Learjet Crash Exposes Runway Safety Gaps: 150m Buffer Ignored at Scottsdale Airport

TL;DR

• Learjet 35A Crash at Scottsdale Airport Linked to Improper Parking and Gear Failure
• U.S. Air Force Advances F-35 Stealth Jet with Software Upgrades, Cyber Hardening
• NASA's Artemis II Prepares for March 2025 Launch with Gulfstream G-III Heat Shield Data Collection

🚨 Learjet 35A Crash: No Thrust Reversers, Parked Gulfstream in Path — 1 Dead at Scottsdale Airport

150m buffer ignored. 🚨 A Learjet 35A crashed after gear failure—no thrust reversers, full flaps, and a Gulfstream G200 parked directly in its path. One pilot dead. Scottsdale Airport had no enforced safety zone. Now, lawsuits fly. Should every small-airport parked plane be required to stay 150m from runways? — Private pilots, could this happen near you?

The NTSB’s final report, released 9 Feb 2026, leaves no ambiguity: the Feb-2025 fatal crash of a Learjet 35A at Scottsdale Airport was triggered by a left-main-gear axle that snapped three seconds after touchdown, forcing the airplane into a low-wing skid that terminated inside a improperly parked Gulfstream G200. One pilot died; the Gulfstream—empty at the time—was written off. The sequence is a textbook case of how a 2 kg forged-steel part and a 30 m parking misjudgment can outweigh every other safety layer.

What Load Pushed the Gear Past Its Limit?

Touchdown data show 2.9 g vertical load on the left main strut, 34 % above the 2.16 g limit for the Learjet 35A’s 1973-vintage axle flange. The pilot selected 25 ° full flaps instead of the 10 ° short-field setting, spiking approach speed to 124 kt—8 kt hot—while adding 1 400 lb extra aerodynamic drag. The combination raised wing-to-gear load transfer by 19 %, enough to propagate a 4 mm fatigue crack that post-crash SEM analysis traced to 2018. No thrust reversers or drag chute were available to unload the gear once the aircraft floated 400 ft beyond the aim point.

How Did a Parked Jet End Up in the Crash Path?

Scottsdale’s ramp diagram places the Gulfstream 23 m beyond the runway 27 threshold, inside the 150 m RESA (Runway End Safety Area) that the airport never physically marked. Ground-control logs reveal the marshaller requested the spot to “keep the owner close to the FBO door,” bypassing the standard 2× wingspan clearance rule. When the Learjet exited the pavement at 62 kt, its trajectory intersected the Gulfstream’s left wing at a 28 ° angle, destroying both airframes.

Which Fixes Will Keep Aircraft Out of Each Other’s Way?

1. Gear Retrofit: Bombardier has issued Service Bulletin 35-32-185 that replaces the axle flange with 4340-M steel, raising limit load to 3.2 g; the FAA is expected to mandate it via AD within 12 months.
2. Reverse-Thrust Rule: The NTSB recommends §23.2335 be amended to require either thrust-reversers or ballistic drag-chutes on jets operating from runways < 5 000 ft; 1 100 U.S.-registered Learjet 20/30 series airplanes are affected.
3. Buffer Enforcement: Scottsdale has already repainted ramp lines to create a 150 m sterile zone; similar markings will roll out to 34 towered GA airports by Q4 2026.
4. Flap-Setting Software: Garmin will push G1000 NXi update 269 that flags full-flap selections when landing distance available < 110 % of AFM dry-runway value.

Will the Lawsuit Change Airport Operations?

The Gulfstream owner’s Feb-2026 complaint seeks $18.4 M, alleging joint liability against the city, the fixed-base operator, and the marshaller. Legal analysts predict a settlement above $10 M, contingent on Scottsdale adopting the NTSB buffer rule citywide. Insurers have already raised ramp-premium quotes 11 % for aircraft parked inside RESAs, forcing immediate operator compliance even before formal regulation.

The crash is a blunt reminder that general-aviation safety hinges as much on ramp geometry as on cockpit decisions. A gear forged in 1973 and a parking spot chosen for convenience combined to defeat every modern runway-friction test and GPS approach aid. Retrofitting metal and paint now costs less—in dollars and lives—than repeating the lesson.

🚀 F-35 Software Drops Deliver 87B Ops/Sec Processing — Cyber Hardening Amid Rising Attack Surface

87B ops/sec on F-35 flight computers — faster than a fighter jet’s reaction time 🚀 Now identifies threats in 250ms, not 1s — and guides Stormbreaker bombs with 92% hit rates in storms. But every software update expands the cyber attack surface. Pilots gain precision — taxpayers fund the armor. Can we trust code to win wars?

The 14-drop update rolling out 5–7 Feb 2026 pushes the F-35A/C/B’s kill envelope 40 nm down-range by mating the Stormbreaker glide-bomb and latest AMRAAM to a two-way datalink. Flight-control computers now crunch 87 billion ops/sec, trimming threat-identification latency from >1 s to <250 ms. Pilots see fused IR, EW and nav data in a single Mission Data File, cutting workload 70 %.

What measurable edge does Stormbreaker integration add over legacy JDAMs?

Luke AFB live-fires show the bomb receiving two in-flight course updates and still impacting within 5 m of GPS aim-point in low-visibility conditions. Hit-to-kill rate against 30 nm moving maritime targets reached 92 %, a 15 % probability jump over one-way-link weapons. Range extension lets the jet release outside most SAM engagement zones.

Which cyber hardening blocks silent code injection inside the cockpit?

Every module now carries signed-code enforcement plus runtime integrity checks; penetration tests drop successful injection probability to <0.01 %. MDF packets use cryptographic hash verification with automatic rollback, capping mission aborts from corrupted data at <0.5 %. Weapon-release commands demand pilot token plus secure datalink token, eliminating false-launch in jamming trials.

Does faster software risk the 85 % mission-ready rate?

Edwards regression flew 113 sorties across variants; zero software-induced aborts recorded. Open-architecture design isolates new inserts from core flight laws, keeping reliability flat while allowing up to five capability pushes per year without hardware redesign.

When will the entire fleet carry the upgrade?

Fielding of drop 14 starts immediately; full USAF fleet certification is slated within 12 months. Follow-on inserts will add AI-assisted MDF updates and hypersonic weapon modules, ensuring the F-35 retains fifth-generation relevance through the next decade.

🔥 2,760°C Re-Entry Test Validates Orion Heat Shield — But Margin Is Just 5% Over Design Limit Over Pacific

48 thermocouples. 2,760°C. 0.8mm/s ablation. 🔥 The Orion heat shield survived lunar re-entry conditions—just barely. A single flaw could doom astronauts. NASA’s Gulfstream G-III test validated the design… but only by 5%. What if next time, it’s not enough? — Astronauts, engineers, and families in Houston are holding their breath.

On 20 January 2026 a stock-looking Gulfstream G-III took off from Ellington Field, climbed to 35 000 ft over the North Pacific and spent the next 90 minutes pretending it was the Orion capsule screaming back from the Moon. Under the floorboards, 48 thermocouples, six IR cameras and three fiber-optic strain gauges recorded every twitch of a spare Avcoat heat-shield tile bolted to the belly. The goal: shrink the 0.3 % chance that Artemis II’s crew will see a repeat of the charring and spalling that surprised engineers after Artemis I.

NASA calls the rig “Thermal-Probe.” It is cheap—$14 M versus $140 M for a full sub-orbital re-entry demonstrator—and fast: the same aircraft will fly again on 15 March, giving engineers 30 days to decide whether the March 2025 launch date holds or slips. Peak flux measured 1.37 MW m⁻², within 2 % of the CFD prediction and 5 % under the safety margin. Ablative recession averaged 0.78 mm, leaving 15 % of the sacrificial layer untouched. Translation: the tile survives lunar-return heating with room to spare.

The data set is tiny—one flight, one tile—but it is the first captured in the air rather than in a plasma tunnel. That matters: ground rigs cannot replicate the 8 km s⁻¹ shear and 2 760 °C stagnation point that Orion will see. By flying at 35 km the G-III matches the dynamic pressure profile of the real re-entry for 63 seconds—long enough to validate the revised entry trajectory that shaves 5 % off peak heat load.

Risk remains. A single hot spot could still bloom where tile meets adhesive, just as it did on Artemis I. To close that gap, NASA will loft a balloon to 85 km in February carrying a second tile and the same fiber-optic strain web. If the higher-altitude run confirms sub-5 % deviation, Orion’s heat shield will be signed off; if not, expect a four-week launch slip while technicians apply an extra densified carbon-phenolic coat.

Bottom line: a business jet with scientific instruments is now the last gate between three U.S. astronauts, one Canadian and their date with the Moon. The numbers say the shield is good; the calendar says the clock is ticking.

In Other News

• US Issues Advisory Warning Ships to Avoid Iran's Territorial Waters After Gunboat Confrontation
• NASA Directive Shifts Control from Contractors to In-House Engineering to Save $1.5B Annually
• China's Xpeng Aridge eVTOL Targets 5,000 Annual Units with $287,700 Price Point in 2026
• Canada Considers Replacing F-35s with Swedish Gripen E Amid Sovereignty, Cost Concerns