Marion Indiana Accident

I'm just going to "speculate" here.
The jet would not be repositioned so soon after an accident until all the evidence is documented, that takes time
The pilots would not move the aircraft to see the accident because they didn't know the extent of the damage. The impact would be one heck of a bang that would not be mistakable to anyone.
The Cessna 525 has anti-skid brakes that wouldn't leave any skid marks under braking.
 
midwestpa24 said:
I'm going to guess the jet was either spun by the collision, or was otherwise repositioned after the collision. Its location in the photos and video does not make sense. In the direction it is going, it has not entered the intersecting runway yet, and is not inline with the intersecting runway and remains of the Cessna. Perhaps the jet pilots turned around to see the accident, not realizing the extent of the damage to their own aircraft.
Click to expand...

I can't imagine the pilots deliberately turning the jet. After an unmistakable impact like this one I would expect their first response would be to get the plane stationary and evacuate their passengers and themselves. Quickly.

Although the aircraft configurations and runway angles may have resulted in the 150 pilot not seeing the jet on the approach, I'll bet the jet pilot(s) saw the 150 taking off but had few options but to try to get the jet stopped before the intersection. (Anybody know if the 525 is eligible under the 500 series single pilot exemption?)
 
Last edited:
GRG55 said:
(Anybody know if the 525 is eligible under the 500 series single pilot exemption?)
Click to expand...

The 525 is a different type altogether, and has two variants: the CE-525S which is single pilot, and the CE-525, which is not.
 
I would think that a 150 could easily turn the Citation 180 degrees...the force to the tail would not have to be as great as one might first think, as it would rotate on the rear wheels, which hold the majority of the weight...I think front wheels on these things hold only like 10% of the overall weight.
 
Yeah looking at the helicopter video today, I’m not buying the “spun around” part. But just can’t tell what got moved.

And hearing the two volunteer firefighters lost their lives fighting what’s essentially a car fire makes me wonder what happened when they got to that Cessna. Because that isn’t normal at all unless they arrived in POVs without any gear yet (common but not really, many keep gear in their POVs) and tried to pull people out while it was still burning.

Sigh.
 
denverpilot said:
Yeah looking at the helicopter video today, I’m not buying the “spun around” part. But just can’t tell what got moved.

And hearing the two volunteer firefighters lost their lives fighting what’s essentially a car fire makes me wonder what happened when they got to that Cessna. Because that isn’t normal at all unless they arrived in POVs without any gear yet (common but not really, many keep gear in their POVs) and tried to pull people out while it was still burning.

Sigh.
Click to expand...

I thought the firefighters were the occupants? Or did I read that wrong?
 
denverpilot said:
Ahhh that would explain it. I didn’t see that part. Good lord. Sorry.
Click to expand...
No apology needed-I thought it was just as likely that I misread it...on vacation and had to flip from work sleep schedule (nights) to normal person schedule (days)...
 
Lndwarrior said:
Hard to understand how you don't see a large jet on a crossing runway...
Click to expand...

A lot of airports have this problem. DXR is a good example. If you are taking off\landing on 35 you can't see the end of 8 until you are halfway to the intersection. Smaller planes go with the wind, bigger planes (jets especially) can't land on 17/35. Too short. They are on 8/26.
Lucky there's a tower at DXR to manage things, so it's not quite the Wild West. Unfortunately, the tower can't see aircraft on 3 of the 4 approaches until they are very short final.
 
From looking at the pics it is odd that the Jet is short of the intersection. I wonder if it is possible the Jet was still moving pretty quickly at the time of the collision and that momentum carried the Jet down the runway several hundred feet... The Citation pilot may have quickly turned the jet around to get back to the downed plane faster and try to potentially help the 150 occupants. That makes more sense to me than to think that Jet was able to stop short of the intersection and that is where the collision occurred, or that the jet was somehow spun around 180 degrees. I doubt that. Enough speculation though. A detailed explanation will come out soon.
 
arkvet said:
From looking at the pics it is odd that the Jet is short of the intersection. I wonder if it is possible the Jet was still moving pretty quickly at the time of the collision and that momentum carried the Jet down the runway several hundred feet... The Citation pilot may have quickly turned the jet around to get back to the downed plane faster and try to potentially help the 150 occupants. That makes more sense to me than to think that Jet was able to stop short of the intersection and that is where the collision occurred, or that the jet was somehow spun around 180 degrees. I doubt that. Enough speculation though. A detailed explanation will come out soon.
Click to expand...

My vote goes for the jet stopping short of the runway while the c150 took off, maybe saw the jet coming, and tried to pass it from behind but didn't expect the jet to stop before the intersection
 
arnoha said:
How hard does a 150 have to hit a Citation to spin it around? Wow.
Click to expand...
Did you see the video of A380 spinning CRJ around? What's curious in that case, the tail didn't even break.
 
Shepherd said:
A lot of airports have this problem. DXR is a good example. If you are taking off\landing on 35 you can't see the end of 8 until you are halfway to the intersection. Smaller planes go with the wind, bigger planes (jets especially) can't land on 17/35. Too short. They are on 8/26.
Lucky there's a tower at DXR to manage things, so it's not quite the Wild West. Unfortunately, the tower can't see aircraft on 3 of the 4 approaches until they are very short final.
Click to expand...

What's blocking the view?
 
Since we're making guesses, mine is that the 150 pilot saw the jet, pulled up too hard too soon while trying to avoid it, stalled and went straight in, hitting the jet on the way up.
 
luvflyin said:
What's blocking the view?
Click to expand...
The airport sits down at the bottom of a natural bowl. Hills on 3 sides of the airport. Runway 35 is actually at the end of a deep, narrow valley. They refer to it as the "valley of death". Quite a few planes have come to grief on 35.
 
champ driver said:
The Cessna 525 has anti-skid brakes that wouldn't leave any skid marks under braking.
Click to expand...

That's not true. This photo of the Hanscom Field runway was taken after the Katz GIV crash in 2014.

You can clearly see the interruptions the anti skid braking cycles produce.

060214planemg011.jpg
 
3393RP said:
That's not true. This photo of the Hanscom Field runway was taken after the Katz GIV crash in 2014.

You can clearly see the interruptions the anti skid braking cycles produce.

060214planemg011.jpg
Click to expand...
Not to mention, a tire doesn't not have to be stopped to lay down a skid. Skid marks occur under hard braking or turning, from rubber transferred to pavement, even when the tire is still rotating.
 
Last edited:
I Notice several local airports with 122.7 as the ctaf, I am wondering if liveatc.net or someone else has a recording close enough to pick things up, I know my radio hears Ottowa IL from Valparaiso IN. I listened to all of Grissom from about 4:30 local time to about 5:15 local time and did not here anything that sounded like the citation. Could he behanded off from KFWA Approach or KIND Approach? I really want to know if the jet was listening to CTAF. I think that is important to know, even if the landing plane has the right of way.

Also, wondering if ADSB-in would have helped the pilot on the ground (cessna). I am reallying thinking about pushing for this in my club now.
 
Stingray Don said:
In this article, the FAA indicates that the jet was landing on runway 4 contrary to previous reports, which makes much more sense given the final locations of the tail section and 150.

https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20180402-0
Click to expand...

That begs even more questions. Looking at the photos, the Citation had not yet reached the intersection of the two runways. So the 150 must have drifted or lost directional control on takeoff in order to strike the Citation where it is sitting. I wonder if the jet stopped or was nearly stopped for the crossing traffic. It obviously didn't move far once the tail was removed. At least the investigation will be able to get one side of the story from the jet pilots.
 
Marcelo Silva said:
My vote goes for the jet stopping short of the runway while the c150 took off, maybe saw the jet coming, and tried to pass it from behind but didn't expect the jet to stop before the intersection
Click to expand...

This makes the most sense I think. Looking at the pics it's a long way from the centre line of 15 to where the tail of the Citation is. The wind didn't do that, not if it was 140 @ 14 as someone posted earlier.
 
Chicago Bearhawk said:
I Notice several local airports with 122.7 as the ctaf, I am wondering if liveatc.net or someone else has a recording close enough to pick things up, I know my radio hears Ottowa IL from Valparaiso IN. I listened to all of Grissom from about 4:30 local time to about 5:15 local time and did not here anything that sounded like the citation. Could he behanded off from KFWA Approach or KIND Approach? I really want to know if the jet was listening to CTAF. I think that is important to know, even if the landing plane has the right of way.

Also, wondering if ADSB-in would have helped the pilot on the ground (cessna). I am reallying thinking about pushing for this in my club now.
Click to expand...

I looked at this yesterday. The closest 122.7 I found was about 135 miles away in the Lansing, MI area, KTEW CTAF specifically. But given that distance and intervening higher ground, I didn't try to listen in.
 
Last edited:
Based on the picture I am looking at, and matching the runway cracks that you see in the picture with the google earth images, it now appears that the jet landed on 4,(which makes sense I think the ceilings were about 2500 so ILS would be a good candidate and the A5 lights might have been on). The jet did not spin and came to rest before the intersection, The C150 came to rest at the accute angle between 4 and 33 which is a strange location but the mowing pattern and cracks match with google earth, and the stock news image (turn your google earth upside down to convince yourself). I can't post links here but, the image is the main arial shown by most news. This images was taken from the air from the obtuse angle between 4 and 15 as if you were on upwind right of 15.
url
. The confusing part is how did the tail get further "upwind on 4" and the C150 ended up closer to centerline.

Speculation is that the pilot was high power and low speed without enough right rudder, and a high angle of attack. that would stall to the right aggravated which is almost impossible to recover from.

Still very confusing..

if that is the case, the C150 should have seen the jet on final even at ceilings of 2500 feet.
Also straight in means the Citation might have been with KIND instead of Grissom because 4 would be coming from the west.

Citation must have opened a flight plan. Also I think the A5 lighting should have been on to alert the C150 to traffic on final.
 
PPC1052 said:
I love the gratuitous shot of the VOR in the local news story in the link. So ominous!
Click to expand...
THAT is why the FAA is proactively removing VORs from the navaid pool. These things kill, y'know? Soccer moms writing letters complaining about dangerous airplanes said so. Think of the children!!

Back on topic: So now the FAA says that the Citation landed on 04? That can be easily verified on FA from the tail number, no?
 
Flight tracking is blocked on FA. There's sparse coverage of the center frequencies in that area too.
 
midwestpa24 said:
Trying to stop the 1,000 looky loos with their drones.
Click to expand...
Around here most EMS folks are trained to use tarps to cover anything which might cause a problem for some folks. It seems like a reasonable thing to do for the victims and their friends/family.
 
Clark1961 said:
Around here most EMS folks are trained to use tarps to cover anything which might cause a problem for some folks. It seems like a reasonable thing to do for the victims and their friends/family.
Click to expand...

As a responder myself, we are. However there is a certain group of drone "enthusiasts" who know no bounds. Not picking on all drone operators, as I are one too ;) , but like many things common decency and sense aren't so common anymore. Aircraft accidents attract far more than their fair share of attention from the public and media, I've seen that first hand.
 
midwestpa24 said:
As a responder myself, we are. However there is a certain group of drone "enthusiasts" who know no bounds. Not picking on all drone operators, as I are one too ;) , but like many things common decency and sense aren't so common anymore. Aircraft accidents attract far more than their fair share of attention from the public and media, I've seen that first hand.
Click to expand...
My point is that the looky-loos have nothing to see if things are covered. The TFR isn't going to slow down a drone operator who isn't even aware of what a TFR means or that they are supposed to notify the airport if they are operating in the vicinity.

Anyway, I thought the 150 wreckage should have been draped once the fire was extinguished.
 
midwestpa24 said:
As a responder myself, we are. However there is a certain group of drone "enthusiasts" who know no bounds. Not picking on all drone operators, as I are one too ;) , but like many things common decency and sense aren't so common anymore. Aircraft accidents attract far more than their fair share of attention from the public and media, I've seen that first hand.
Click to expand...

So true. You'e got to put respect for the deceased above getting some grisly YouTube footage.
 
midwestpa24 said:
As a responder myself, we are. However there is a certain group of drone "enthusiasts" who know no bounds. Not picking on all drone operators, as I are one too ;) , but like many things common decency and sense aren't so common anymore. Aircraft accidents attract far more than their fair share of attention from the public and media, I've seen that first hand.
Click to expand...

Hmm.. I am not sure that throwing up large TFRs to keep drone looky-loos out is good practice in general. Besides, who was the real looky-loo on the scene in this case? A helicopter.
 
midwestpa24 said:
That begs even more questions. Looking at the photos, the Citation had not yet reached the intersection of the two runways. So the 150 must have drifted or lost directional control on takeoff in order to strike the Citation where it is sitting. I wonder if the jet stopped or was nearly stopped for the crossing traffic. It obviously didn't move far once the tail was removed. At least the investigation will be able to get one side of the story from the jet pilots.
Click to expand...
Could be target fixation. If he saw the jet and thought it wouldn't stop in time he might have fixated on it and wound up drifting toward it, or he thought he'd go behind it. Realized he was going to hit it, so pulled up hard and stalled.

Or something completely different.
 
OK, I found 511AC talking to Grissom as he was going into Marion. Forgot that Marions is UTC -4 this time of the year...
KGUS-Apr-02-2018-2030Z.mp3 from liveatc, (I can't post the full link yet).

511AC was cleared to desend to 2500, and instructed to report Marion in-sight.
at 27:18, or just a few seconds before, 511AC reported airport in-sight
ATC offered to cancel IFR, or wait till on the ground,
511AC cancelled IFR.
Tower said "No traffic between you and the airport, cancellation received, change to advisory frequency approved"
511AC acknowledged.
That would have occurred about 11 or 12 minutes before the time of the reported incident.

So without the recording from 122.7, there is no way to know what happened, except that the airport manager or someone had reported that the C150 pilot did broadcast intentions, I read that in one of the news articles but can't confirm it at this point.

I am thinking with a 14 knot headwind, the C150 would not even think of looking down the other runway.
also, I am wondering if there may of been other confusion for the c150 pilot, with the winds he might have heard some one say on final straight in or something and thought
the plane was behind him I think runway 15 is a "BACKTAXI" runway with no taxi-way. therefore he might have rushed himself to get off the runway, not knowing where the other plane was.

Of course communication and good radio skills would have corrected that.

Also the C150 did have a MODE S transponder (per registry info at FAA), and I wonder if he did not set it to ALT until after the runup, this would mean that Grissom already disconnected with 511AC, before C150 became visible from the MODE S.
A lot of checklists have the set to standby, until your runup is done, I am thinking about leaving it on ALT unless I am at a big airport from now on....
if it was set to ALT, there is a chance that Grissom would have seen the plane on the runway and been alerted to departing traffic on 15.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top