N6132QCessna 152

According to a representative of the flight school, both airplanes were operated single pilot, by pilot rated students performing separate pilot in command skills building training flights. Both airplanes landed at the same airport after a short cross-country flight. Following a short break, the pilots entered their respective airplanes and taxied to the runway. The pilot in the lead airplane pulled to the right side of the taxiway to allow the following airplane to pass. The pilot of the following airplane was looking at his onboard navigation device as he attempted to pass on the left side of the lead airplane, and his right wing struck the left wing of the lead airplane.

Both pilots shut down their airplanes, exited and assessed the damage. Both pilots determined that the damage was inconsequential and departed for the next leg of their training flight.

Further examination by the flight school's maintenance department, revealed that substantial damage was sustained to the left wing aileron of the stationary airplane, and to three right-wing ribs of the passing airplane.

Both pilots reported that there were no mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airplanes that would have precluded normal operation.

The pilot reported that during a solo night flight, he "landed long" and was unable to complete a touch-and-go as planned. The airport did not have a parallel taxiway leading to the departure end of the runway, so the pilot taxied onto the ramp area to turn around. During the taxi on the ramp the lighting was "poor" and the right wingtip struck a hangar. He reported that he "did not realize" the right wing struck the hangar and continued the flight back to his home airport.

After landing and securing the airplane, he noticed the right wing was damaged and told the flight school maintenance personnel.

A post-accident review revealed the airplane had sustained substantial damage to its right-wing rear spar.

The pilot reported that there were no pre-accident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.

According to the flight school's flight operations manual, flight operations were not permitted at the accident airport due to the requirement for the runway to be at least 4000 ft. long. The accident airport runway was 3,005 ft. long. In addition, the manual prohibited touch-and-go landings at night.