Wichita, Kansas — 2024
In 2024 the overlap record holds 6 claimed overlaps at Wichita Dwight D. Eisenhower National Airport (KICT), on 5 separate dates. Erika Kirk is claimed present on 3 of them — which is why this field-year has a page at all.
Of those 6 rows, 3 were checked against recovered ADS-B position data and put the airframe at or over this field, and 3 carry a measured clock time below. The rest were checked and the archives held nothing — which is not the same as the aircraft being elsewhere.
Nothing here places any person aboard any aircraft. These are aircraft positions and claimed locations, and the two are different kinds of thing.
The town and the field
| Town | Wichita, Kansas |
| Population | 397,532 (US Census 2020) |
| Metro served | Wichita KS |
| Airport | Wichita Dwight D. Eisenhower National Airport (KICT) |
| Field class | commercial service international |
| Longest runway | 10,300 ft |
| Aircraft operations per year | 117,671 (2025) — about 322 a day |
| Passengers per year | 1,867,723 (2025) |
| Egyptian-registered stays logged here, all years | 5, over 10 days on the ground |
An operation is one takeoff or one landing, so a visiting jet that arrives and departs counts twice. At KICT that works out to roughly 322 operations a day. Traffic figures: Wikipedia, citing FAA. They are not from this repo, which holds no traffic data.
Is a foreign state jet unusual here? NOT unusual for a Falcon. Wichita is the American general-aviation manufacturing capital and holds a Falcon-authorised service centre.
The overlaps — dates, times and tail numbers
| Date | Claimed present | Tail | On the ground at this field | Closest recovered position | Sheet audit | ADS-B check | Row |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18 March 2024 | Erika Kirk | SU-BTT | none recovered | nothing recovered | inaccurate | no archive heard this airframe that day | OWENS-022 |
| 22 March 2024 | Erika Kirk | SU-BTT | none recovered | nothing recovered | inaccurate | no archive heard this airframe that day | OWENS-054 |
| 29 March 2024 | Charlie Kirk | SU-BTT | none recovered | SU-BTT 1.83 km at 14:19:09 CDT (19:19:09 UTC), airborne 1600 ft | accurate | aircraft recovered at the claimed field | OWENS-023 |
| 3 April 2024 | Charlie Kirk | SU-BTT | none recovered | SU-BTT 1.43 km at 08:43:30 CDT (13:43:30 UTC), airborne 1675 ft | partial | aircraft recovered at the claimed field | OWENS-024 |
| 3 April 2024 | Charlie Kirk | SU-BTT | none recovered | SU-BTT 1.43 km at 08:43:30 CDT (13:43:30 UTC), airborne 1675 ft | partial | aircraft recovered at the claimed field | SITE-003 |
| 5 July 2024 | Erika Kirk | SU-BTT | none recovered | nothing recovered | inaccurate | no archive heard this airframe that day | OWENS-059 |
6 rows on 5 dates. Where one date carries two rows, the reconstructed sheet holds the same claim twice — an audit row and a site row, say — not two separate visits. Count the dates for visits and the rows for paperwork.
Where the clock times come from
There is no time column anywhere in the source data. overlaps.csv and flights.csv carry dates only. Every time on this page was measured for it, point by point, out of the raw ADS-B traces held in this repo under <TAIL>/data/recovered/ — the same files the ADS-B verdicts were computed from. Local times are the field's own local clock; UTC is given beside each so nothing turns on a timezone.
3 of the 6 rows produced a measured time. The other 3 did not, because no archive holds a trace for that airframe on that date.
A blank is not a finding. Parked with the transponder off, outside volunteer receiver coverage, and a wrong claimed date all look identical from here.
What this page does and does not show
- A trace proves presence, never purpose, and never occupancy. No archive anywhere puts Charlie Kirk, Erika Kirk or anyone else aboard any of these aircraft. Erika Kirk's itinerary is the missing document — see Erika Kirk flights.
- "Claimed present" is a claim, not a record. It is a cell on the reconstructed sheet, and on that sheet the location is often a state rather than a field. See the overlap window definition.
- 3 of these 6 rows were audited inaccurate and are shown anyway. They are part of the record of what was claimed, and dropping them would misrepresent how much of the claim survived.
- 1 were audited accurate. That means the claim matched the aircraft record on checking — not that anybody was aboard.
- Repetition at a field is a reason to look, not a conclusion. Fields host maintenance, customs and fuel stops, and a jet can return to one for entirely ordinary reasons.
Sources: following/overlaps.csv and following/airports.csv in this repo, as of 28 August 2026; clock times measured from the recovered traces under Planes/<TAIL>/data/recovered/; town population from the US Census 2020; annual traffic from Wikipedia, citing FAA.
Back to every qualifying field-year.