (LGB) (A2)
Type of Clearance: None (A1); None (A2)
Departure Time: 18:30 Local (A1); 18:30 Local (A2)
Type of Airspace:
The time of sunset was 1859:24. 

The sun’s azimuth at the time of the accident was 267° (see figure 5) and the elevation was slightly above the horizon at 0.50°. 


Airport Information

Airport: Compton/Woodley CPM 
Runway Surface Type: Asphalt
Airport Elevation: 98 ft msl
Runway Surface Condition: Dry
Runway Used: 25L 
IFR Approach: None
Runway Length/Width: 3322 ft / 60 ft 
VFR Approach/Landing: Traffic pattern

Wreckage and Impact Information (A1)

Crew Injuries: 1 None
Aircraft Damage: Minor
Passenger Injuries:
Aircraft Fire: None
Ground Injuries: 
Aircraft Explosion: None
Total Injuries: 1 None 
Latitude, Longitude: 33.889446,-118.24083

Wreckage and Impact Information (A2)

Crew Injuries: 1 Fatal, 1 Serious
Aircraft Damage: Destroyed
Passenger Injuries:
Aircraft Fire: On-ground
Ground Injuries: 
Aircraft Explosion: On-ground
Total Injuries: 1 Fatal, 1 Serious 
Latitude, Longitude: 33.889446,-118.24083

The Cessna came to rest on the north side of runway 25L, about 150 ft west of the left outboard wing. The T-28 was 450 ft further west of the Cessna. The marks on runway revealed no indications of braking by the T-28 before the collision.

Additional Information

FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 90-66B, Non-Towered Airport Flight Operations, recommends that:

All traffic within a 10-mile radius of a non-towered airport or a part-time-towered airport when the control tower is not operating should continuously monitor and communicate, as appropriate, on the designated CTAF until leaving the area or until clear of the movement area. After first monitoring the frequency for other traffic present passing within 10 miles from the airport, self-announcing of your position and intentions should occur between 8 and 10 miles from the airport upon arrival. Departing aircraft should continuously monitor/communicate on the appropriate frequency from startup, during taxi, and until 10 miles from the airport, unless 14 CFR or local procedures require otherwise.

Communications

Neither pilot was in contact with an air traffic control facility, nor were they required to be. CPM's common traffic advisory frequency (CTAF) was not recorded.

The Cessna's radio settings could not be determined due to thermal damage. The T-28 was equipped with a Garmin GTR SL40 communications radio, located immediately below a Garmin 327 transponder mounted to the bottom of the panel. When the electrical system was powered on following the accident, the active radio frequency was 125.00 and the standby frequency was 121.50. The CPM CTAF was 123.05. Commonly referred to as "GUARD," 121.5 MHz is reserved for emergency communications for aircraft in distress, as well as the frequency utilized by earlier generation emergency locator transmitters as a means of locating downed aircraft.

When positioned in the pilot's seat in the T-28, investigators noted that the radio frequencies were partially obscured from the pilot’s field of vision. While in a normal flying position, an investigator of similar height of the T-28 pilot could only see the bottom half of the displayed frequencies.

Preventing Similar Accidents

See and Be Seen

Adequate visual lookout while flying in visual meteorological conditions is critical to avoiding other aircraft. While accidents can occur in high-traffic areas (near airports), they can also occur in cruise flight.

All pilots can be vulnerable to distractions in the cockpit, and the presence of technology has introduced challenges to the see-and-avoid concept. Aviation applications on portable electronic devices (PEDs) such as cell phones, tablets, and handheld GPS units, while useful, can lead to more head-down time, limiting a pilot's ability to see other aircraft.

Pilots need to be vigilant and use proper techniques to methodically scan for traffic throughout your flight, not only in high-volume traffic areas. Dividing attention inside and outside the aircraft and minimizing distractions (including nonessential conversations, photography or sightseeing activities, and PED use) that may degrade the ability to maintain awareness of other aircraft are two strategies that can help improve traffic scans. Passengers can help look for traffic and, during instructional flights, one pilot should always be responsible for scanning for traffic.

Aircraft visible to other aircraft can be improved by turning on available lights, including anti-collision lights, and using high-intensity discharge or LED lighting.

Pilots should clearly communicate intentions and use standard phraseology, known distances, and obvious ground references to alert other pilots of their location.

Some conditions make it harder to see other aircraft, such as operating in areas where aircraft could be masked by surrounding terrain or buildings and when sun glare is present. Effective use of on-board traffic advisory systems, when available, can help pilots visually acquire and avoid other aircraft but is not a substitute for an outside visual scan.

See http://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-alerts/documents/SA_045.pdf for additional resources.

The NTSB presents this information to prevent recurrence of similar accidents. Note that this should not be considered guidance from the regulator, nor does this supersede existing FAA Regulations (FARs).










Location: Compton, CA
Accident Number: WPR19FA095A
Date & Time: 03/13/2019, 1855 PDT
Registration: N5440F
Aircraft: North American T28
Injuries: 1 None
Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General Aviation - Personal 

On March 13, 2019, about 1855 Pacific daylight time, a Cessna 152 airplane, N48962, and a North American T-28 Trojan, N5440F, collided while landing on runway 25L at the Compton/Woodley Airport, Compton, California. The student onboard the Cessna was fatally injured and the flight instructor sustained serious injuries; the Cessna was destroyed after being consumed by fire. The Airline Transport Pilot onboard the T-28 was not injured; the T-28 sustained minor damage. The T-28 was operated by Tomorrow's Aeronautical Museum and the Cessna was operated by the Long Beach Flying Club. Both airplanes were being operated under Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 as personal flights. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan was filed for either flight. The Cessna departed for a local instructional flight from the Long Beach Airport, Long Beach, California at an unknown time. The T-28 departed for a local personal flight from Whiteman Airport, Los Angeles, California about 1830 with a planned destination of Compton.

There were multiple video recordings that captured the accident. A review of the footage revealed that the Cessna touched down and continued on the landing roll out. The T-28 crossed over the runway threshold bar about 10 seconds after the Cessna and subsequently touched down. On the landing roll, adjacent to the "1/2" sign (indicates half of the runway remains), the T-28 impacted the Cessna resulting in an explosion.


The T-28 pilot stated that as he turned the airplane left from the base leg to final approach in the traffic pattern for runway 25L, he noticed a layer of haze on the horizon. The bright sun and the haze created a glare on the windscreen that obscured his forward vision making it difficult for him to see directly ahead. As he descended toward the runway, the glare became worse and he realized he was in between runway 25L and 25R. He side-stepped to runway 25L and the airplane touched down on the runway surface. Several seconds later, the pilot observed the Cessna on the runway ahead of him. He felt the impact with the other airplane and resulting explosion immediately thereafter. The T-28 continued about 1,000 ft before coming to rest off the right side of 25L (see figure 01).



Figure 01: Wreckage Distribution

Utilizing the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sunrise/sunset calculator and solar position calculator, the time of sunset was 1859:24. The sun's azimuth at the time of the accident was 267° (see figure 02) and the elevation was 0.50° (about 90 ft above the horizon).

Figure 02: Solar Position 

Aircraft and Owner/Operator Information


Aircraft Make: North American

Registration: N5440F
Model/Series: T28 B
Aircraft Category: Airplane
Amateur Built: No
Operator:
Operating Certificate(s) Held: None

Meteorological Information and Flight Plan


Conditions at Accident Site: Visual Conditions

Condition of Light: Day
Observation Facility, Elevation: KHHR, 63 ft msl
Observation Time: 0153 UTC
Distance from Accident Site: 5 Nautical Miles
Temperature/Dew Point: 17°C / 0°C
Lowest Cloud Condition: Clear
Wind Speed/Gusts, Direction: 11 knots / 16 knots, 270°
Lowest Ceiling: None
Visibility:  10 Miles
Altimeter Setting: 30.02 inches Hg
Type of Flight Plan Filed: None
Departure Point: Los Angeles, CA (WHP)
Destination: Compton, CA (CPM)

Wreckage and Impact Information


Crew Injuries: 1 None

Aircraft Damage: Minor
Passenger Injuries: N/A
Aircraft Fire: None
Ground Injuries: N/A
Aircraft Explosion: None
Total Injuries: 1 None
Latitude, Longitude: 33.889444, -118.240833


Location: Compton, CA
Accident Number: WPR19FA095B
Date & Time: 03/13/2019, 1855 PDT
Registration: N48962
Aircraft: Cessna 152
Injuries: 1 Fatal, 1 Serious
Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General Aviation - Instructional 

On March 13, 2019, about 1855 Pacific daylight time, a Cessna 152 airplane, N48962, and a North American T-28 Trojan, N5440F, collided while landing on runway 25L at the Compton/Woodley Airport, Compton, California. The student onboard the Cessna was fatally injured and the flight instructor sustained serious injuries; the Cessna was destroyed after being consumed by fire. The Airline Transport Pilot onboard the T-28 was not injured; the T-28 sustained minor damage. The T-28 was operated by Tomorrow's Aeronautical Museum and the Cessna was operated by the Long Beach Flying Club. Both airplanes were being operated under Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 as personal flights. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan was filed for either flight. The Cessna departed for a local instructional flight from the Long Beach Airport, Long Beach, California at an unknown time. The T-28 departed for a local personal flight from Whiteman Airport, Los Angeles, California about 1830 with a planned destination of Compton.

There were multiple video recordings that captured the accident. A review of the footage revealed that the Cessna touched down and continued on the landing roll out. The T-28 crossed over the runway threshold bar about 10 seconds after the Cessna and subsequently touched down. On the landing roll, adjacent to the "1/2" sign (indicates half of the runway remains), the T-28 impacted the Cessna resulting in an explosion.

The T-28 pilot stated that as he turned the airplane left from the base leg to final approach in the traffic pattern for runway 25L, he noticed a layer of haze on the horizon. The bright sun and the haze created a glare on the windscreen that obscured his forward vision making it difficult for him to see directly ahead. As he descended toward the runway, the glare became worse and he realized he was in between runway 25L and 25R. He side-stepped to runway 25L and the airplane touched down on the runway surface. Several seconds later, the pilot observed the Cessna on the runway ahead of him. He felt the impact with the other airplane and resulting explosion immediately thereafter. The T-28 continued about 1,000 ft before coming to rest off the right side of 25L (see figure 01).


Figure 01: Wreckage Distribution

Utilizing the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sunrise/sunset calculator and solar position calculator, the time of sunset was 1859:24. The sun's azimuth at the time of the accident was 267° (see figure 02) and the elevation was 0.50° (about 90 ft above the horizon).

Figure 02: Solar Position 

Aircraft and Owner/Operator Information

Aircraft Make: Cessna

Registration: N48962
Model/Series: 152 No Series
Aircraft Category: Airplane
Amateur Built: No
Operator: Long Beach Flying Club
Operating Certificate(s) Held: None

Meteorological Information and Flight Plan


Conditions at Accident Site: Visual Conditions

Condition of Light: Day
Observation Facility, Elevation: KHHR, 63 ft msl
Observation Time: 0153 UTC
Distance from Accident Site: 5 Nautical Miles
Temperature/Dew Point: 17°C / 0°C
Lowest Cloud Condition: Clear
Wind Speed/Gusts, Direction: 11 knots / 16 knots, 270°
Lowest Ceiling: None
Visibility:  10 Miles
Altimeter Setting: 30.02 inches Hg
Type of Flight Plan Filed: None
Departure Point: Long Beach, CA (LGB)
Destination:  Long Beach, CA (LGB)

Wreckage and Impact Information


Crew Injuries: 1 Fatal, 1 Serious

Aircraft Damage: Destroyed
Passenger Injuries: N/A
Aircraft Fire: On-Ground
Ground Injuries: N/A
Aircraft Explosion: On-Ground
Total Injuries: 1 Fatal, 1 Serious
Latitude, Longitude: 33.889444, -118.240833




Lukas, a friend, brother, son and mentor. 

Lukas has been fascinated with airplanes and had dreams to become a pilot himself. Unfortunately, last Wednesday Lukas and his flight instructor were involved in tragic plane accident and as a result Lukas did not survive. He was enthusiastic with everything he did in his life and he died doing one of the things he loved most. 

Lukas’ closest family, his mother Alicja and brother Mario, are making arrangements to come to the US from Europe to lay Lukas to rest. The funds raised here will help with funeral expenses, family’s travel expenses, and to be sure Lukas is taken care of and remembered well by the people he has touched throughout his life. 

There were many people that Lukas made an impact on in their lives, whether it was his students or people in the dive community, he was truly an amazing person. Lukas’ passion and talent for music inspired many young minds. Lukas was a kind and generous person who would do anything to help his friends. Lukas loved all animals and considered his cats family members. He had the most adventurous spirit, the biggest heart and the largest smile. From music, to motorcycles, to roller coasters, to scuba diving and flying Lukas lived his life with an enormous amount of enthusiasm.  He will be missed by family, friends, students and colleagues.  




Authorities Thursday identified a student pilot who was killed when two planes collided on a runway at Compton/Woodley Airport.

The crash occurred about 7 p.m. March 13 on Runway 25L on March 13, when a North American T-28B Trojan crashed into a Cessna 152 occupied by a flight instructor and a student pilot.

The fatally injured man was identified today by the coroner's office as 40-year-old Lukas Michael Swidinski of Long Beach.

"The Cessna landed first, trailed by the T28," Ian Gregor of the Federal Aviation Administration said in a statement. "The North American T-28B Trojan landed and ran into the Cessna 152, which was still on the runway, causing the Cessna 152 to explode. There were two people on the Cessna 152 and one on the North American T-28B Trojan."

The second man in the Cessna 152 was a flight instructor in his 30s. He was taken to a hospital in critical condition, the sheriff's department said.

The pilot of the North American T-28B Trojan was unhurt, according to the sheriff's department.

Personnel from the FAA and the National Transportation Safety Board were working to determine what caused the two planes to collide.

The North American T-28B Trojan is a military trainer first used by the U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy in the 1950s, then was utilized as a counter-insurgency aircraft in the Vietnam War.

Anyone who may have witnessed the crash was asked to call the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department's Aero Bureau at (562) 421-2701.


https://www.nbclosangeles.com




A flight instructor remained in critical condition Thursday after a fiery, two-plane crash at the Compton/Woodley Airport killed his student the previous evening.

The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department described the surviving victim as a man in his 30s and the student as a man in his 40s. They were in a single-engine Cessna 152, which was struck by a single-engine North American T-28 on the runway around 7 p.m. Wednesday.

The pilot of the T-28 did not sustain any injuries in the incident, the Sheriff's Department said. That aircraft, which bears the U.S. Navy sign, appeared to be mostly intact as it sat at the airfield on Thursday morning.

Officials have yet to identify the three individuals involved.

The Cessna had just landed on the runway when the T-28 touched down and ran into it, causing the Cessna to explode, according to the Federal Aviation Administration.

"Like many general aviation airports, Compton does not have a control tower," FAA Public Affairs Manager Ian Gregor said. "Pilots communicate with each other on a common radio frequency."

The T-28 appeared to approach the Cessna from behind before landing on top of it, witnesses told KTLA on Wednesday night.

"It just sounded like the darnedest explosion you would imagine… I saw one of the airplanes involved in the crash dragging parts of the other airplane down the runway," pilot Billy Jackson said.

The Compton Fire Department responded to the scene and extinguished the blaze, the L.A. County Sheriff's Department said.

The FAA is helping the National Transportation Safety Board investigate the case.  The NTSB typically takes at least a year to determine what caused an incident, Gregor noted.

A 2015 crash at the county-owned Compton airport left a pilot dead when a single-engine plane that had been trying to tow an advertising banner crashed and burned on a runway, the Associated Press reported.

Story and video ➤ https://ktla.com














COMPTON, California (KABC) -- One person was killed when two small planes collided in a fiery crash at Compton/Woodley Airport Wednesday night. 

The crash was reported just before 7 p.m. It appeared to involve a vintage Vietnam-era T-28 aircraft and a small plane that appears to be a Cessna. 

The small plane was destroyed and burned up in the crash. One pilot was apparently ejected from one of the aircraft and killed. 

Pieces of the aircraft are littering the runway and the wing landed about 100 yards away from the main fuselage. 

Witnesses say it appeared the Cessna had already landed and was taxiing when the other pilot, possibly having trouble with the setting sun, also tried landing on the same runway and crashed into it. 

Firefighters and law enforcement officials were on the scene.  Paramedics transported another person from the scene in an ambulance. 

Story and video ➤https://abc7.com

41 comments:

  1. What a horrific accident. That big 3-bladed prop on that powerful radial engine must have tore that Cessna to pieces. At a non-towered airport you have to listen carefully to the CTAF/UNICOM to get a mental picture of where the traffic is but you also have to visually look for the traffic too. If you're not sure where someone is, call out on the radio to clarify. I would think the T-28 was at fault here. Sad story, my condolence to the families of the deceased and RIP to the Cessna pilots.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes. The T-28 is at fault, he/she (zhe/ze in California ;) did not follow proper protocol.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Both planes were landing: https://www.reddit.com/r/CatastrophicFailure/comments/b14eh8/aircraft_incident_in_compton_ca_313/?st=JT9P68AR&sh=9f3fb369

    ReplyDelete

  4. The "museum pilot" strikes yet again.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I just found this video of the entire crash on Youtube and it sickens me that such carelessness caused such carnage. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8NAfY-IcvA

    ReplyDelete
  6. Similar accident between a small and large a/c. Large one “doesn’t recall” making a call that he was landing.

    http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2018/04/cessna-150-n5614e-and-cessna-525c.html

    ReplyDelete
  7. it seems like the sun setting down caused the glare on the T28s and the cessna was not visible to it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Better hope the T28 pilot and museum have good lawyers. They are going to need it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I rather hope that the family of the deceased has a good lawyer!

    ReplyDelete
  10. I assure you, the attorneys will find them ..... and they have 364 days to do so

    ReplyDelete
  11. There are a few types of accidents that I think about every now and then when flying and this is one scenario. It is so disconcerting to be taking off or landing (or driving for that matter) into the sun. I imagine a deer or another vehicle on the runway... ugh! My heart goes out to the affected individuals and families. I know the Trojan pilot is going to be blamed but goodness, I wouldn't want that guilt on me! One moment you're on top of the world and the next, it all lands on you.

    ReplyDelete
  12. You can always go around...

    ReplyDelete
  13. Wouldn't you think the guy taking the video would have, should have tried to wave off the T28? It was obvious what was about to occur.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If the T28 didn't see the Cessna right ahead of him on the runway, I doubt he would have seen a much smaller person off to the side on a taxiway waving. When you are landing, the majority of your focus is on your aiming point and then the far end of the runway. It is extremely unlikely a landing pilot would see someone off to the side and even less likely he'd understand what you were trying to tell him and go around. Instead, you might end up distracting the pilot even more from seeing the aircraft in front of him and taking evasive action.

      Delete
  14. Wave? Like how? And as shown in the video the sun was blazing where the T28 was going. The problems with i2 aircrafts on final are too numerous to enumerate and for the ntsb to figure out who when where but since both were of the same type and class ie single engine land, the aircraft below the other had priority ie the Cessna, unless it carelessly used that rule to force its way in . Which is doubtful.

    ReplyDelete
  15. This is why we have a unicom at non-towered airports. The "I couldn't see him because the sun was in my eyes" will only take him so far. It's the pilots responsibility to maintain visual separation, when he lost visual he should have been on the radio for a position report. This was some sloppy pilotage.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Doing long straight in approach with T-28 or similar type warbird with huge engine results in poor forward viability. It also usually results in a poor landing while dragging the plane in with the prop. If engine fails, you don’t make it to runway. Many experienced pilots use a carrier type approach for this reason with a shorter steeper approach rounding base to final to improve your ability to clear your landing approach. Pattern traffiic, or in some cases, the tower extending your downwind, sets you up for the long straight in. It can be very frustrating due to poor visibility. No excuse though for lack of communication or the accident. I observe careless and or a total lack of communication at non towered airports on a daily basis. Many pilots call out a straight in from 5 miles assuming runway is now theirs when there are planes in the pattern. Make you wonder who their instructor was.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Any update on the surviving CFI's condition? I would imagine he has to be badly burned and it will be a long road to recovery if he survives.

    ReplyDelete
  18. The T-28 pilot was negligent in the extreme. How can anyone not think this is an instance of manslaughter at the least, or 2nd degree murder and assault at the worst? The T-28 pilot should have been arrested at the scene. Equal liability also rests with the T-28 owner who permitted an incompetent or impaired pilot to operate his plane, then stood next to the runway and shot the video of both planes approaching, is heard to say, "He doesn't see him," and took no action whatever to try to wave off his plane. Both men should never again be allowed to own or operate an aircraft. There are no "amends" in the universe to atone for their deadly actions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Examination of the T-28 revealed that its radio was not tuned to the airport's CTAF; therefore, the T-28 pilot was neither receiving position reports from other aircraft in the traffic pattern, nor was he broadcasting his position. The circumstances of the accident are consistent with the T-28 pilot's failure to see and avoid the Cessna

      Delete
  19. Checked the museum of the future and its goals are laudable i.e provide an interest in aviation to disenfranchised youth from the ghettos and minorities... but I suspect one of these students may have been the PIC of that plane or some flight to simply get the old bird to get some oil pumping. In any case this was reckless behavior and ignorance of see and avoid given if the sun was shining so brightly at the end of a runway the plane shall have refrained from landing until it sat below the horizon.

    They are probably lawyered up for obvious reasons. And their most logical excuse will be some kind of made up emergency. No radio isn't an emergency but most likely the pilot will claim there was some overwhelming cause that made him want to land asap. As advised by their counsel.

    The 150 I trained in on occasion had, strangely, a rear view mirror. I wonder if any GA plane operator like me could install a cheap $50 rear facing camera. As you never know who's the idiot who can try on you from the back.

    ReplyDelete
  20. " How can anyone not think this is an instance of manslaughter at the least, or 2nd degree murder and assault at the worst? "

    Doesn't work that way in our country. Probable fine, suspension/revocation.

    Then comes the civil action.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I read that the pilot may have lost comm's. I wonder if the pilot had his cell phone with him. Since the T28 is owned by the museum on Compton, it may have been prudent to fly the pattern and call someone there or even better the Compton Airport office. Lost comm's in complicated airspace, combined with the sun's glare, the model aircraft, etc. required some careful thought. Very sad outcome for all involved.

    ReplyDelete
  22. https://www.gofundme.com/f/fund-raising-for-ryan-davis-family
    For those asking how the Cessna CFI is doing here is the link to his gofundme account. Ryan is still fighting a long battle, still in the hospital. He and his family can use any help provided.
    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  23. classic case of poor airmanship exhibited by T28 pilot...basic rule violated ...if you can't see don't go ... unannounced arrival for whatever reason should have been to visually clear a runway prior to landing ....can't see ...go around until you can ...simple as that .One thing more the warbird syndrome " the Big I am " is yet another issue to be considered ...Like it or not the T28 pilot is fully at fault

    ReplyDelete
  24. Well almost 3 years for what was quite obvious right after the accident but glad it's out. Poor ADM 100% on the T-28 pilot. I hope his assets and everything he has are gone in the lawsuits against him. If I remember he also said to the NTSB investigator he couldn't see clearly the digits for the frequencies and so didn't bother tuning in. That was his exact reason. SMH.
    Was it legal approaching a non towered field? Yes... but also reckless and careless considering the sun's position and inability to see anything on the runway.
    I hope the FAA used that later section to nuke his ass out out of his ratings and certificates.

    ReplyDelete
  25. The accident report on the CTAF frequency said it all. The T-28 pilot wasn’t on the right CTAF frequency. Assuming the C172 pilot was transmitting his position, and the Trojan pilot on the right freq, he would have known there was a plane landing.
    Unfortunately he had 125.00 tuned, but the CTAF was 123.05. If he could only see the bottom part of the numbers (per the report), it’s easy to understand the error.
    An honest mistake, but in this case it was tragic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Um, more like lots of not-so-honest mistakes, even assuming he actually tried to make any radio calls. From the docket:


      "Pilot reported that at no time during the enroute, approach or landing did he ever see or hear another airplane. He stated that he was fairly sure he made one traffic call at some point during the approach, but did not hear anything back, and he was not convinced that the radio was working correctly so he did not try again. He recounted again that the radio was hard to reach and see, and went on to state that he felt it was more important to look out of the window for traffic rather try and get the radio configured."
      "He was carrying a sectional map and airport guide, and when asked to recall the Compton CTAF frequency, responded that it may be 122.7. he further reiterated that Mark Drew set the radio frequencies while at Whiteman, and that he did not touch them or make any other radio calls while enroute."
      "He believes that during this portion of the flight, he likely inadvertently penetrated the Class D airspace of Fullerton Airport."
      "The T-28 pilot stated that he used his “Flight Guide” book for determining airport frequencies. Examination of the actual guide found at the airplane revealed that the page for CPM was missing; a paper note in place of the page read, “Pg 34, Aug 2017 Compton a/d removed.” "


      So let's summarize. The 84 year-old 250-lb pilot who was hopped up on a cocktail of various medications, had cataracts and poor enough vision to only barely qualify for a third class medical on his last exam. He embarked on an illegal commercial repositioning flight (with only a third class medical, the only way the flight would be legal would be if the pilot paid for 100% of the aircraft rental and fuel himself and had his own purpose for making the flight. Free flight time counts as compensation per the FAA.) Through piss poor planning, he had no idea what the CTAF frequency for Compton actually was, or how to correctly tune it in, and also likely violated Fullerton's airspace.

      Delete
    2. Like I say, I am tired of apologists for PIC who kill. This one killed and displayed a careless and reckless operation of an aircraft by carelessly ignoring communications around the very busy LA airspace, and blatantly attempted to land an aircraft with 0 forward visibility due to the Sun on the Horizon. Same as trying to land in heavy fog. You can always go around... be he didn't. And he became a killer.
      His ratings and privileges should have been revoked a long time ago if he was dishonest with himself and he would have self assessed to at least fly with another pilot for this flight if he used proper ADM.
      He has 0 rationale for doing all the things he did and like pointed above he may have been absolutely illegal to do a ferry flight on a third class. Federal Law was violated here.

      Delete
    3. I would also question the AME who gave this flying cocktail of drugs a third class. It is known in some circles who is the AME to go to for "easier" exams. Like always dishonest people will be able to obtain medicals they shouldn't have gotten. I hope the FAA/NTSB also investigates how this person had a third class medical to begin with...

      Delete
  26. This same type accident occurred back in 1980 or so... same airport but it was an ATP in a T-38 and he clipper the prop on a 150 but all were O.K.,... he landed... said he never saw the 150... did my PPL there back in 1979 .....if you are landing and have your head U.A. something will happen ......One must Call their intentions and LOOK for the folks turning Base inside the wash, a plane turning tight is hard to see.... NO STRAIGHT IN's. !

    ReplyDelete
  27. I clearly remember when this story first hit. There was a photo of the body on the runway un-blurred (blurred here) and it was very traumatic to see. Family should long ago have taken the keys away from this geriatric who with all this medical conditions, specifically EYE sight, should NEVER have been in control of any machined vehicle.

    ReplyDelete
  28. SMH!!!

    The perpetrator pilot is STILL valid... none of his certificates were revoked. He still has a valid third class. He still can fly!!!!

    ersonal Information
    Print This Page
    ROSS EMORY DIEHL


    Medical Information:
    Medical Class: Third Medical Date: 12/2021
    MUST WEAR CORRECTIVE LENSES FOR DISTANT VISION AND HAVE GLASSES FOR NEAR VISION.
    NOT VALID FOR ANY CLASS AFTER 12/31/2022.
    BasicMed Course Date: None BasicMed CMEC Date: None
    Certificates
    AIRLINE TRANSPORT PILOT

    FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR

    FLIGHT ENGINEER
    Certificates Description
    Certificate: AIRLINE TRANSPORT PILOT
    Date of Issue: 3/9/2017

    Ratings:
    AIRLINE TRANSPORT PILOT
    AIRPLANE MULTIENGINE LAND
    COMMERCIAL PRIVILEGES
    AIRPLANE SINGLE ENGINE LAND

    Type Ratings:
    A/B-727 A/B-737 A/L-1011 C/DC-B26 C/N-B25


    Limits:
    ENGLISH PROFICIENT.
    DC-B26 N-B25 (VFR ONLY).
    ALL MAKES AND MODELS OF SINGLE AND MULTI ENGINE PISTON POWERED AUTHORIZED AIRCRAFT.
    AUTHORIZED EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT: CU-P40 FA-C123 G-F6F G-F7F M-B26 MI-A6M N-F86(VFR ONLY) N-P51 N-T28 R-P47 T-33(VFR ONLY).

    ReplyDelete
  29. It gets better. This pilot who did indeed an illegal ferry flight and killed per the dockets... also filed a lawsuit against the State of California for personal injury. I imagine he claimed the Hawthorne airport was unsafe.

    https://unicourt.com/case/ca-la23-ross-e-diehl-et-al-vs-state-of-california-et-al-573296

    This means not only he is unapologetic after killing an innocent, he is STILL ACTIVE, HAD NO CERTIFICATES REVOKED and can kill again. Unbelievable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He also still owns an aircraft he built himself that has a flight on record less than a year ago. https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N2211

      Delete
    2. MarcPilot said that the T-28 pilot was: "hopped up on a cocktail of various medications" while the medical factual report in the docket specifically stated that none of the medications the T-28 pilot was taking would be considered impairing.

      Pilot Diehl should obtain MarcPilot's identity info from Blogger and sue MarcPilot so that people reading KR can get relief from MarcPilot's constant raging and blatant misrepresentations.

      Pilot Diehl has experience filing lawsuits, so let's hope he is reading comments here and files a defamation suit against MarcPilot very soon.

      Delete
  30. He wasn't even on the frequency. In spite of his age and experience, he's an arrogant amateur.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Very Sad someone lost their life and another horribly injured because of someone not doing what they were supposed to be doing flying the aircraft and following ALL procedures....He basically Rear ended someone but with an aircraft not a car. Another Sorry to say TOO OLD to be in command of something that needs complete attention to detail. Should of stopped flying long before this episode

    ReplyDelete
  32. The docket has some interesting material about the T-28B. Basically, the aircraft was NORDO since the panel layout made it impossible for the pilot to SEE the frequencies in the radio, and equally impossible to CHANGE them. Frequencies were set up for his departure from a towered airport. FWIW, there is no regulation that prohibits operations into uncontrolled ('non-towered') public use airports. Whether that is good judgement... is another matter. IMHO, the FAA should revisit the pass given to aircraft without an electrical system, and require at least an operable hand-held 720 channel radio in those cockpits. Having had a couple of instances over the past several years of flying GA where my radios quit because of an alternator failure that allowed my electrical system to go to sleep I think it would be a good for all of us to carry a hand held for just that exigency.

    ReplyDelete
  33. A big hole in the cheese was landing into the extreme glare at that time of day. Schedules can kill when schedule-imposed circumstances add risk as was the case in this accident.

    ReplyDelete