• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
General Aviation News

General Aviation News

Because flying is cool

  • Pictures of the Day
    • Submit Picture of the Day
  • Stories
    • News
    • Features
    • Opinion
    • Products
    • NTSB Accidents
    • ASRS Reports
  • Comments
  • Classifieds
    • Place Classified Ad
  • Events
  • Digital Archives
  • Subscribe
  • Show Search
Hide Search

Cub and 172 collide on runway

By NTSB · April 9, 2019 ·

The pilot of the tailwheel-equipped Piper J-3 Cub reported that his airplane was not equipped with a radio and that the forward visibility was not good when taxiing while piloting the airplane from the rear seat. He entered a left downwind for the runway at the airport in New Carlisle, Ohio, saw no other aircraft while on final, and continued to land.

He added that, during the landing roll, as he turned to clear the runway, his airplane collided with a Cessna 172 that was taxiing on the same runway after having landed on it from the opposite direction.

He reported that he did not see the Cessna before the collision.

The Piper sustained substantial damage to the right wing’s front spar.

The pilot of the Cessna reported that, while flying in the traffic pattern, he announced his position and intent to land on the airport’s common traffic advisory frequency during all landings while simultaneously visually checking right and left for traffic. He added that, as he was taxiing on the runway toward the exit after landing, he saw the Piper land in the opposite direction on the same runway. Subsequently, the Piper turned diagonally across the runway toward the Cessna, and the two airplanes collided.

The Cessna sustained substantial damage to its right wing.

Both pilots reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with either airplane that would have precluded normal operation.

Probable cause: The pilot’s decision to land on an occupied runway and his failure to see and avoid the other airplane.

NTSB Identification: GAA17CA223B

This April 2017 accident report is provided by the National Transportation Safety Board. Published as an educational tool, it is intended to help pilots learn from the misfortunes of others.

About NTSB

The National Transportation Safety Board is an independent federal agency charged by Congress with investigating every civil aviation accident in the United States and significant events in the other modes of transportation, including railroad, transit, highway, marine, pipeline, and commercial space. It determines the probable causes of accidents and issues safety recommendations aimed at preventing future occurrences.

Reader Interactions

Share this story

  • Share on Twitter Share on Twitter
  • Share on Facebook Share on Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Reddit Share on Reddit
  • Share via Email Share via Email

Become better informed pilot.

Join 110,000 readers each month and get the latest news and entertainment from the world of general aviation direct to your inbox, daily.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Curious to know what fellow pilots think on random stories on the General Aviation News website? Click on our Recent Comments page to find out. Read our Comment Policy here.

Comments

  1. Pat Kelly says

    April 13, 2019 at 10:11 am

    Just because the FAA says it’s ok doesn’t mean it is. I picked up a handheld for $100 on Craigs list. I think everyone would agree that your life is worth more than $100.

  2. Bill Hunt says

    April 13, 2019 at 9:32 am

    We’ve got a couple of aircraft at our airport that use hand-held radios. Half the time you can’t understand what they’re saying. A radio is not a substitute for keeping your eyes outside the airplane.

  3. Warren Webb Jr says

    April 11, 2019 at 3:07 pm

    I can understand the finger-pointing at the no-radio airplane but I think it is more than that. In the worst aviation disaster in history, both airplanes had radios.

  4. Joe Henry Gutierrez says

    April 10, 2019 at 12:21 pm

    It never ceases to amaze me how some people are so stubborn in doing what is right just because a rule says its o.k. to go ahead and endanger people’s lives including their own. To fly an airplane without a two way radio just because the FAA says its o.k. to do so if your aircraft left the factory with out an electrical system. Lets go the extreme, what if half of the aircraft flying today didn’t have radios, how many people would still go out and fly everyday??? Stupid, isn’t it ???

    • Dale L. Weir says

      April 11, 2019 at 11:12 am

      Just recently a T-28 and Cessna 150 collided on a runway in California. Both aircraft were equipped with radios….

    • B Tsew says

      April 13, 2019 at 8:49 am

      A tremendous number of pilots fly every day without radios and without incident. Including myself, for more than 50 years. You don’t know any of us but you disagree with the practice so you brand us all as stupid. That says way more about you than it does about us.

  5. JimH in CA says

    April 10, 2019 at 9:02 am

    One of these [ older ] guys landed with a 6 kt quartering tailwind. My guess is that is wasn’t the Cub.
    3Oh0 is a private airport with a 2,000 ft paved runway and a large grass runway area.

    My guess is that neither was looking down the runway during landing, otherwise one of them should have done a go-around.

    I’m in favor of mandating the use of a radio at public airports, but this was a private airport and these guys probably knew each other.

  6. gbigs says

    April 10, 2019 at 7:07 am

    The FAA and it’s no radio policy. Blame the government for allowing it folks.

  7. Phil says

    April 9, 2019 at 10:15 am

    I am guessing that the cost of repairs is going to be a lot more than the cost of a hand-held radio.

© 2025 Flyer Media, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy.

  • About
  • Advertise
  • Comment Policy
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Writer’s Guidelines
  • Photographer’s Guidelines