Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: What did happen at the May 14th, 2022, Lancaster Airport crash

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,643

    What did happen at the May 14th, 2022, Lancaster Airport crash

    What did happen at the May 14th, 2022, Lancaster Airport crash

    Lancaster residents were promised a follow up report of the airport runway accident where Lancaster police and fire were denied access to the gated property to provide personal assistance in the event of injury and to offer investigative aid in determining the accident’s cause.

    When the matter was discussed at the town board meeting Supervisor Ruffino and Councilmember Leary declared the accident was being investigated by the FAA and its report would be made public. Since then, crickets.

    Lancaster resident Mark Blazejewski has done some excellent follow up research on the accident and posted this on his Facebook site:


    WHAT DID HAPPEN AT THE LANCASTER AIRPORT, ON THE DAY OF THE TRAGIC TOPS SHOOTING?
    Mark Blazejewski

    I have obtained and reviewed a copy of the July 13, 2022, NTSB report concerning the May 14, 2022, plane accident at the Lancaster Airport.

    AS I UNDERSTAND THE REPORT, among other curiosities, I note that the NTSB did not travel to the scene, and given the reported irregularities concerning plane damage, I think it is highly likely that the wreckage was not inspected.

    In Comment One below is a screenshot of the initial accident report constructed on May 14, 2022. That report specifies that there was "substantial" damage to the plane.

    In fact, the report does attribute testimony relating to "substantial damage to the wings and airframe" to the pilot, but the report concludes, twice, that the extent of the damage is "UNKNOWN"; a strong indication to me that the wreckage may never have been inspected by the NTSB.

    Moreover, the report states that the "Defining Event" occurred "In Flight," but the analytical narrative ascribes the event to "take off" with the strong suggestion of immediate pilot error.

    The above description of the "Defining Event" notwithstanding, the link below suggests that the plane was in the air for about three minutes.

    https://www.flightaware.com/.../2022...825Z/KBQR/KBQR

    Further, the screenshot under Comment TWO supports the Flight Aware link above.

    As such, this event seemingly relates to a landing, not an incident relating to take-off.

    More troubling, the analytical narrative of the report speaks of some sort of struggle or conflict, perhaps physical, between the student pilot and his instructor which resulted in the crash. The report seems to conclude and specifically attributes the same to student "Unnecessary action" and "anxiety" and "panic." (COMMENT Five.)

    Also, I am concerned that this report may be flawed in these regards:

    (1) Any narrative of this accident may be suspected in that first responders were not permitted immediate access to the scene, and much of the information related in the report may be described as unverified hearsay.

    (2) The times listed on screenshot two suggest the event occurred at 1:58 p.m., BUT the report states the event occurred at 2:10 p.m., twelve minutes after tracking and log records indicate. Given the subsequent events of May 14, 2022, this discrepancy is suspicious to me.

    (3) Both the instructor and student are unidentified.

    (4) Both the registered owner and operator are unidentified.

    (5) The Departure Time is unspecified.

    (6) There was no Flight Plan filed.

    (7) There is no indication of Passengers.

    (8 I am curious to know how the report concludes that there was no explosion or fire, when first responders were never
    permitted on the scene and the NTSB apparently did not visit the scene or inspect the wreckage.

    (9) The questions of Toxicology Reports were not confirmed or denied, they were left blank.

    Yea, this report raises more questions than it answers, so if I in anyway erred, someone straighten me out and please clarify these issues.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,556
    Date: 14-MAY-2022
    Time: 13:10 LT
    Type: Silhouette image of generic C172 model; specific model in this crash may look slightly different
    Cessna 172M Skyhawk
    Owner/operator: Little Bird Airways LLC
    Registration: N20459
    MSN: 17261305
    Fatalities: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 2
    Aircraft damage: Unk
    Category: Accident
    Location: Buffalo-Lancaster Regional Airport (BQR/KBQR), NY - United States of America
    Phase: Take off
    Nature: Training
    Departure airport: Lancaster, NY
    Destination airport: Lancaster, NY
    Investigating agency: NTSB
    Confidence Rating: Accident investigation report completed and information captured
    Narrative:
    The flight instructor reported that after she demonstrated a soft-field takeoff, she directed the student to conduct one. During the takeoff roll, the student maintained excessive back pressure on the control yoke and was told by the instructor to reduce the back pressure. Once the airplane lifted off the runway it started to veer to the left; the instructor again informed the student to reduce back pressure to decrease the pitch, but the student maintained a grip on the controls and held excessive right rudder. The instructor stated, 'I have the controls,'¯ but the student 'locked up and blocked'¯ them and failed to relinquish the controls. The instructor was able to reduce the pitch, but directional control was lost, and the left wing contacted the runway surface, and the airplane departed the runway and flipped over, which resulted in substantial damage to the wings and airframe. The instructor stated that there were no mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation.

    Probable Cause: The student pilot's excessive pitch during takeoff resulted in a loss of control and impact with terrain. Contributing was the student's failure to relinquish the controls when ordered by the instructor.

    https://littlebirdairways.com/home-page
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by Dan Roman; September 11th, 2023 at 09:40 AM.

  3. #3
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,049
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Roman View Post
    Date: 14-MAY-2022
    Time: 13:10 LT
    Type: Silhouette image of generic C172 model; specific model in this crash may look slightly different
    Cessna 172M Skyhawk
    Owner/operator: Little Bird Airways LLC
    Registration: N20459
    MSN: 17261305
    Fatalities: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 2
    Aircraft damage: Unk
    Category: Accident
    Location: Buffalo-Lancaster Regional Airport (BQR/KBQR), NY - United States of America
    Phase: Take off
    Nature: Training
    Departure airport: Lancaster, NY
    Destination airport: Lancaster, NY
    Investigating agency: NTSB
    Confidence Rating: Accident investigation report completed and information captured
    Narrative:
    The flight instructor reported that after she demonstrated a soft-field takeoff, she directed the student to conduct one. During the takeoff roll, the student maintained excessive back pressure on the control yoke and was told by the instructor to reduce the back pressure. Once the airplane lifted off the runway it started to veer to the left; the instructor again informed the student to reduce back pressure to decrease the pitch, but the student maintained a grip on the controls and held excessive right rudder. The instructor stated, 'I have the controls,'¯ but the student 'locked up and blocked'¯ them and failed to relinquish the controls. The instructor was able to reduce the pitch, but directional control was lost, and the left wing contacted the runway surface, and the airplane departed the runway and flipped over, which resulted in substantial damage to the wings and airframe. The instructor stated that there were no mechanical malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation.

    Probable Cause: The student pilot's excessive pitch during takeoff resulted in a loss of control and impact with terrain. Contributing was the student's failure to relinquish the controls when ordered by the instructor.

    https://littlebirdairways.com/home-page
    I just came up to Speak Up in order to amplify on your post.

    My Facebook post concerned the NTSB's Final Report regarding the May 14, 2022 accident at Lancaster Airport. In that post, I did reference and post what might be called an "initial" or "preliminary" accident report dated May 14, 2022. This is a May 20, 2022 screenshot of that accident report:

    image - 2023-09-11T101746.096.jpg

    What you posted is both a screenshot and substance of another, apparently subsequent version of that "initial" or "preliminary" report. A copy of your information can be found at https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/278257. Also available on that link is the Final Report. It is that final Report which is the basis for my Facebook post.

    In regards to your posted version of the May 14, 2022 report, I ask you to note the time of the accident which is given as 13:10. If I understand the designated time correctly, it reflects a time at least 48 minutes before the accident allegedly occurred, as per these sourced links:

    https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/N20459

    https://www.flightaware.com/live/fli.../KBQR/tracklog


    Furthermore, that 13:10 time would appear to precede the time of 14:10 referred to in the Final Report, by one full hour.

    I hope this clarifies things for everyone.
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; September 11th, 2023 at 10:47 AM.
    "With all due respect Ron, you don't know what you're talking about."---Supervisor Johanna Coleman, September 4, 2018

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2023
    Posts
    28
    All the "facts" where pointed out in regards. To this FAA Report that a aircraft. Did "crash" at the "Buffalo-Lancaster Regional Airport"! And Contact information is via Mr.George Ezzo, Airport Manager. And furthermore "Fact" is on this aircraft incident. That the Lancaster Police Department and Fire Service via Townline Fire Department. Where not allowed on the scene of this aircraft incident! This Airport is also called a "Feeder" airport. And per the Buffalo Niagara International Airport. A "Emergency Landing" Airport for smaller aircraft. So, with even that designation and BNIA sent a smaller aircraft with a "Emergency". To this Regional Airprt in Lancaster. Does this Airport Management have the authority. With this moment that a "Emergency" Landing is required. Not to allow the State and Local Police Department(s). And the State, City or Local Fire Service into this "Private" FAA Regional Airport ? Note: City Fire Department is the BNIA (NFTA)Rescue and Firefighting

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,643
    While I appreciate all the information provided by the posters, regardless of conflicting narratives from the FFA, NTSB, and other, it still does answer whether the Buffalo-Lancaster Regional airport had the authority to deny access to Lancaster’s police and first responders to provide medical attention and a preliminary inspection as to accident cause, personal injury, and property damage.

    By their own operation narrative – The Buffalo-Lancaster Regional (KBQR) is a public-use airport serving the Buffalo Metropolitan and surrounding Western New York areas. It is dedicated to general aviation. Grass roots aviators, flying clubs, corporate operators and flight schools feel equally at home at Buffalo-Lancaster. It is also a reliever airport for the Buffalo-Niagara International Airport.

    The Lancaster Bee publication the following week:

    A runway accident at the Buffalo-Lancaster Regional Airport on Walden Avenue caused concern from members of the Lancaster Town Board this Saturday, with emergency services being barred from entry upon being notified of the overturned plane.

    “This is completely unacceptable. We will have to check with our attorneys to see what the agreement is with them,” said Town of Lancaster Trustee Robert Leary discussing the incident. He floated the idea that any special use permits issued could be used as motivation for the airport to exercise cooperation and transparency with local emergency services. He believes medical professionals should be allowed to be on-site during these situations, and equally, that law enforcement should be permitted to investigate the circumstances surrounding any crash or accident.

    Supervisor Ron Ruffino communicated his thoughts on the matter. “The Lancaster Town Board is aware of the aircraft incident that was reported today at the Buffalo Lancaster Airport,” he said. “We are aware that the FAA is investigating, and the board will follow up with the FAA and management from the airport.”


    We have heard crickets on the matter. I am still of the mind that Lancaster residents deserve to hear from the town on whether the Lancaster Airport had the authority to deny police and first responder access to a public entity. Was someone in the town contacted that ordered the responders to stand-by? Why? Who would issue such an order? Why are residents being denied that information.

    Had property access been allowed and a preliminary inspection made, I don’t believe all these conflicting narratives would exist. There are exigent circumstances that prohibit denial of property search and investigation. Is this not one of them?

  6. #6
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,049
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post

    Had property access been allowed and a preliminary inspection made, I don’t believe all these conflicting narratives would exist. There are exigent circumstances that prohibit denial of property search and investigation. Is this not one of them?




    Lee, thank you for the refocus.

    My Facebook post was created with the intention to provide the people of Lancaster with the promised NTSB Final Report, but that Report, whether flawed or exemplary, does not address the issue(s) of emergency access to the Buffalo-Lancaster Airport on May 14, 2022.


    Under what might be termed "normal circumstances, would not the police and the first responders have been permitted immediate access to a crash site in order to assess medical needs; possible public hazards; establish a verifiable timeline; interview the principles and perhaps witnesses; and fully secure the site in order to establish and preserve a chain of evidence?


    It would seem that such was not the case regarding the May 14, 2022 Lancaster Airport accident. In my honest opinion, what emerged was a Final Report which seemingly holds some rather disputable information.

    The NTSB's Final Report, again whether it is flawed or exemplary, does not seem to address the Bee's May 19, 2022 report, which appeared to focus on the issue of first responder access to the Buffalo-Lancaster Airport on the day of the mishap.

    In my post, I tried to illustrate some of that disputable information, and did so in order to illustrate why there may be a need for the obvious emergency protocols, as well as some sort of explanation as to why the first responders were denied access to the airport on May 14, 2022.
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; September 12th, 2023 at 07:40 AM.
    "With all due respect Ron, you don't know what you're talking about."---Supervisor Johanna Coleman, September 4, 2018

  7. #7
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,049
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post

    We have heard crickets on the matter. I am still of the mind that Lancaster residents deserve to hear from the town on whether the Lancaster Airport had the authority to deny police and first responder access to a public entity. Was someone in the town contacted that ordered the responders to stand-by? Why? Who would issue such an order? Why are residents being denied that information.

    Had property access been allowed and a preliminary inspection made, I don’t believe all these conflicting narratives would exist. There are exigent circumstances that prohibit denial of property search and investigation. Is this not one of them?
    This from The Lancaster Bee, May 19, 2022, is troubling:

    The topic was briefly addressed at the Town of Lancaster’s board meeting workshop on Monday, May 16. There, the board decided that any further will be made after the FAA’s investigation.


    Why did the Board appear to rely on the FAA's (NTSB's) investigation of what caused the crash, as a prerequisite for pursuing the separate issue of first responder access?

    Isn't a crash or an accident, a crash or an accident, and its causation has nothing to do with the emergency response access issue?

    Why did the Board seemingly dilute its concentration on the main access issue, by apparently linking it with the separate crash causation issue?

    Just My Opinion:

    If the Board believed that the NTSB Report would address the first responder access issue in its July, 2022 Final Report, I think the Board was wrong.

    After having well over a year to study that Final Report, why is it the public seemingly has no answer(s) to the outstanding questions regarding the focal issue of first responder access?
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; September 12th, 2023 at 09:11 AM.
    "With all due respect Ron, you don't know what you're talking about."---Supervisor Johanna Coleman, September 4, 2018

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,643
    I would like to thank those that sent me copies of the FAA, NTSB, the Pilot accident report, et al.

    It is disturbing to read so many conflicting reports concerning the time of accident, response time, damage assessment, and cause of accident. Reading the reports and seeing a photo of the inverted plane it is obvious there was significant airplane damage, potential for personal injury, and the need for an emergency response team.

    Such a team did respond but was denied property access by Buffalo-Lancaster Airport management. Of all the information presented the following has not been revealed and is of primary concern to the public for myriad safety reasons:

    By whose authority did the airport act to deny access to police and rescue. The town was to contact its attorneys to see if there was an agreement with the airport that would allow it to deny access. That appears far-fetched and reckless, yet 16 months after the accident the town has yet to respond on the matter.

    Who told the first responders to leave. Surely the responders must have contacted some town official who gave them the order to disperse.

    Looking at the photo of the inverted airplane and its significant damage, one can only be incensed that the airport took it upon itself to determine no injury was suffered by the flight school instructor or the 16-year-old student and that the need of medical attention was not required.

    The number one responsibility of a municipality is public safety and its community’s wellbeing. Is it therefore unreasonable for the public to question here whether that commitment has been compromised. The public deserves an answer.

  9. #9
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,049
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post
    By whose authority did the airport act to deny access to police and rescue. The town was to contact its attorneys to see if there was an agreement with the airport that would allow it to deny access. That appears far-fetched and reckless, yet 16 months after the accident the town has yet to respond on the matter.

    Who told the first responders to leave.
    Surely the responders must have contacted some town official who gave them the order to disperse."
    It is my understanding that the Buffalo Lancaster Regional Airport is the "primary reliever" airport for Buffalo-Niagara International Airport.

    From the BLR Airport's website:

    "Buffalo-Lancaster Regional (KBQR) is a public-use airport serving the Buffalo Metropolitan and surrounding Western New York areas. At less than six miles Southeast of Buffalo-Niagara International Airport, we are its primary reliever."
    Reference: http://www.buffalolancaster.com/

    As such, would not federal security and safety protocols apply to Buffalo Lancaster Regional Airport?

    It seems to me that only someone with considerable muscle could have compelled the first responders to leave, so is it fair to ask did federal personnel somehow provide such muscle?

    Were some telephone calls made?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post
    It is disturbing to read so many conflicting reports concerning the *time of accident, response time, damage assessment, and cause of accident.
    Indeed, the findings of the NTSB's Final Report appear to be in conflict with the findings of the Federal official that apparently contributed to that Final Report.

    It troubles me that there seems to be very significant differences relating to Flight Aware tracking records and some other versions of the timeline. The Final Report does not appear to harmonize those differences with its own conclusion(s). More muscle?

    Again, the date of the accident was May 14, 2022 and the time was the early afternoon, correct?
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; September 14th, 2023 at 09:14 AM.
    "With all due respect Ron, you don't know what you're talking about."---Supervisor Johanna Coleman, September 4, 2018

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,643
    May 14, 2022, Lancaster Airport crash information – finally.

    Councilmember Robert Leary is to be commended for requesting Police Chief Gummo and Buffalo-Lancaster Regional Airport representative Jason Macken to appear at the board work session to explain what caused the May 14th, 2022, single engine flight school crash and why police, fire, and EMS services were denied access – especially when the accident occurred on a Saturday at approximately 2 pm..

    Unfortunately, when Leary asked Chief Gummo to speak on the matter he declared that for some reason people were asking questions on when the plane flipped over. “Stuff started showing up in the public.” Those people have been waiting 16 months for an explanation from the town on the circumstances of the crash and why Lancaster police, fire, and EMS were denied access onto the property to provide aid and investigation. They were promised as much.

    Chief Gummo declared they had received a call (unknown) of a plane that had crashed on take off and flipped over at the end of the runway, according to a report. According to the NTSB the crash occurred because of pilot error.

    The police officers went out there as well as fire and EMS. They were denied access to the property, but not by an airport representative, by by a tenant having no authorization to deny access. They were renting space from the airport and were running a business – a fight school for flight training,

    Gummo: We were commissioned by then Chief Karn to put something together so this would not happen again: working with airport management we came up with a plan where if this happened again police, fire, and EMS would have code security access for the main gate and other access gates. And whoever was blocking us from access would be arrested for obstruction. Once the airport manager arrives, he will be able to confirm that.

    When airport management (Jason Macken) appeared Leary repeated Chief Gummo’s narrative and asked him to corroborate Chief Gummo’s narrative – that indeed it was a tenant that denied property access. Macken agreed and was asked by Leary if an agreement was drawn up with the airport to instate policy that tenants could never do that again. Macken said the tenants were advised and it is now written policy. The whole town emergency services now have access.

    He said they were working on this before the incident – as they should have after the previous flight school airplane crash.

    Comment

    The public appreciates hearing Lancaster police, fire, and EMS will never be denied airport access again.

    It is still troubling that it took this long to get this report and still not know who ordered the first responders to stand down and leave the premises. Especially troubling when hearing access was denied by the tenant who ran the flight school. Where was management on a Saturday afternoon at 2 pm.

  11. #11
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,049
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post
    May 14, 2022, Lancaster Airport crash information – finally.

    Councilmember Robert Leary is to be commended for requesting Police Chief Gummo and Buffalo-Lancaster Regional Airport representative Jason Macken to appear at the board work session to explain what caused the May 14th, 2022, single engine flight school crash and why police, fire, and EMS services were denied access – especially when the accident occurred on a Saturday at approximately 2 pm..
    Yes, I am very glad that they took the time to speak to that very troubling, and in many minds, highly suspicious occurrence.

    My concern, for "some reason," did not even warrant attention in a public session, and I could challenge this presentation in so many ways, but what is the point?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post
    * Unfortunately, when Leary asked Chief Gummo to speak on the matter he declared that for some reason people were asking questions on when the plane flipped over. “Stuff started showing up in the public.” Those people have been waiting 16 months for an explanation from the town on the circumstances of the crash and why Lancaster police, fire, and EMS were denied access onto the property to provide aid and investigation. They were promised as much.
    I sure am glad that the Town Council work sessions are preserved on video and audio, because this presentation would be "taking time up time away from regular meetings."

    I have experienced Town Council sessions which were used to pat paid employees people on the back for doing their job, and to advertise chicken barbeques. Apparently public safety is only a selectively perceived concern, eh?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post
    * Chief Gummo declared they had received a call (unknown) of a plane that had crashed on take off and flipped over at the end of the runway, according to a report. According to the NTSB the crash occurred because of pilot error.
    I'll take him at his word, but in a day of Caller I.D., I have a hard time fully accepting it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post
    * The police officers went out there as well as fire and EMS. They were denied access to the property, but not by an airport representative, by by a tenant having no authorization to deny access. They were renting space from the airport and were running a business – a fight school for flight training,
    To anyone who values the safety of their family, friends and neighbors, and the more general Lancaster community, this is beyond troubling.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post
    * It is still troubling that it took this long to get this report and still not know who ordered the first responders to stand down and leave the premises. Especially troubling when hearing access was denied by the tenant who ran the flight school. Where was management on a Saturday afternoon at 2 pm.
    The Lancaster version of the Warren Report, eh?
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; September 19th, 2023 at 07:57 AM.
    "With all due respect Ron, you don't know what you're talking about."---Supervisor Johanna Coleman, September 4, 2018

  12. #12
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,049
    I'll write this one last time:

    Quote Originally Posted by mark blazejewski View Post



    It seems to me that only someone with considerable muscle could have compelled the first responders to leave, so is it fair to ask did federal personnel somehow provide such muscle?

    Were some telephone calls made?...


    Indeed, the findings of the NTSB's Final Report appear to be in conflict with the findings of the Federal official that apparently contributed to that Final Report.

    It troubles me that there seems to be very significant differences relating to Flight Aware tracking records and some other versions of the timeline. The Final Report does not appear to harmonize those differences with its own conclusion(s). More muscle?

    Again, the date of the accident was May 14, 2022 and the time was the early afternoon, correct?
    "With all due respect Ron, you don't know what you're talking about."---Supervisor Johanna Coleman, September 4, 2018

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,674
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post
    May 14, 2022, Lancaster Airport crash information – finally.

    Councilmember Robert Leary is to be commended for requesting Police Chief Gummo and Buffalo-Lancaster Regional Airport representative Jason Macken to appear at the board work session to explain what caused the May 14th, 2022, single engine flight school crash and why police, fire, and EMS services were denied access – especially when the accident occurred on a Saturday at approximately 2 pm..

    Unfortunately, when Leary asked Chief Gummo to speak on the matter he declared that for some reason people were asking questions on when the plane flipped over. “Stuff started showing up in the public.” Those people have been waiting 16 months for an explanation from the town on the circumstances of the crash and why Lancaster police, fire, and EMS were denied access onto the property to provide aid and investigation. They were promised as much.

    Chief Gummo declared they had received a call (unknown) of a plane that had crashed on take off and flipped over at the end of the runway, according to a report. According to the NTSB the crash occurred because of pilot error.

    The police officers went out there as well as fire and EMS. They were denied access to the property, but not by an airport representative, by by a tenant having no authorization to deny access. They were renting space from the airport and were running a business – a fight school for flight training,

    Gummo: We were commissioned by then Chief Karn to put something together so this would not happen again: working with airport management we came up with a plan where if this happened again police, fire, and EMS would have code security access for the main gate and other access gates. And whoever was blocking us from access would be arrested for obstruction. Once the airport manager arrives, he will be able to confirm that.

    When airport management (Jason Macken) appeared Leary repeated Chief Gummo’s narrative and asked him to corroborate Chief Gummo’s narrative – that indeed it was a tenant that denied property access. Macken agreed and was asked by Leary if an agreement was drawn up with the airport to instate policy that tenants could never do that again. Macken said the tenants were advised and it is now written policy. The whole town emergency services now have access.

    He said they were working on this before the incident – as they should have after the previous flight school airplane crash.

    Comment

    The public appreciates hearing Lancaster police, fire, and EMS will never be denied airport access again.

    It is still troubling that it took this long to get this report and still not know who ordered the first responders to stand down and leave the premises. Especially troubling when hearing access was denied by the tenant who ran the flight school. Where was management on a Saturday afternoon at 2 pm.
    Lee & Mark,

    I am just now reading this, have been off Speakup for some time. I cannot believe what I am reading "again" regarding first responders not having the ability to gain access when an incident such as this occurs. I worked on that project many years ago when I lived in Lancaster when a similar incident had happened which resulted in first responders not having the ability to gain access. At that time, a code access was given to the first responders. What happened years later? A reliever airport should give priority access to first responders based on the role of the airport as a reliever airport that had received grant monies to receive reliever designation status from the FAA.

    It sounded like the student was scared and froze when given a command from the instructor, which opens up the debate as to what age was the student and are they mentally developed to take flight lessons?

  14. #14
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,049
    Quote Originally Posted by shortstuff View Post
    It sounded like the student was scared and froze when given a command from the instructor, which opens up the debate as to what age was the student and are they mentally developed to take flight lessons?
    Another issue arises from Chief Gummo's statement suggesting the police department received a call concerning the crash, but if I understood the Chief correctly, he doesn't know who called-in the mishap.

    In the day of Caller ID, I find that very odd. So, was it a call to the Dispatcher or 911?

    As such, the question remains as to the source of the call. Was it someone on the BLR Airport campus; the pilot, or perhaps the student?

    Was it a passerby?

    Odd, very, very, very odd.

    What I also find very is the Town Council which apparently relied so very heavily on the FAA/NTSB Final Report, did not appear to request a representative of the FAA to be present at the Work Session.

    Equally, there were no representatives from the Fire Department, LVAC, or similar organizations. Why is that?

    Once again, very odd indeed!!!

    Also, were there any eyewitnesses to the incident?

    I have read the account of one on the social media site Southtowns Scanner, who believed it had seen a plane apparently in distress from the area of the Kohls store on Transit Road. Another commenter on that site spoke to the issue of access denial, and did so on May 14, 2022.

    (BTW, I truly appreciate the comments of the representative from the BLR Airport, which seemed to confirm Police Chief Gummo's positions regarding the unauthorized tenant and any future incidents.)
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; September 27th, 2023 at 06:10 PM.
    "With all due respect Ron, you don't know what you're talking about."---Supervisor Johanna Coleman, September 4, 2018

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 19th, 2023, 05:20 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: February 25th, 2022, 12:40 PM
  3. Atlanta airport mess: How does this happen?
    By topstories in forum News Feeds
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: December 18th, 2017, 05:13 PM
  4. Buffalo-Lancaster Airport meeting, Part II: Airport, FFA, presentations continued
    By speakup in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: August 10th, 2009, 09:30 AM
  5. Buffalo-Lancaster Airport meeting, Part I: Airport, FFA, presentations
    By speakup in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 7th, 2009, 11:20 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •