19990925033289I

Incident · Minor damage

FAA incident report · Univar 108 · Grant, MI · September 25, 1999

Date
September 25, 1999 · 14:13 local
Place
Grant, MI
Phase of flight
Final Approach
Operating rules
General operating rules (Part 91)
Damage
Minor damage
Aircraft
N9176K
Reported as
Univar 108
People aboard
1
Fatal injuries
0
Pilot’s flight hours
5,050 total45 in this make and model10 in the last 90 days

From the FAA’s Accident/Incident Data System (AIDS), through its Aviation Safety Information Portal, as reported. The NTSB investigates accidents separately, and its record of an accident is the fuller one. The aircraft is matched to the registry by N-number and event date, checked against the reported make and model; the registry’s history has gaps, so older matches can be wrong. Compare the reported make and model.

What happened

The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.

(-23) This is an update of this file reference a telephone conversation with the iic--inspector darling--on or about 11/16/1999: no action planned with the pilot as it was determined that the wires his aircraft hit were obscured by trees and brush. The owners of the private airfield where the pilot was practicing emergency landings stated that, due to the incident, he was going to contract out with the power company to bury the power lines as soon as feasable. Being no further action was required by the iic as a result of the airport owner's forthcoming actions, the case was then closed. End.

As the FAA filed it

(-23) THIS IS AN UPDATE OF THIS FILE REFERENCE A TELEPHONE CONVERSATION WITH THE IIC--INSPECTOR DARLING--ON OR ABOUT 11/16/1999: NO ACTION PLANNED WITH THE PILOT AS IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE WIRES HIS AIRCRAFT HIT WERE OBSCURED BY TREES AND BRUSH. THE OWNERS OF THE PRIVATE AIRFIELD WHERE THE PILOT WAS PRACTICING EMERGENCY LANDINGS STATED THAT, DUE TO THE INCIDENT, HE WAS GOING TO CONTRACT OUT WITH THE POWER COMPANY TO BURY THE POWER LINES AS SOON AS FEASABLE. BEING NO FURTHER ACTION WAS REQUIRED BY THE IIC AS A RESULT OF THE AIRPORT OWNER'S FORTHCOMING ACTIONS, THE CASE WAS THEN CLOSED. END.