FLIGHT FINDINGSAVIATION OCCURRENCE MAP
Back to map

Mesaba Aviation Flight 3109

24 Feb 2004 · Romulus, MI, United States

Saab-Scania AB (Saab) Saab 340B · Accident: on ground/water collision with object during pushback

From Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport (DTW) to Muskegon County Airport (MKG)

Report a problem

Narrative check · The NTSB narrative appears to contradict this record's aircraft involved. Values are shown as recorded, not corrected; compare with the narrative.

Event

NTSB case
CHI04LA077
Event typeAccident: someone killed or seriously injured, or the aircraft substantially damaged (NTSB definition). Incident: an occurrence that affected or could have affected safety, short of that. Glossary
Accident
InvestigationHow far the investigation had got when the record was published: preliminary, ongoing, final or completed. Unknown where the source does not say. Glossary
Completed
API-reported fatalities
0 · all aircraft and ground
Ground fatalities
Unknown
OperationWhat kind of flying it was, grouped by the rules it flew under: airline (US Part 121), air taxi and commuter (Part 135), general aviation (Part 91 and similar), military or government. Glossary
Airline
WeatherVisual meteorological conditions (VMC): good enough to fly by looking outside. Instrument conditions (IMC): cloud or low visibility, flying by instruments. Glossary
Visual Meteorological Cond

Saab-Scania AB (Saab) Saab 340B Narrative disagrees

Category
Airplane
RegistrationThe aircraft's tail number, such as N12345 or G-ABCD. Registrations are reissued, so the same one years apart can be a different aircraft. Glossary
N420XJ
Onboard fatalities
Unknown
Route
From Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport (DTW), Romulus, MITo Muskegon County Airport (MKG), Muskegon, MI
Aircraft age
Not recorded
Flight rulesThe regulations the flight operated under: in the US, Part 91 (general aviation), Part 121 (airlines), Part 135 (air taxi and commuter) and others; for flights abroad, the NTSB's coarser commercial or non-commercial code. Glossary
Part 121: Air Carrier
Phase of flightThe stage of the flight when things started to go wrong: standing, taxi, takeoff, initial climb, en route, maneuvering, approach or landing. Glossary
Pushback/towing
First occurrenceThe single coded event the NTSB judges best describes what happened (records from 2008 on). Older records name the first occurrence in the sequence instead. Glossary
On ground/water collision with object
DamageDestroyed: beyond practical repair. Substantial: damage that affects the structure, performance or handling and normally needs major repair. Minor: less than that. Glossary
Substantial

Cause areas

  • Ground personnel › Procedures/directives, not followed
  • Ground personnel › Visual lookout, not maintained

Approximate · Coordinates from the NTSB case API, which marks them as estimated or does not say; no uncertainty radius is established.

NTSB narrative

The scheduled domestic passenger flight was being pushed back for taxi when it struck an unoccupied airplane that was parked on the ramp. Both airplanes sustained substantial damage. The 2 flight crewmembers, 1 cabin crewmember, and 29 passengers were uninjured. Dark night visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident. The Push Tug Operator stated, "In pushing back this plane I was attempting to do it as I was trained, that is, to [prop] the front wheels on the painted line. I [normally] work on the east side and there is a line [used] for the front wheels. I had not done [a] push back [on] the west side before. While pushing this plane back I started looking for the line as I approached the line my wing walker had stopped walking the [wing] and was off to my left and slightly behind me she says she gave me a stop [signal], but due to her position I could not see her. She ran up to me and told me to stop but it was already [too] late." Excerpts from the airline's Station Operations Manual stated, "The Pushback Operator and the Captain have the overall responsibility for the safe conduct of the pushback operation. ... The Pushback Operator shall remain alert for signals given by the Wing Walker(s). When Wing Walker(s) is/are used, if visual contact between the Pushback Operator and Wing Walker is lost, stop the pushback. The Pushback Operator must continuously scan for signals and hazards. ... Before pushback of an aircraft, the Pushback Operator shall : 1. Determine where the aircraft is to be pushed back to, positioned and route to be taken. 2. Note ALL potential clearance problems to be avoided. ... 5. Review with the Captain the route to be taken. ... During pushback of an aircraft, the Pushback Operator shall: 17. Pushback ONLY when clearance from obstructions (and visual contact with Wing Walker(s), when used) is maintained. ... PUSHBACK OPERATOR CHECKLIST, BEFORE PUSHBACK CHECK 1. ASSESS ROUTE, CLEARANCES AND RAMP CONDITIONS." The Push Tug Operator tested positive for cocaine metabolite. 14 CFR Part 121 Appendix I stated, "Each person who performs a safety-sensitive function directly or by contract for an employer must be tested pursuant to an FAA-approved antidrug program conducted in accordance with this appendix." The Push Tug Operator was not on the FAA's safety-sensitive list. An airline representative reported that the airline's policy is to accomplish a pre-employment drug test for all safety-sensitive and non safety-sensitive employees. The Push Tug Operator's pre-employment drug test was reported as negative. The airline had a drug policy and an employee assistance program in-place at the time of the accident. An airline representative reported that the supervisor and coordinator for the accident gate area were two gates away and did not directly observe the accident pushback. Subsequent to the accident, the airline established a policy of random drug testing for all employees as a condition of employment.

Probable cause

The visual lookout not maintained and the procedures not followed by the Push Tug Operator during the pushback. Factors were the parked airplane, the dark night, and the inadequate surveillance of the pushback by airline management.

Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset

Sources

NTSB record CHI04LA077
Event ID
20040226X00241
Case number
CHI04LA077
Dataset
historical-pre2008
Source SHA-256
89e2df6d848e7ab3b42e7d7c7a03ff403303057a26ca04c95b3ea67201c3ce74
Source notes (4)
  • Unreviewed is an editorial label, not an investigation status. API-sourced is not report-checked or human-reviewed. Explicit event totals are used without summing aircraft injury tables; onboard allocation is withheld. Unknown values remain unknown. The operation category is mapped from the NTSB-reported FAR part and has not been reviewed.
  • Filled from the NTSB case API where the bulk record had no value: local date, investigation status, coordinates. Values present in the bulk record are kept.
  • The date is the local date; the NTSB stores the UTC date 2004-02-25.
  • API snapshot SHA-256: 713e569b338b86ffc53448a7738598b78b17405a33a49533b7a3a1698b7dd625; retrieved 2026-09-18T15:29:42.659Z.