Narrative:

We were operating our aircraft in the traffic pattern at C83, practicing lndgs. All correct radio communications were conducted on the CTAF frequency and the aircraft anti-collision lights and landing lights were illuminated. On final approach, as the aircraft arrived at the threshold, a vehicle was noticed on a taxiway, north of the runway. This city vehicle was proceeding at a rapid rate (around 30 mph estimated) toward runway 23 on an intersecting taxiway that crossed runway 23 about 1000 ft down. As the vehicle approached the runway, I considered the fact that it might proceed onto and cross the runway, but I assumed that it would turn and parallel the runway and not be a collision hazard. The vehicle, however, proceeded right onto the runway just as we began to reduce power for landing. I initiated a go around and at the same time the driver of the vehicle saw us and took evasive action. The vehicle continued south over the edge of the runway and crashed in a ditch. My go around was successful and contact between the airplane and vehicle did not occur. After a brief period, the driver of the vehicle transmitted on the CTAF frequency an apology for making us go around. He stated that his radio had been off of the frequency and he didn't hear us coming. Nobody was injured. This occurrence brings about 2 observations, neither new. First, aircraft and ground vehicles must be very cautious when entering a runway. A visual check of the final approach must always be made. I think this vehicle assumed runway 30 was in use so didn't visually check the final. Second, pilots must exercise extreme caution in looking for possible runway incursions during landing. If I had executed a go around when I first saw the vehicle moving toward the runway, the margins would have been a lot larger.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLT INSTRUCTOR WITH STUDENT PLT HAS CLOSE ENCOUNTER WITH GND VEHICLE XING RWY WITH NO COM. GAR EXECUTED.

Narrative: WE WERE OPERATING OUR ACFT IN THE TFC PATTERN AT C83, PRACTICING LNDGS. ALL CORRECT RADIO COMS WERE CONDUCTED ON THE CTAF FREQ AND THE ACFT ANTI-COLLISION LIGHTS AND LNDG LIGHTS WERE ILLUMINATED. ON FINAL APCH, AS THE ACFT ARRIVED AT THE THRESHOLD, A VEHICLE WAS NOTICED ON A TXWY, N OF THE RWY. THIS CITY VEHICLE WAS PROCEEDING AT A RAPID RATE (AROUND 30 MPH ESTIMATED) TOWARD RWY 23 ON AN INTERSECTING TXWY THAT CROSSED RWY 23 ABOUT 1000 FT DOWN. AS THE VEHICLE APCHED THE RWY, I CONSIDERED THE FACT THAT IT MIGHT PROCEED ONTO AND CROSS THE RWY, BUT I ASSUMED THAT IT WOULD TURN AND PARALLEL THE RWY AND NOT BE A COLLISION HAZARD. THE VEHICLE, HOWEVER, PROCEEDED RIGHT ONTO THE RWY JUST AS WE BEGAN TO REDUCE PWR FOR LNDG. I INITIATED A GAR AND AT THE SAME TIME THE DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE SAW US AND TOOK EVASIVE ACTION. THE VEHICLE CONTINUED S OVER THE EDGE OF THE RWY AND CRASHED IN A DITCH. MY GAR WAS SUCCESSFUL AND CONTACT BTWN THE AIRPLANE AND VEHICLE DID NOT OCCUR. AFTER A BRIEF PERIOD, THE DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE XMITTED ON THE CTAF FREQ AN APOLOGY FOR MAKING US GAR. HE STATED THAT HIS RADIO HAD BEEN OFF OF THE FREQ AND HE DIDN'T HEAR US COMING. NOBODY WAS INJURED. THIS OCCURRENCE BRINGS ABOUT 2 OBSERVATIONS, NEITHER NEW. FIRST, ACFT AND GND VEHICLES MUST BE VERY CAUTIOUS WHEN ENTERING A RWY. A VISUAL CHK OF THE FINAL APCH MUST ALWAYS BE MADE. I THINK THIS VEHICLE ASSUMED RWY 30 WAS IN USE SO DIDN'T VISUALLY CHK THE FINAL. SECOND, PLTS MUST EXERCISE EXTREME CAUTION IN LOOKING FOR POSSIBLE RWY INCURSIONS DURING LNDG. IF I HAD EXECUTED A GAR WHEN I FIRST SAW THE VEHICLE MOVING TOWARD THE RWY, THE MARGINS WOULD HAVE BEEN A LOT LARGER.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.