What happened
The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.
(-5) Cessna 172, N100RK received minor damage while taxiing after landing at the Minneapolis international airport, Minneapolis, Minnesota on October 24, 1998. The pilot-in-command of the aircraft, marlan j. perhus and the other occupant f the aircraft, joel m. ellingson were not injured. Mr. Ellingson is a private pilot and was manipulating the controls of the aircraft at the time of the incident. The aircraft had landed on runway 30L and was instructed by Minneapolis air traffic control to exit the runway on alpha 3 and to follow a DC-10 aircraft on taxiway alpha. The DC-10 aircraft was instruced to turn left on taxiway charlie and hold short of runway 30L. N 100RK was then instructed to turn right on taxiway hotel to join taxiway tango to the tower ramp. Shortly after N100RK turned onto taxiway hotel, msp ATC instructed the DC-10 to cross runway 30L with no delay, traffic on a two mile final. Msp ATC advised the DC-10 that Cessna traffic was passing behind. The jet blast from the DC-10 lifted the tail and left wing of the Cessna. The Cessna's propeller started striking the ground. Mr. Perhus stated he positioned the elevator full forward and pulled the mixture control to idle cut off. At the time of the incident the Cessna was approximately 300 feet behind the DC-10. A diagram of the Minneapolis airport, showing the position of the two aircraft is attached. The DC-10 was being operated by northwest airlines maintenance personnel for the purpose of taxing for a maintenance run-up. Inspector raymond yank of the milwaukee FSDO inspected N100RK on October 30, 1998. He reported that the aircraft sustained damage to the right wing tip, propeller and nose wheel pant. Analysis of the incident indicates that the personnel onboard the DC-10 could not see the Cessna and had no way of knowing the distance of the Cessna behind the DC-10. The Cessna was taxing away for the DC-10 and therefore had no control of its distance to the DC-10. #40 investigation of this incident did not indicate did not indicate any operation contrary to the federal aviation regulation or any competency issues involving the crews of the two aircraft. privacy data omitted
As the FAA filed it
(-5) CESSNA 172, N100RK RECEIVED MINOR DAMAGE WHILE TAXIING AFTER LANDING AT THE MINNEAPOLIS INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA ON OCTOBER 24, 1998. THE PILOT-IN-COMMAND OF THE AIRCRAFT, MARLAN J. PERHUS AND THE OTHER OCCUPANT F THE AIRCRAFT, JOEL M. ELLINGSON WERE NOT INJURED. MR. ELLINGSON IS A PRIVATE PILOT AND WAS MANIPULATING THE CONTROLS OF THE AIRCRAFT AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT. THE AIRCRAFT HAD LANDED ON RUNWAY 30L AND WAS INSTRUCTED BY MINNEAPOLIS AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TO EXIT THE RUNWAY ON ALPHA 3 AND TO FOLLOW A DC-10 AIRCRAFT ON TAXIWAY ALPHA. THE DC-10 AIRCRAFT WAS INSTRUCED TO TURN LEFT ON TAXIWAY CHARLIE AND HOLD SHORT OF RUNWAY 30L. N 100RK WAS THEN INSTRUCTED TO TURN RIGHT ON TAXIWAY HOTEL TO JOIN TAXIWAY TANGO TO THE TOWER RAMP. SHORTLY AFTER N100RK TURNED ONTO TAXIWAY HOTEL, MSP ATC INSTRUCTED THE DC-10 TO CROSS RUNWAY 30L WITH NO DELAY, TRAFFIC ON A TWO MILE FINAL. MSP ATC ADVISED THE DC-10 THAT CESSNA TRAFFIC WAS PASSING BEHIND. THE JET BLAST FROM THE DC-10 LIFTED THE TAIL AND LEFT WING OF THE CESSNA. THE CESSNA'S PROPELLER STARTED STRIKING THE GROUND. MR. PERHUS STATED HE POSITIONED THE ELEVATOR FULL FORWARD AND PULLED THE MIXTURE CONTROL TO IDLE CUT OFF. AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT THE CESSNA WAS APPROXIMATELY 300 FEET BEHIND THE DC-10. A DIAGRAM OF THE MINNEAPOLIS AIRPORT, SHOWING THE POSITION OF THE TWO AIRCRAFT IS ATTACHED. THE DC-10 WAS BEING OPERATED BY NORTHWEST AIRLINES MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL FOR THE PURPOSE OF TAXING FOR A MAINTENANCE RUN-UP. INSPECTOR RAYMOND YANK OF THE MILWAUKEE FSDO INSPECTED N100RK ON OCTOBER 30, 1998. HE REPORTED THAT THE AIRCRAFT SUSTAINED DAMAGE TO THE RIGHT WING TIP, PROPELLER AND NOSE WHEEL PANT. ANALYSIS OF THE INCIDENT INDICATES THAT THE PERSONNEL ONBOARD THE DC-10 COULD NOT SEE THE CESSNA AND HAD NO WAY OF KNOWING THE DISTANCE OF THE CESSNA BEHIND THE DC-10. THE CESSNA WAS TAXING AWAY FOR THE DC-10 AND THEREFORE HAD NO CONTROL OF ITS DISTANCE TO THE DC-10. #40 INVESTIGATION OF THIS INCIDENT DID NOT INDICATE DID NOT INDICATE ANY OPERATION CONTRARY TO THE FEDERAL AVIATION REGULATION OR ANY COMPETENCY ISSUES INVOLVING THE CREWS OF THE TWO AIRCRAFT. ^PRIVACY DATA OMITTED^