UPDATE 2/5/2026:
The Wayne County Airport Authority CEO confirmed my original reporting, that the bollards at Metro Airport couldn’t stop a Power Wheel. They’ve now added 9,000 pound cement barriers in front of the arrivals building at the McNamara terminal.
Wayne County Airport Authority CEO Chad Newton issued the following statement on the incident:
I’ve been with the airport for 27 years and what occurred on January 23rd at the McNamara Terminal is unprecedented. It has definitely changed our security posture.
The building features design elements intended to prevent a crash, but they turned out to be inadequate to stop the car. As a result of what happened, you will see 9,000-pound cement barriers are in place. The barriers are located in the roadway in front of each door on the Departures and Arrivals levels. The fact that the “floor” of each Departures Level is the “ceiling” of the Arrivals Level presents unique challenges, including weight limitations. We’re continuing to work with the airlines and our internal teams to determine what is the most appropriate permanent barrier to prevent a vehicle from driving into the doors again. Our first priority is to protect our visitors and employees from any such incident in the future. Rest assured, the airport is more secure now than it was last week.
The driver is undergoing a medical evaluation. When the investigation is finished, police will present their findings to the prosecutor’s office to determine what, if any, charges should be filed.
ORIGINAL: Six people were injured Friday evening after a Mercedes passenger vehicle drove straight through the glass entrance doors of Detroit Metropolitan Airport’s McNamara Terminal, breaching multiple protective bollards before entering the terminal.
The driver was immediately detained at the scene, while six individuals were treated by EMTs for injuries sustained during the incident. Authorities have not indicated that the crash was terrorism-related, but the force and trajectory of the impact have raised questions about terminal vehicle protections.
Photos from the scene show at least two bollards missing entirely from the ground, while a third remains standing just outside the vehicle’s path. The damage pattern strongly suggests the car struck the bollards head-on, rather than clipping or glancing off them, before continuing forward into the glass entryway.
Bollards are fixed barriers, typically steel posts embedded in concrete, installed at building entrances to prevent vehicles from entering crowded pedestrian spaces. However, not all bollards are designed to stop the same level of force.
What the Bollard Damage Indicates
Industry standards recognize two primary categories of bollard protection:
Low-speed storefront protection, governed by ASTM F3016, is designed to stop passenger vehicles weighing approximately 5,000 lb at speeds of:
- 10 mph (S10)
- 20 mph (S20)
- 30 mph (S30)
High-speed security or anti-ram protection, governed by ASTM F2656 (formerly K-ratings), is intended for higher-risk sites and is tested against a 15,000 lb medium-duty truck, not a passenger car:
- 30 mph (M30 / K4)
- 40 mph (M40 / K8)
- 50 mph (M50 / K12)
The vehicle involved in Friday’s crash was a Mercedes passenger car, which typically weighs between 4,000 and 5,000 lb, far below the 15,000 lb test vehicle used for high-security bollard ratings.
That distinction matters.
Photos from inside the terminal also appear to show that the Mercedes’ airbags did not deploy. Under federal vehicle safety standards, airbag deployment is triggered by crash severity rather than speed alone, and typically occurs when a vehicle experiences a rapid deceleration equivalent to roughly 12–18 mph in a solid frontal impact.
Crashes involving multiple barriers, such as bollards and glass doors, can disperse force over distance and time, reducing peak deceleration. The apparent lack of airbag deployment further suggests the vehicle encountered low-speed mitigation barriers designed to slow and disrupt vehicles, rather than high-speed, crash-rated anti-ram bollards intended to bring a vehicle to an immediate stop.
Likely Bollard Type at DTW
The McNamara Terminal opened in 2002, before modern ASTM F2656 standards were widely adopted at civilian airports. Based on the terminal’s age, common airport design practices, and the observed failure pattern, it is likely the bollards struck were either unrated or rated only for low-speed mitigation, possibly equivalent to older K4-style (30 mph) deterrent installations, rather than modern anti-ram barriers.
Importantly, many airport terminal bollards are not designed to completely stop a vehicle, even a passenger car, if it approaches at speed. Instead, they are intended to:
- Slow the vehicle
- Reduce impact force
- Disrupt alignment before it reaches doors or crowds
In this case, the fact that multiple bollards were struck and displaced suggests the Mercedes carried sufficient momentum to overwhelm the installed protection, even though the vehicle was far lighter than those used in high-security crash testing.
A Design Question, Not a Blame Assignment
Federal aviation security guidelines do not require airports to install crash-rated anti-ram barriers at public terminal entrances. Airports are instead required to perform risk-based assessments and implement layered mitigation measures balancing safety, access, and passenger flow.
That leaves an uncomfortable but important reality:
Most airport terminals in the U.S. are not hardened to stop a vehicle traveling straight toward an entrance, even if bollards are present.
Friday’s incident underscores that gap.
Why This Matters
This was not a case of a vehicle brushing past a barrier.
The physical evidence indicates a direct, head-on breach of protective infrastructure at one of Michigan’s busiest transportation hubs.
As DTW officials review the incident, questions remain:
- What rating, if any, did the struck bollards carry?
- When were they installed?
- Were they designed for deterrence or vehicle interdiction?
- Would tighter spacing or upgraded barriers have changed the outcome?
Those are not accusations. They are infrastructure questions, and they are increasingly relevant nationwide.
Discuss this on our Facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1CJrevrGru/