An aerobatics competitor has been identified as the person killed when the Extra 300 she was in was involved in a midair collision with a flying club Cessna 172 last Saturday. It’s also been revealed that the collision occurred minutes after the Extra had competed in the Kyle Scott Aerobatic Dust-Up at Fort Morgan, Colorado. Kristen Morris, 35, was killed in the accident. The other occupant of the Extra, David Shangraw, was injured but is expected to recover, according to a statement by the International Aerobatic Club. Two people in the 172 suffered minor injuries “The accident happened during final approach following a competition flight,” the IAC statement said. It’s not clear who was flying.
The Cessna was on a straight-in approach for Runway 14, possibly on the RNAV approach, shortly after the Extra took off from the opposing Runway 32 to set up for its routine. FlightAware’s track shows the plane crossing the runway near the terminal and doing a series of maneuvers before joining the left downwind for 14, turning base just north of the threshold and intersecting final near the end of the runway where the collision occurred. The Cessna got on final well north of the field and flew a straight-in approach to Runway 14. It’s a non-towered airport with a CTAF.
Morris was a retired Air Force captain who flew regularly and was also a staunch volunteer coach for the Air Force Wounded Warriors. “She was doing something she loved, and I will forever remember her as one of the most kind and pure-hearted people I’ve ever met,” friend Allison Smith was quoted by the ABC News7 as saying .
um, Russ? Wasn’t the Extra on a LEFT downwind?
Yep. Fixed
This so poorly written I can’t believe it. Did you read what you wrote? So sorry for the loss of Miss Morris.
I’ll bite, Steve. Where have I failed you?
All made sense to me.
so who was using CTAF, when did they communicate,, what were proper proceedures at non towered airport as published, were NOTAMS present? I am at a towered airport, with an aerobatic box, NOTAMS are usually given, and proceedures are well followed. Why were they not done here?
All good questions that are so far unanswered
And usually a box monitor on the radio to warn aircraft who show up. I’ve competed in dozens of IAC events and had a number of close calls with planes happily wandering through the middle of the aerobatic box mid-routine. In one case, I was inverted and could see the color of the Cessna pilot’s shirt as it went by a few hundred feet away.
Please read NOTAMS and make calls on each airport’s frequency you intend to land at or fly directly over at low level!
Tragic. But I must be missing something—what’s the significance of the Extra returning from an aerobatic routine?
See the comment above yours
Was the “other occupant” in the C172, or in the Extra? What happened to the C172? Very interested since I used to fly with a David Shangraw.
From the flight tracking (not shown in article) it appears that the Cessna was on the instrument approach for runway 14 (practice?). Not sure why the Cessna is getting called out for a “long” straight in approach. Please add the flight tracking for the Cessna to better show what was going on. Would really like to hear the radio calls.
Kevin, the track shows the C172 followed RNAV 14 laterally, DEKTE to ECUDI to the 144 degree final course,(https://skyvector.com/files/tpp/2509/pdf/10684R14.PDF) likely on autopilot, a long straight increasing workload and conflict risk with pattern traffic. Condolences to Kristen Morris’s family, and to all affected.
“Conflict risk with pattern traffic” was guaranteed by the Extra? That was a carrier style approach from the Extra without radios calls. Cessna made radio calls for the entire approach.
I’ve linked to the Cessna’s track in the story
Russ, Thanks for adding that flight track for the Cessna. Story should read..” The Cessna was doing a (practice)?RNAV instrument approach to runway 14”.
I don’t think I’ve ever heard of passengers during aerobatic competitions.
It’s possible two people were in the Extra because one was acting as a safety pilot for the other. That is allowed under IAC rules for the lower categories.
Not a passenger. Safety pilot9INSTRUCTOR)allowed for Basic and Sportsman categories. In this case likely due to insurance requirements. Benn that way for 35 plus years.
Aerobatic contest requires FAA waiver and notam for full five category contest. NOTAM REQUIRED Cessna should not have been in that airspace.
Jim said, “NOTAM REQUIRED.” Anybody know if a NOTAM establishing a TFR closing the airspace was issued and effective at the time of the accident? Just establishing an “aerobatic box” does not close the airspace to other traffic. Was the Cessna operating IFR? If so, the controller should not have cleared them for the approach if a TFR NOTAM was in effect. Was the Cessna getting VFR flight following? Again, the controller should have warned them about a TFR for an aerobatic competition or for an active aerobatic box.
Lots of questions, no answers I’ve seen yet.
The aerobatic guys are notorious for flying a nonstandard, ultra tight pattern. Extra 300 pilots are often taught to fly a downwind 1/4 to 1/3 mile adjacent the runway, turn base upon passing the numbers and to continue base turn to final, making a “U” shaped base/final turn. This is in direct contrast to the 4 corners of a typical traffic pattern. By doing so, they have been known to cut off Cessna’s in the pattern, land first and get well out of the way before the Cessna is anywhere near the runway. As mentioned before, the low wing nature and steep turns of the Extra lead to a very large blind spot.
An aerobatic box does not close the airspace unless a TFR is in effect. By regulation, 14 CFR 91.303 and AC 91-45D, a box only defines where aerobatic pilots can perform. Without a TFR any other pilot can legally fly through and ATC will not keep them out.
The present NOTAM, !DEN 09/137 FMM AIRSPACE, two-mile radius surface to 5000 feet AGL, Sept 6 1400 UTC to Sept 7 0100 UTC, was not in effect on Aug 31 when the accident occurred. That means the airspace was open to all users.
That creates danger. One pilot may assume the box is protected, while another assumes nothing unusual is happening. Both are legal, both are wrong, and that is how midairs occur.
The Chart Supplement even cautions about aerobatic operations and USAF student training in Colorado, which means you should expect surprise traffic, quick maneuvers, and airplanes you did not plan for.
Bottom line, no TFR means the box is open. See-and-avoid is all you have. Do not assume. Get all available information. Head out the cockpit!
This NOTAM was in effect on 8/31, 7 to 7 MDT.
FMM 08/880 Airspace 08/31/2025 1300 09/01/2025 0100 AIRSPACE AEROBATIC ACFT WI AN AREA DEFINED AS 2NM RADIUS OF FMM SFC-4000FT AGL
2508311300-2509010100
Jim, you’re correct I missed it. I found the cancelled NOTAM, !DEN 08/880, which was active Aug 31, two-mile radius around FMM, surface to 4000 feet AGL, 1300–0100 UTC. My oversight, and I’ll own that.
But here’s the thing: a NOTAM like that doesn’t close the airspace. Only a TFR does. The box just defines where aerobatic pilots can fly. Other traffic is still legal to enter, and ATC won’t keep them out.
That’s the trap. One pilot assumes the box is protected, another assumes nothing’s going on. Both are legal, both are wrong, and that’s how midairs happen.
The Chart Supplement even warns about aerobatics and USAF student training in Colorado — meaning surprise traffic, quick moves, and airplanes you didn’t plan for.
Bottom line: NOTAM or no NOTAM, unless it’s a TFR the box is open. See-and-avoid is all you’ve got. Don’t assume.