What happened
On December 18, 2005, a Mudry CAP 10B, registration I-BLAS, was performing a local flight near Parma Airport. After approximately 40 minutes of flight, the pilot prepared to land on runway 02. The pilot initially intended to perform a back-track maneuver to return to the parking area; however, Air Traffic Services (ATS) notified the pilot that another aircraft was beginning its landing sequence. Consequently, the pilot was instructed to enter taxiway "A" and perform a 180-degree turn to avoid interfering with the arriving traffic.
Instead of stopping in taxiway "A" to complete the turn, the pilot proceeded along taxiway "T". At the time, taxiway "T" was closed for construction work under NOTAM B6505, and the destination apron "V" was also closed under NOTAM B6507. While navigating these closed areas, the aircraft's left wing and propeller struck plastic "New Jersey" barriers used to block the entrance to the apron. The aircraft then struck a runway threshold light with the lower fuselage, causing damage to the vertical stabilizer, which partially detached. The two occupants of the aircraft were uninjured.
The investigation
The ANSV investigation examined the pilot's actions and the airport's operational status. The investigation confirmed that the aircraft was in an airworthy condition, ruling out technical failure as a cause. The investigators noted that the pilot claimed the barriers were not visible from the cockpit due to the low seating position characteristic of the CAP 10. However, the investigation established that the pilot was responsible for being aware of the active NOTAMs, which explicitly prohibited access to the taxiway and apron in question.
Findings
- The primary cause of the accident was the collision with ground obstacles resulting from the pilot's failure to observe active NOTAMs regarding closed taxiways and aprons.
- The pilot proceeded into restricted areas despite instructions to hold in taxiway "A".
- The low cockpit visibility of the aircraft contributed to the pilot's inability to see the barriers, though this did not negate the requirement to follow airport notices.