Two aircraft collided while approaching Fort Morgan Municipal Airport in Colorado on Sunday, leaving one person dead and three others injured, according to The Fort Morgan Times. Authorities said a Cessna 172 on final approach was struck midair by an Extra Flugzeugbau EA300 around midday. Both aircraft crashed to the ground and caught fire.
Emergency responders from the Morgan County Sheriff’s Office were dispatched shortly after 10:44 a.m., with additional responders also arriving on scene from the Fort Morgan Police Department, Colorado State Patrol, Fort Morgan Fire Department and Morgan County Ambulance. Both aircraft carried two passengers each. Occupants from the Cessa were treated at the scene for minor injuries, while one passenger from the Extra was taken to a hospital. The other passenger in that aircraft was pronounced dead at the scene by the county coroner.
The airport was hosting the Kyle Scott Dust-Up aerobatics competition, organized by Chapter 12 of the International Aerobatic Club, when the midair collision occurred.
“All I can confirm is that there was a midair collision between two aircraft at the Fort Morgan Municipal Airport earlier today,” Fort Morgan City Manager Brent Nation told The Fort Morgan Times.
The FAA and NTSB have begun investigating the crash, and the airport will remain closed pending the outcome.
I’m wondering if this was the classic low wing versus high wing mid air collision. If the extra was descending and or didn’t look underneath him, or the 172 didn’t look upwards upon setting up for final approach. Also, did either aircraft have ADSB in capacity? Either way, the outcome was tragic.
I’m wondering if there was any communication between these two aircraft?
“while one passenger from the Extra was taken to a hospital. The other passenger in that aircraft was pronounced dead at the scene” hmmmm…only passengers onboard?
Tragic, and sad, in any case. I feel for the victims and their families.
I agree. I think CTAF is supposed to be de riguer for non towered airports, callouts before entering the pattern and in each leg so everyone hears traffic to see and avoid. The aerobatic club hosting the event may be partially responsible for having eyes on the ground to help ensure aerobatic fliers remain in the box with contingency measures if an emergency occurs. I don’t know if a TFR is needed to alert fliers of aerobatic activity.
Years ago atc didn’t alert a king air pilot that there was the national stearman fly in event going on, and the fool tried a straight in approach to the opposite end of the active runway…
It has been nearly a quarter century since the FAA TSO’d ADS-B. Except for mandating it for airlines, the FAA has fought to keep the air-to-air capability minimized. Their most outrageous action in that direction was to authorize two data links that didn’t talk to each other. If you want air-to-air service you have to either buy both systems or rely on TIS-B, a service sparsely available. As originally envisioned, ADS-B would replace not only the transponder but also the EPIRB. That economy and monumental improvement also disappeared along the way. There is no question that full ADS-B equipage would have prevented this and most other collisions, and that is always the true test of a remedy.
Correction to previous message: The FAA did not mandate ADS-B IN for the airlines, only ADS-B OUT and also mandated for all in specific airspace.
Many years ago after flying for an hour out in a practice area I returned to the field for some touch & gos. The pattern was empty and there was no chatter on Unicom. I touched down and took off again - just after turning crosswind My windscreen was filled with a skydiver desperately pulling on his cords to get out of the way! I managed to flip on edge and miss him.
It turned out that the person at the FBO responsible for the radio that day had to make a bathroom run just prior to the jump, so the call to keep the pattern clear for the jump never went out. Also, I had not been informed that the jump would be taking place when I took off earlier.
ADS-B In only works if there is an ADS-B ground station within range. It’s also no substitute for see-and-avoid since not all aircraft are equipped with ADS-B Out. Even if both aircraft are equipped with ADS-B Out and there is an ADS-B ground station within range, sometimes there are false indications. I’ve had it happen several times in my airplane. Nevertheless, ADS-B traffic is very helpful. Many of the targets that I get on my ADS-B In receiver aren’t visible with my eye. It tells me where to look. You just can’t relax on the see-and-avoid.
Andrew, I am sorry but I must respectfully suggest that you are wrong on all counts. ADS-B is only a data link. It sends own aircraft’s GPS-derived full state vector (lat., lon., alt. + 2nd derivatives of each) and other data “to whom it may concern” each second at a pseudorandom rate. There are many algorithms that could provide warning and resolution to the pilot, and I’m sure there are some flying by now. In 1995, my first stab was 3D filtering by “tau,” the 2D ratio of distance to rate of closure used by TCAS. During the RTCA SC-186/WG-5 UAT spec development I proposed this to the Garmin engineers and they agreed that it would work. I had the distinct impression that they had a better idea. FAA prefers a simple 2-minute predictor displayed ahead of own ship and detected threats and they might be right. ADS-B ground stations have many potential uses, but are necessary only for TIS-B, the uplink carrying ATC traffic data and, for UAT, free weather radar and data. As to see and avoid, you have been spared by the twin truths of vast sky and few aircraft. 1960-era FAA tests with a DC-3 and Twin Beech showed about 50% effectiveness and I think they buried the results.