The Taylorcraft BC12-D pilot told investigators that the airport in Whitefish, Montana, had recently been closed but the applicable Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) had expired, and he flew to the airport.
Upon arrival, he overflew the field to check the wind direction and then entered a downwind for the runway. The approach was uneventful until just before touchdown when the airplane struck a steel structure, which was a runway closed sign, that had been placed near the runway threshold.
The pilot told the investigators that he did not see the sign before impact due to visibility limitations of the tailwheel-equipped airplane on approach.
The airplane subsequently nosed over and came to rest inverted, resulting in substantial damage to the vertical stabilizer and rudder.
The pilot thought that the NOTAM of the airport closure had expired. It was determined that the airport was meant to be temporarily closed, but the applicable NOTAM was inadvertently allowed to expire and was not renewed. Appropriate mitigations have since been incorporated to prevent recurrence.
Probable Cause: The failure of the airport authorities to renew the airport closure NOTAM for the airport. Contributing to the accident, was the pilot’s inability to see the runway closure sign.
To download the final report. Click here. This will trigger a PDF download to your device.
This December 2023 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.
Two things would have prevented this accident. 1. Update the closure NOTAM.
2. Use orange snow fence panels or yellow panels staked to the ground, and be sure they are swept free of snow. If this had been an airport serving airlines, it would fall under 14CFR Part 139, and lighted X’s would be required. No fault of the pilot. Hope that airport settles with his insurance company and he is able to replace the plane.
So the warning sign is the obstruction !
Pure genius !
How does a tail wheel obstruct vision in a high wing a/c ?
Inquiring minds want to know.
This is looking but failing to SEE. Turning your head in a given direction doesn’t mean you are looking . A conscious effort is needed to see anything unexpected. It’s the same as scanning for other aircraft , as by just mechanically turning your head means you will likely miss seeing other aircraft until they are too close for comfort. The situation here has complicating factors involved that would have required a serious look, especially as the problem , i.e. obstruction would be partially camouflaged by snow and there was no current notam out on that airfield . An unfortunate combination of things are to blame, not just the pilot , for this misfortune .
Is it really necessary to build a steel structure to indicate a closed runway ?
I’m not saying that the pilot didn’t make a mistake but is a bridge type structure really called for ?
That omission calls for legal counsel. Kaching!
/J
I think it was visible on downwind and base
Perhaps a training flaw in the where to look during the pattern sequence?
The fact that it’s WHITE and the ground is covered in snow didn’t help.
Some ORANGE plastic snow fence ON THE GROUND would have been much more visible,
I just saw two of those lighted “X”s for sale on market place.
But that steel frame has to be the dumbest thing I have ever seen.