A plane crashes into another and an expert says mistakes were made..... brilliant. How many years does one have to be in aviation to come to that conclusion?
The P-63 King cobra was notoriously known for its poor visibility. It was banking left, but it was too close. Both pilots didn’t know what the hell was going on.
The P63 was known to have poor pilot visibility...its why the Air Force didnt like it...and in that bank turn he never saw the B17 as it was hidden under his wing...the lawyer talking about maintenance is a crock...this was 100% pilot error...Rest In Peace all involved and the loss of 2 pieces of history...
Good point about the P-63's poor visibility. I'm wondering if the notoriously squirly-handling P-63 didn't get sucked into the wing vortex of the much bigger B-17.
@@effsixteenblock50 It looked to me like the P-63 was not aware of precisely where the B-17 was and by the time he saw it the collision was inevitable. The P-63 really made its reputation in the Soviet Union during WW2 as a ground pounder. What I’m curious about is why was the 63 known for questionable behavior in flight as the plane it was based on ( the P-39 airacobra ) was most known for being “ underpowered “
As I continue to watch these videos I am beginning to believe that the bomber may have been in view from the P-63's cockpit. I could see this accident happening if the bomber had been overtaking the fighter while the fighter was turning- coming up from behind and under the wing- but the bomber was out pretty far ahead and being overtaken by the fighter. Clearly the fighter's pilot did not see where the bomber was but I don't think it was because his view was blocked. He may have become distracted and focused his field of view elsewhere at the wrong moment.
@@effsixteenblock50 I believe there is also something called a snap-spin (correct me if I am wrong) where if the plane is going too fast and tries to do too aggressive of a maneuver it will be put into a spin. There is an angle where it is shown going visibly faster than the P-51s it is following, so that may have contributed as well.
As an aircraft mechanic with over forty years experience, I can say that aviation lawyers are worse than regular ambulance chasing lawyers. They get juries made up if laymen, many of whom are afraid of flying anyway and who don't have the first clue about airplanes and twist the facts so much that even a seasoned airline pilot would be afraid to fly. And to say someone made a mistake today is an understatement. Pilot's make mistakes and often they are very catastrophic but to say there was gross negligence at this point is at best unprofessional and at worst, slander.
Thank you, John. I echo everything you said and add criticism for channel 11 news for going straight to speculation before the bodies and wreckage were cold.
The "experts" aren't *experts* at all, I watched those final flights all morning. Several of the camera angles are very misleading. The "Spitfire" was actually a P-63 Kingcobra and a helicopter pilot isn't going to know jack shit about flying World War II era aircraft, it is a completely different skillset. The lawyer knows even less. How about a little respect for the families and friends of everyone involved? This crap disgusts me. Screw CBS DFW and its disrespectful and uninformed reporting. Someone needs to investigate the journalistic standards at CBS DFW.
dude was 77 with 2 hours of flights in 2 years. So maybe there should have been some RESPECT for the people on the ground that could have been killed by these old men playing out fantasies.
This is why I'll *CONTINUE* to say that the television "News" (CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, BBC, PBS, NPR, Fox News, etc) needs to be called to Federal Court and *REMOVED* of their ability to call themselves "Journalists" and be called "ACTORS" & labeled "ENTERTAINMENT" and 'NOT' News. 🤔 That's why an Actor, News Media, Fact-Checkers & Politician's job is to *PRETEND* to be things they're not & know things they don't. 😠
Did you really nitpick King cobra and Kingcobra the dude said Spitfire and it was clearly not as Spitfire not to mention it was British made and the King-Cobra was American made. Also he mentioned arguably one the most recognizable famous aircraft of ww2 and misidentified it with a king cobra. Ps yes I spelt the name of the P-63 in different ways on purpose 🤷🏽♂️
@@hayloft3834 It appeared there were p-51's leading the p-63...I have neither seen nor heard any mention of spitfire's being involved at all...but perhaps. It is insulting to the Spitfire to confuse it with the p-63.
@@hayloft3834 I can read a bloody program mate, neither of the two TX-based spits was there. The guy is no expert, he is not qualified to speak on causality and more than you or I. I'm not sure why yo are defending the guy TBH, it's distasteful that he even appeared on camera.
So, some "aviation expert and pilot" calls a P63 a Spitfire? People with real knowledge, experience and judgement say, "this was awful, but we'll have to wait to find out exactly what happened." Pretty sure everyone of us would say "airplanes shouldn't crash into each other". Take a seat "aviation experts & pilots"! Rest in peace to all involved.
Hey aviation Experrt its a mig. Lots,of experts and some wet behind the ears.bet some this bowl of oats dont even know one Name of the original founding fathers of the original confederate air force.or where it all started . Hint = p38× lighting.owner..i.was.lucky.too.have.seen.and.meeting.and seen.where this fork devil was stowed.when i was little boy. Just down a country road..
A lawyer is the LAST thing we need in an interview regarding news about this tragedy!! My experience with lawyers is they take a situation and milk it for all the money they can make out of it. What is wrong with you that you would ask a lawyer to use this to sensationalize and exploit what is clearly a tragedy?! My heart and prayers go out to those who lost their family or loved ones today. That they may heal.
Same thing occurred to me. Why in hell did the reporting news agency feel the need to insert that nonsense? As if the maintenance affected either aircraft in some way to create that collision?!
"A tragedy" is not a technical evaluation of this event. Calling it an accident won't help us fix our technical oversight and stop more tragedies from happening. It's okay if you're not ready to process the technical details about this which requires a degree of objectivity. If so, you should only watch and comment on the news covering the family & the social side of things. Which is just fine, everybody processes things differently. Do keep in mind, though, that these technical reports from experts, including the lawyers, are what will determine both our safety, yours, and your loved ones.
@@Meisha-san I totally disagree. I see no reason that lawyers will help the situation whatsoever. I can't imagine expert investigators sifting through everything and not being able to determine the facts unless a lawyer is involved.
@@matthewlotysch3299 The families of those killed will appreciate the help of a lawyer in monetary compensation. If your loved one was killed in a car wreck caused by another car, you darn well too will want a lawyer so you can sue the guy who caused the death of your loved one.
They were doing what they loved in their final moments, All accidents are exactly just that, they are not intentional. If there is consolation both pilots most likely didnt see it coming. RIP
The problem here was 2 things. The pilot of the P63 had no clear sight of the B-17 and should have never made his pass to take the lead without positioning himself for correct visualization. The second is all these planes should have had pre set flight altitudes. The B-17 should have been at a higher elevation in this formation maneuver in the first place. Another tragic mishap that could have been so easily avoided. RIP
No true expert would be throwing around criticisms only hours after the crash, as they wouldn't have anywhere near all the facts & evidence to back such criticism. note;former pilots & air force officers are NOT air accident experts, no matter how many hours they've flown.
@@secondrule Where did i claim people couldn't speculate? Oh, I didn't. Yes, there's video. As you clearly seem to think that is all that is needed, perhaps you will now tell us all the cause of the crash & who was to blame.
Note the 1995 crash involved a 77-year-old pilot with one 1/2-hour flight in the previous year and a half, at the control of a very hot and challenging airplane. His co-pilot had only 125 hours in the type. The B-26 had a reputation for being fatally unforgiving even when everything was working.
this is the story over and over again. Im okay with doing dangerous things but they were flying over populated areas and it was lucky no innocent people were hurt.
@@HTV-2_Hypersonic_Glide_Vehicle The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows. the failure of the pilot to maintain minimum airspeed for flight resulting in an inadvertent stall/spin. Factors were the loss of power for undetermined reasons, and the pilot's lack of recent flight experience in the aircraft. My father flew a B26 in WW2 in Africa, Italy, France, Germany. He really loved that "hot" airplane but said you could not be timid. You had put it on the ground not glide in. Minimum airspeed was 160 mph and that scared the hell out of inexperienced pilots.
I’m an airport manager at a airport with several tenants who base their vintage WWII aircraft. Once a year, these tenants host a fly in where many such aircraft will fly/circle the pattern around, around , and around. The crowd loves the sound those big radial and Merlin make. But often the mix of slower bomber and training aircraft flying in a crowded circle/pattern with high speed fighter can be chaos. There is a video floating around from the Dallas airshow that shows the B-17 and P-63 coming around a turn before they collide. In the background, the sky is crowded with many aircraft. In my opinion, there were simply “way too many” aircraft circling in the pattern, at different airspeed, making a collision inevitable. It’s a damn shame this happened but too often (and I’ve witnessed it with pilots and peers of these vintage WWII aircraft) they want to WOW the crowd with 1000 plane raids.
You never been to Oshkosh fly in have you. You have no concept of a busy airspace they have 10,000 airplanes at the airport. Google it and listen to the controllers handling the traffic.
I stay away from airshows. Too crowded in the air, and too crowded on the ground. Old airplanes are fun to look at, but why push them past their useful service and contribution? That's seems vain and greedy and dangerous; and it adds no value to their service, or our culture.
Air shows are composed of 100% visual maneuvers and if you can’t see ahead of your flight path for whatever reason you shouldn’t be flying with other aircraft in the pattern, especially with different performing airplanes. Extensive military formation flying training and experience is a must. I had 7 years Air Force and 31 years major airline experience and I early retired at 62 because I no longer felt I had the same safety “edge” as I once had. I can’t imagine flying over 70 years old. No disrespect to the pilot in this case.
'I early retired at 62 because I no longer felt I had the same safety “edge” as I once had.' - Why did you retire early as an airline pilot. Isn't a commercial airline basically on autopilot most of the time, it flies itself. What makes it unsafe for you to pilot? I am asking with all due respect (not to be a troll, just out of curiousity. I suffer from aviophobia.)
@@maxpercer7119 You clearly have no understanding of the function of an autopilot. It reduces the physical load on a pilot who would otherwise have to hold the controls steady for hours on end. Pilots also use flight directors, which string together sequences of machine states and allow an aircraft to perform a sequence of manoeuvres. The pilot has to program the autopilot and the flight director, he still has to plan and manage the flight - the automation simply reduces the physical effort required.
My 98 year old dad watched this, and cried. He flew a B-17 in WW2, he is still sharp and witted and cooks his own dinners, in his Sr. assisted apartment. What a sad movement..losing another B-17, now we have only 2 in the USA.
I was thinking about a situation like your dad, imagine how it would have felt fighting for the USA, risking their life, surviving, going back home, just to find out years later possible war comrades lost their life, and also destroying one of the historical planes that made it out in 1 piece, these kind of vehicles really should belong on a museum.
Wouldn't it be common sense for two groups of planes traveling at significantly different speeds be at two significantly different altitudes for safety purposes?
part of the aviation community is not speculating, we point out what we know and wait to draw conclusions till investigators can bring us the truth. what we know now is only half truths and giving answers to people who dont know better would be misleading on our parts.
Ambulance chaser already advertising his services on a news channel? This is just sick. For all we know, the pilot had a medical problem. 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏For the victims, families, friends, CAF, and any person who witnessed this tragic event.🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏 People are so cruel nowadays, please don't point fingers. Let the investigation take place.
77 year olds who fly one hour a year tend to be the ones who have medical problems... And when your a pilot you take on a huge responsibility. The man shouldnt have been flying the plane in an airshow and especially over a populated area at low elevations. Not to mention how they were at the same elevation, this could have been avoided so easily.
@@austinthrowsstuff Why do you keep repeating this? I have heard nothing about any of the pilots in this particular incident having only one hour of flight time in these aircraft in the last year, anywhere.
No, are YOU going to trust him? If you actually listened when they briefly presented his background, it appears he has significant experience with the CAF and airshow operations in the matter of crashes where deaths occur. So, you can take all that for what it's worth rather than reflexively blowing him off because of a presumption of practiced legal expertise.
@@patrickradcliffe3837 The circumstances concerning flightcrew, operations experience, and PIC appear to have nothing to do with the recent air collision. But I'll wait for the FAA/NTSB to provide further data to consider. Having a person involved with seeking answers in an earlier instance of a CAF operations fatality is newsreporting 101, giving the viewer a rare and important insight.
@@patrickradcliffe3837 The report literally says he was directed to overtake and lead. But you are guessing with incomplete data. I don't give a shit whose "fault" it might be. I flew in the B26 Carolyn with the very same pilots who later died in it. I was pretty sure that would be pilot error, too - and it was - but only an arrogant twat goes out and just says what's what with incomplete information.
Hi 👋🏻 I’m from Sweden 🇸🇪. When I was a teenager there was a big air show above Stockholm. Unfortunately I got to witness a full failure and an ejection from the plane.. it was a miracle that the pilot survived and that NOBODY on the ground was hit. I still remember that day, I won’t forget it. We thought that hundreds of people would be injured or killed but everyone in the audience was perfectly fine.
How easy for the people on the ground to point fingers. The lawyer is probably contacting the families of the dead crewmembers trying to gin up a law suit. Freaking ambulance chaser
@@MrShobar Yeah they're all in museum hangers, brought out once or twice a year so not much 'practice' for pilots, 60 would be great. I'll bet these guys only had a dozen hours at best in the weeks proceeding the event. Sad, I imagine people would be just as happy to tour the planes in the hanger, get to sit in the seats, hear the history, etc
They should be able to see everyone in the air, judging their speed and position and warning you to avoid a dangerous situation you as a pilot may not be able to see, not giving very bad advice. You should be able to trust them.
The first thing the attorney said was negligence. Lawyers are horrible people and just out to financial gain even before an investigation is performed.
Lawyers might not be the best persons out there but if you ever need one liability or criminal defense you’ll be glad they’re out there. Can’t say enough good things about my lawyer seeing as he kept me out of prison, and helped me keep my job
@@bullabuck7535 He is Russian and only Russian soldiers suffer in Putin's war, whereas in Ukraine, both soldiers and civilians suffer. He says: "My condolences to the families of the victims".
The air boss was just as much at fault as the P-63 pilot. If you watch the spectator video, you will see a fighter ahead of the P-63 that was being followed. There was no reason to have the fighters flying a different circuit; they should have been in formation with the bomber itself.
How is the Air Boss at fault at all? They lead a mass brief with all the performers in the morning, in addition to the brief that the CAF pilots would have had. Biggest things the Air Boss is looking for is showbox violations and watching for unauthorized aircraft entering the air space. The circuits and altitudes are the responsibility of the performer, not the Air Boss. Even then, given the closing speed of the P-63, no radio call would have stopped this from happening. The Air Boss will be interviewed, but I doubt the Air Boss will not have any blame leveraged against them.
@@yxeaviationphotogDespite having numerous mass briefings, if somebody who is in charge tells/orders someone to pull a very dangerous move disregarding all obvious safety rules and planning/briefing, they would definitely be at fault. "Forget what we talked about and all safety rules...speed up and cut that B 17 off in front of you"...If the "boss" said anything like that, he is at fault as well as the pilot who followed his ridiculous orders.
I’m sure the FAA is going to mandate certain changes as to how they operate. At least they need too! It’s like they cobble together a bunch of hot dog pilots flying vintage beauties, and for the most part, they’ve been very fortunate over the years. One thing is for sure, at least in my view, they’re going to need ‘standardization instructors’ for any type of formation flying and FAA certification to allow them to fly within a certain distance of each other. I flew as a standardization instructor in T-34s for the Navy for a few years and it’s a big no-no is to lose sight of the other aircraft under your wing when joining up as wingman. If the P 63 pilot was told to overtake the B-17 as stated in this video, then he should’ve kept SA on that B-17 and never lost sight of them, but sadly it looks like he did.
IMO it's not responsible journalism to feature this kind of critique before the facts are in. Those two are throwing all sorts of claims and allegations around without all the information
You mean that they should wait for the results of the NTSB investigation? You mean that journalists and attorneys are two of the professions least trusted today? Perhaps only slightly more trusted than politicians, used car salesmen and military recruiters? You mean that all those here who already "know" what happened should perhaps also wait for the findings of the investigation? OK
Colburn mis-spoke when he called the P-63 "Spitfire" when, in fact, the P-63 is nicknamed "Airacobra"... Condolences/sympathies to families that lost loved ones. VERY tragic, indeed
It is clear that the P-63 Pilot had no eyes on the B-17 the entire time of that incident... the angle that the P63 was on, would obscure the B-17 from sight.... the P-63 Pilot should have leveled off from time to time so that he had visual confirmation of aircraft around him.... this whole Airshow looked to be very dangerous, there were aircraft flying all over the place, a mid-air collision was bound to happen....
P-63 was notorious for poor visibility from the cockpit, which was one of the reasons why it was seldom used by the US military. From the angle he was flying, he simply couldn't see the B-17. May they rest in peace.
@@Sailor-Dave Should they have not planned out their flying routes to ensure such a collision would not be possible then? If it's known there's a blind spot at a given angle of flight, why have a plane at such an angle at a point in time when the other planes position would put it out of eyesight??? Good to know it wasnt a stunt gone poorly wrong, but still reeks of folks who shoulda known better making a tragic mistake
@@jackburton2680 No stunt was being attempted. The P-63 simply lost visual of the B-17 during it's turn (his own fuselage obscured the site of the bomber in front of him as his nose was pitched up in the turn), and he flew straight into it with no time to react once he realized his mistake.
What a wasted time of a report! You couldn't you find less informed people to interview? The so called pilot confused the P-63 with a Spitfire? And the photos... seconds before the accident.... really?? They showed NOTHING new... Look I have photos of these aircraft from the 2021 WOH airshow you could have used those too, after all, they were taken "minutes" before the accident.... And what a great conclusion reached..... something bad did happen... really?? The attorney making reference to a case in 1995 as key to say that the CAF has problem? Look people that was about 27 years ago in case you need help with the math!!! What a waste of report....
They haven't even cooled off yet and some lawyer begins slandering those involved. Obviously, this "person" has no empathy for the families and is short on facts. The CAF should sue the sh*t out of this guy for slander and defamation of character. It's too soon to be pointing fingers.
That doesn't insure safety either not that long ago another restored B17 suffered engine loss of power at takeoff and crashed at the end of the runway killing everyone on board I don't think that these vintage historic machines should be flown at all put them in a museum so that future Generations can see touch and tour these machines every time we lose one of these machines to some rare accident or mishap is one less piece of history that exists. For god sakes I mean why not just rip the Spirit of St Louis out of the Smithsonian and fly it around the country on a airshow tour! Because that's basically what we're doing with these historic machines
@@nathanbond8165 I totally agree. The P-63 that just crashed was the LAST ONE in existence(according to a previous interview on RUclips with Craig Hutain...the pilot involved in the crash). Someone else posted that there are only 2 B-17's left in the U.S. This is very sad.
@@valeriegriner5644 well there are b-17s in museums I don't know how many flying b-17s are left but we do know that this is the second B-17 that has been lost to an accident a couple years ago another B-17 lost engine power on takeoff and crashed at the end of the runway and killed everyone on board at any rate they don't make these aircraft anymore parts are getting harder and harder to find we should not be risking these pieces of History for vanity and nostalgia let's restore pieces of history and then protect them in museums so that one day your great-grandchildren can honor these planes and learn about them
@@valeriegriner5644 let's be honest about what this is about this is a bunch of retired Commercial and Military Pilots that have way too much time on their hand and a lot of money to buy and restore these historic aircraft and then they fly these things around acting as if they're preserving history they're not this is for vanity this is cosplay they fantasize about being World War II fighter pilots in these planes and bombers if they want to build replica planes go ahead I have no problem with building a replica king cobra or replica B-17 with modern safety features but I have a big problem using illreplaceable historic aircraft as your personal World War II flight simulator while you cosplay being a WW2 fighter or bomber pilot this is about ego this is about vanity
It's an absolute tragedy not only for the families of the Fallen Pilots but also the vehicles which are irreplaceable just like their pilots. When a machine survives a major war to go on to be a fine Museum it's quite tragic when the vehicle is lost
I don't like this video at all. Just hours after the crash and they're attacking the entire CAF organization like that... They can obviously have their opinions and say whatever they like, but this sounds almost like they're on a path to try and shut down the CAF or something...
For the crew and pilots on these planes they're deaths were almost instant but what no one realizes is the trauma and PTSD that hundreds maybe thousands of people at this Air Show have now experienced watching two aircraft Collide and explode on impact? the sound, the site and yes the smell of burning Aviation fuel and human flesh ( when humans burn they make a very distinct smell, ask anyone that's ever been in war) a smell that you will never forget your entire life and so also what about all the children that are always at these air shows that have been traumatized for life. it's not every day that you watch two aircraft Collide and explode in front of you just thought I'd bring that point of view how many people at that air show are going to need years of therapy now to help them process what they witnessed?
Also what about the PTSD that the ground crew the families and the friends and volunteers and workers of this organization as I'm sure they all knew the pilots and crew who died and they sat there that day and watched their friends die right in front of them in a horrific Violet plane crash what about the trauma and PTSD that those people are going to have and guilt knowing that they may have in some small part had something to do with this tragedy
@@cathywallace6990 is that some sort of attempt of a joke or are you trying to make this political either way it's in poor taste PTSD is real and you don't have to go to war to experience it just ask any police officer or firefighter that have seen people die in front of them it's traumatic especially for children think before you comment
@@StvMcQueen1 well I think your numbers are a little inflated but I always respond to someone's reply like I am doing to yours right now and so yeah it does generate a lot of comments thank you Google talk to text LOL
Flying a high performance, low wing airplane in a turn in an airplane that is known for having poor visibility, it’s doubtful he ever saw the B-17 before hitting it. “Overtaking “ an airplane simply means pass it, usually not a dangerous thing to do, but if he was told while in the turn, I m netting he didn’t even see it. From the videos I have seen, there was no apparent evasive action taken, which tells me he didn’t even see it. I don’t know how many was on board the B-17, but if it was during the show, it’s likely only essential flight crew was on board. I doubt if insurance would allow passengers during the show itself. Hope not. The P-63 is a single seater.
I've been maintaining aircraft for 30+ years and I do not consider myself an "EXPERT". I would consider myself a "SPECIALEST". Over the years I have met so many self proclaimed experts and hangar lawyers. Airfields and the internet seem to be a magnet for these idiots.
Honestly the lawyer sounds like he’s full of it. I’ve flown with CAF pilots before and they’re usually some of the safest and most experienced pilots out there
Wait until the accident report comes out before passing judgment.....no one knows what happened yet. A lot of things could have went wrong, mechanical failure, pilot error, ground control error, etc. Wait until the investigation is over before making definitive statements. Rest in peace and what a heartbreaking tragedy.
@@bill-nj6fc It's more complicated and not as simple as you think. Why did the P-63 pilot impact the B-17? What lead lead up to the accident? We and you really don't know very much at this time. Many more questions about that airshow need to be asked.
@@av8tor261 the only question that needs to be ask about the air show , is why the hell do we have them, there pointless, dangerous and to much of risk to the public
Here we go with the blame game. I can have an opinion also and it seemed like the B was flying along just fine and smooth and the P came right into it. So some kind of mistake was likely made or a slight possibility of a medical issue with the P pilot Unlikely a mechanical issue. But we will see and no reason to be placing blame anywhere until we investigate.
Not having much aviation experience or knowledge of the planes here, I would generally defer to others as to what happened and why. I have been to many air shows though over the years and from that experience and perspective, they tend to give the airspace to one plane or a similar type of plane flying in formation rather than different types of planes flying at different speeds and altitudes. It just seems like common sense if you have a lot of traffic in the sky with dissimilar aircraft and pilots of varying degrees of skill and experience you will increase the odds of a mishap.
An Air Boss is not the same as an air traffic controller.....they are also trained and certified by the International Council of Air Shows. They don't let just anyone be the Air Boss at a show.
@@yxeaviationphotog I understand that. I served an an FAA Air Traffic Controller for 37 years at Washington ARTCC in the DC to Ny corridor including 9/11 and others. I also served a a Safety Risk Management Controller for 10 years. I understand and respect the difference. That being said, lessons learned, is future safety and awareness. Nothing can prevent tragedies. It’s all about awareness and CLEAR communications and CLEAR readbacks.
@@heavysighs I respect your experience and viewpoint, but becoming a fully qualified Air Boss takes years if not only instruction, but working under more experienced Air Bosses in order to get fully certified. They are familiar with aviation regulations and work closely with ATC during shows. I think having an air boss also be a licensed controller is kind of redundant.
@@yxeaviationphotog I respect that. There does seem to be room for improvement on ‘close proximity’ aircraft operations at an airshow separation standards. My controversial stance is that safe air operation’s don’t always come before the ‘show’. I see both sides. As a pilot myself I get it. We all know the meme’s and saying’s. But… after 37 years directly involved in ATC and Aviation Safety, I think that more layer’s of safety are better; yet less spectacular, and way more boring and inconvenient. RIP to our fellow pilots, and may their families find comfort in the knowledge that they died doing something that they loved. It’s all of our dream to go that way.
@@heavysighs I know at least two highly experienced Air Bosses here in Canada and neither of them put the show before safety. Both have seen friends die at shows they have worked at. I'm certainly not against additional layers of safety and I have no doubt that this will be discussed in the Air Boss forums at ICAS next month. Any accident will always bring some change.....sucks that it usually comes at the cost of someone's life.
I'll Call it now. the P-63 pilot will bare the majority of the blame and rightly so. he fly his aircraft in an unsafe manner and caused the crash. however the airboss shares some blame and should have a lifetime revocation of his licenses.
@@MrShobar its the person on the ground that controls all aspects of the airshow. even acts as the air traffic controller. he told the P-63 to go ahead and over take the B-17 even though the P-63 pilot could not see the B-17 while the P-63 was in a sharp turn.
It looks like he couldn't see the B17 as it was under his starboard wing. How this position came about is what real experts will be striving to find out.
CBSDFW should be ashamed to broadcast this as news. Two so called experts, one who who was a helicopter pilot who called the fighter plane a Spitfire. And an aviation attorney who makes his money blaming people for accidents. He does not have first hand knowledge. Neither are air accident experts, neither is aware of the flight plan.
I admire what the CAF does in preserving WWIi aircraft but other than that I have nothing positive to say about them. Every encounter I've had with them either professional or personal has been a negative one.
From several videos taken at varying angles, it is clear the P-63 strayed from the parade line of P-51's and into the outer, wider turning circle of the B-17 and B-24, etc. The P-63 also seemed to be flying at max speed as well. Just a very sad day for all.
During WWII there were many of this kind of accident, tension, low visibility, bad comms. So, what the odds that replicating a war scenario, it would not happen? I prayed for these heroes, flying on 80 years old aircrafts, May the Lord receive them in his glory, Amen
Deepest condolences to family and friends. May they rest in peace. After reading a few comments, do we need to argue over what plane did what, or who is an expert on this situation? The question is, can we cheat death? Do any of us know the day, hour or manner of death we'll suffer? No ... so be kind. Love your spouse and children making sure they know each day they are loved. Honor your parents bc someday you won't have them ... don't wait until you've become a parent and old, looking backwards to only see regret!
The point is to save lives by finding out what happened and making absolutely sure this never happens again. If you want to fly recklessly with too many different planes in the air that will insure a collision happens, then people will die. You can definitely avoid accidents (cheat death..a stupid expression) by being safe and not doing stupid stunts and disregarding safety rules. A simple one is stay behind the plane in front of you; don't try to pass it unless you have adequate space around it and certainly don't fly too fast, too close at the same altitude. It's not supposed to be a demolition derby with a bunch of hot dogs.
Obviously some type of mistakes occurred. It is called being human. A police helicopter pilot is far from an expert on fixed wing flying and the aviation attorney is already setting up his next lawsuit that will make him money and harm a historic organization. The interviewers should be ashamed of themselves for starting this needless blame game.
"...It is called being human..." And continuing to remain a human necessitates care in everything you do, especially when operating aircraft of this type. Corners were cut here...
I am sure there will be countless opinions on this tragedy. As a pilot with wide experience 25.000 hrs plus and many, many types. I flew for a while from Falcon Field Az. There is an active war bird museum there with some fine airworthy example of WW2 machines. Lovingly restored and immaculately maintained. From experience I know that display flying is hazardous. The top priority is planning of the highest possible standard so that each pilot was fully aware and capable of maintains a meticulously planned detail from start to finish. There is no part for ad hoc manoeuvres or prima donnas.
I live under a runway approach at Midway Airport and have done so for 41 years. Having said that, the last air show I attended was 55 years ago at age 12. Enough said.
Their was nothing wrong with the B-17 or the P-63.The pilot of the P-63 just didn't judge the pass of the B-17 correctly.The B-17 crew never knew what happened.What a senseless accident that was so preventable. The P-63 pilot was at fault.
I feel that the problem is the fly past air traffic control. if you see the fly past in other countries. Each group of aircrafts formation are at least 1-2 minutes away from each other. The fast and slow aircrafts are in different groups. Normally the faster aircraft in the front formation and slower aircraft behind. If the organizer tried to mix all type of aircraft together. It is a big challenge and every pilot involve need to be inform to fly at a specify cruising speed and height to avoid accident like this. Lack of air traffic control at the air show is root cause for this collision.
No, air traffic control plays zero into this. Once performers are cleared into the show box by the Air Boss, they don't talk on the radio unless they see a box violation or an unauthorized aircraft entering the airspace. The circuits of the aircraft would have been briefed before the flight by all of the crews involved, including altitudes and intervals, etc. So no, this is not an air traffic control/Air Boss issue. Someone was out of position.
@@yxeaviationphotog "Maverick", someone who breaks the rules because rules are getting in the way - as in, Maverick Top Gun. So good he can eject at mach 10 and walk to a dinner. Maybe in this case they were no rules, that in of itself is breaking rules. Probably there were, if so, somone left the designated envelope. I know, lets wait till all the facts are in, an internet rule.
This was not someone being "Maverick". As well, air traffic control doesn't run an air show, that's done by an Air Boss, who is in charge of the airspace and air show box. Also, the entire aircraft formation briefs where everyone should be and when, so your "no rules" comment is inaccurate. That's how air shows work. So no, a lack of air traffic control has nothing to do with what happened....either the B-17 wasn't where it was supposed to be, or the P-63. Someone messed up, but it wasn't anyone on the ground. I should also note that the same show was held last year, and the same air display was put on, and it included both the B-17 and P-63 that were involved......and no mishap.
There are tons of these airshows every year with 1000s of hours of flying. You never see crashes. I've personally been the the briefings at these shows and always admired how well planes and layed out. Everything is. The same with how strict maintenance is for these aircraft. Whenever there has been accidents in the past the first thing the media does is jump on how old the aircraft are, the pilots being to old or mentally ill. Or say they are sound dangerous stunts. They're goal? To scare people away from going and seeing these wonderful aircraft. These non profits keep these aircraft flying for two reasons. Our veterans and to inspire children to fly.
ntsb report wont say anything the video hasnt told us already, if you have half a brain you can see what happen, dont need to wait a 12 too 18 months LMAO for some fancy report from ntsb
@@bill-nj6fc If you had any respect for the dead you would keep it to yourself. I am tired of hearing half baked crap after incidents like this, from I saw stuff come off the plane to it was suicide. Yes, I have read some pretty bonehead shit, so if you would like to keep adding to it, go for it! Go nuts!
Do all the pre-flight meetings you want, but there are just too many variables in aviation that can't be predicted. It's a miracle that aviation exists as it does, airshows are just an irresponsible show-off of this miracle.
Actually from the understanding I've gathered from pilot channels, specifically fighter pilots. I'm just an aviation enthusiast of course. But ig in aviation its quite the contrary, they say there is no such thing as an accident only mishaps, I forget exactly how they word it. But basically in every single aviation crash there is a series of mistakes that lead to that situation. And at any point the series can be broken. The truth is if this wasn't like a crazy suicide. Then There was a series of mistakes that happened that lead to this. Hopefully that can figure out what truly happened so we can learn from this tragedy
Nothing irresponsible about air shows. If you knew how air shows were organized and run, you'd have a different take. Safety is paramount for all involved with an air show, but even then, you can only mitigate risk, not eliminate it.
It looked like a KAMIKAZE aiming straight for the wing area to split the plane on purpose. How does one accidentally time that and hit that spot perfectly?
Photographer said he overheard radio transmissions from the flight coordinators requesting the King Cobra to overtake the B-17, after it fell out of alignment. That could be a potential smoking gun. Seems that coordination team may have had a serious lapse of judgment.
When fly at a distance, the cowl (front) of the plane your flying is larger than the plane in the distance, its covered and can`t be seen until right up on it and then, its to late. Flying at the speed that the P-63 was going, it would have been very very hard to correct the issue. If you look at the angle that he was approaching the B-17 the angle has was coming in at made it even worse. Visibility was almost non existent.
That they had to wait 24 hours for the Medical Examiner to tell them how many people aboard doesn't say much for CAF's procedures and discipline. Why crew and passenger manifests are required.
@@GARDENER42 There were seven other aircraft in the near vicinity of the B17, with at least one apparently flying about willy nilly in an uncordinated fashion, leading to a B17 flying straight and level getting T-boned for some as yet unknown reason.
Correct. There are always inherent dangers to aviation, just like driving a car. In this instance, it was captured on camera and made for a spectacular show, unlike like a deadly pile up on the freeway.
Aviation ‘expert’ calls a Russian WWII P63 KingCobra a Spitfire… then some loser attorney that has never set foot on these planes thinks he knows how they are maintained or flown… never trust an attorney. I knew these pilots and they were better pilots than these idiots will ever be. And as for maintenance, these planes are maintained better than commercial airliners. I know, I have personally watched both. The screw up seems to have come from the ground. Neither pilot saw each other and in an air show, the air boss makes the traffic call.
A plane crashes into another and an expert says mistakes were made..... brilliant. How many years does one have to be in aviation to come to that conclusion?
Pure genius.
He didn't say he was an expert. He said he was an attorney. There's a big difference between the two.
@@eradicator187 😂🤣😂🤣
They were hacked I seen it on the Spiderman game all the time..
The P-63 King cobra was notoriously known for its poor visibility. It was banking left, but it was too close. Both pilots didn’t know what the hell was going on.
The P63 was known to have poor pilot visibility...its why the Air Force didnt like it...and in that bank turn he never saw the B17 as it was hidden under his wing...the lawyer talking about maintenance is a crock...this was 100% pilot error...Rest In Peace all involved and the loss of 2 pieces of history...
Good point about the P-63's poor visibility. I'm wondering if the notoriously squirly-handling P-63 didn't get sucked into the wing vortex of the much bigger B-17.
@@effsixteenblock50 It looked to me like the P-63 was not aware of precisely where the B-17 was and by the time he saw it the collision was inevitable. The P-63 really made its reputation in the Soviet Union during WW2 as a ground pounder. What I’m curious about is why was the 63 known for questionable behavior in flight as the plane it was based on ( the P-39 airacobra ) was most known for being “ underpowered “
John your 100% right!
As I continue to watch these videos I am beginning to believe that the bomber may have been in view from the P-63's cockpit. I could see this accident happening if the bomber had been overtaking the fighter while the fighter was turning- coming up from behind and under the wing- but the bomber was out pretty far ahead and being overtaken by the fighter.
Clearly the fighter's pilot did not see where the bomber was but I don't think it was because his view was blocked. He may have become distracted and focused his field of view elsewhere at the wrong moment.
@@effsixteenblock50 I believe there is also something called a snap-spin (correct me if I am wrong) where if the plane is going too fast and tries to do too aggressive of a maneuver it will be put into a spin. There is an angle where it is shown going visibly faster than the P-51s it is following, so that may have contributed as well.
As an aircraft mechanic with over forty years experience, I can say that aviation lawyers are worse than regular ambulance chasing lawyers. They get juries made up if laymen, many of whom are afraid of flying anyway and who don't have the first clue about airplanes and twist the facts so much that even a seasoned airline pilot would be afraid to fly. And to say someone made a mistake today is an understatement. Pilot's make mistakes and often they are very catastrophic but to say there was gross negligence at this point is at best unprofessional and at worst, slander.
All valid points!
How many aircraft have you caused to crash?
Agreed.. Nobody has spilled hot coffee on themselves lately, or showered while using a hair dryer lately.. so he's looking for a free publicity.
The p63 also has terrible visibility
Thank you, John. I echo everything you said and add criticism for channel 11 news for going straight to speculation before the bodies and wreckage were cold.
The "experts" aren't *experts* at all, I watched those final flights all morning. Several of the camera angles are very misleading. The "Spitfire" was actually a P-63 Kingcobra and a helicopter pilot isn't going to know jack shit about flying World War II era aircraft, it is a completely different skillset. The lawyer knows even less. How about a little respect for the families and friends of everyone involved? This crap disgusts me. Screw CBS DFW and its disrespectful and uninformed reporting. Someone needs to investigate the journalistic standards at CBS DFW.
dude was 77 with 2 hours of flights in 2 years. So maybe there should have been some RESPECT for the people on the ground that could have been killed by these old men playing out fantasies.
You said it Steve! 👍
Gee, you think the camera angle showing the impact got it wrong?
@@austinthrowsstuff which pilot, and where did you get that information?
This is why I'll *CONTINUE* to say that the television "News" (CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, BBC, PBS, NPR, Fox News, etc) needs to be called to Federal Court and *REMOVED* of their ability to call themselves "Journalists" and be called "ACTORS" & labeled "ENTERTAINMENT" and 'NOT' News. 🤔
That's why an Actor, News Media, Fact-Checkers & Politician's job is to *PRETEND* to be things they're not & know things they don't. 😠
Their "expert" doesn't even know the difference between a Spitfire and a King Cobra....
Did you really nitpick King cobra and Kingcobra the dude said Spitfire and it was clearly not as Spitfire not to mention it was British made and the King-Cobra was American made. Also he mentioned arguably one the most recognizable famous aircraft of ww2 and misidentified it with a king cobra. Ps yes I spelt the name of the P-63 in different ways on purpose 🤷🏽♂️
@@hayloft3834 It appeared there were p-51's leading the p-63...I have neither seen nor heard any mention of spitfire's being involved at all...but perhaps. It is insulting to the Spitfire to confuse it with the p-63.
@@hayloft3834 There were no Spitfires at the show and if yo listen he is clearly referring to the aircraft involved in the incident.
@@hayloft3834 I can read a bloody program mate, neither of the two TX-based spits was there. The guy is no expert, he is not qualified to speak on causality and more than you or I. I'm not sure why yo are defending the guy TBH, it's distasteful that he even appeared on camera.
@@hayloft3834 maybe he just heard the Merlin engines of the P-51 and thought there was a Spitfire?🤷♂️
So, some "aviation expert and pilot" calls a P63 a Spitfire? People with real knowledge, experience and judgement say, "this was awful, but we'll have to wait to find out exactly what happened." Pretty sure everyone of us would say "airplanes shouldn't crash into each other". Take a seat "aviation experts & pilots"! Rest in peace to all involved.
Thought I heard that wrong also! But this is what the world and the media has come to! Who cares about facts! Let's get a story out there!!
Yep, I heard that and saw the same thing.
Yeah I just about laughed (except it was too sad to laugh) at this guy calling the P63 a "Spitfire"
Hey aviation Experrt its a mig. Lots,of experts and some wet behind the ears.bet some this bowl of oats dont even know one Name of the original founding fathers of the original confederate air force.or where it all started . Hint = p38× lighting.owner..i.was.lucky.too.have.seen.and.meeting.and seen.where this fork devil was stowed.when i was little boy. Just down a country road..
we know what happen, p63 pilot screw up
A lawyer is the LAST thing we need in an interview regarding news about this tragedy!! My experience with lawyers is they take a situation and milk it for all the money they can make out of it. What is wrong with you that you would ask a lawyer to use this to sensationalize and exploit what is clearly a tragedy?! My heart and prayers go out to those who lost their family or loved ones today. That they may heal.
Same thing occurred to me. Why in hell did the reporting news agency feel the need to insert that nonsense? As if the maintenance affected either aircraft in some way to create that collision?!
Already some gas bag positioning himself to file a law suit with no concern for those lost or of their families affected by this tragedy.
"A tragedy" is not a technical evaluation of this event. Calling it an accident won't help us fix our technical oversight and stop more tragedies from happening.
It's okay if you're not ready to process the technical details about this which requires a degree of objectivity. If so, you should only watch and comment on the news covering the family & the social side of things. Which is just fine, everybody processes things differently.
Do keep in mind, though, that these technical reports from experts, including the lawyers, are what will determine both our safety, yours, and your loved ones.
@@Meisha-san I totally disagree. I see no reason that lawyers will help the situation whatsoever. I can't imagine expert investigators sifting through everything and not being able to determine the facts unless a lawyer is involved.
@@matthewlotysch3299 The families of those killed will appreciate the help of a lawyer in monetary compensation. If your loved one was killed in a car wreck caused by another car, you darn well too will want a lawyer so you can sue the guy who caused the death of your loved one.
1:15 wow!
The lawyer was no help.
Lawyer like we’re the money .
They were doing what they loved in their final moments,
All accidents are exactly just that, they are not intentional. If there is consolation both pilots most likely didnt see it coming. RIP
All Lawyers are experts in aviation. Their experience has no rival especially when it comes to operating flaps…
Flapping their gums.
Lawyer didn't start speaking until 1:45
The guy at 1:15 is a pilot...that called the P-63 a Spitfire and the ramp .... tarmac.
Not surprised
The comments of the attorney were not needed at this time. He knows nothing of what he speaks about
Yes, that is quite too soon.
@@hayloft3834 but it was likely a mistake made by the P-63 pilot
I found it useful to hear an opinion that disagreed with the "nothing to see here" spin the organizers are putting on it in their press briefings.
As a aircraft enthusianst myself, let us wait for the report. And let us have respect for the family and their departed souls. 🥺🙌🙏🏴
God bless their souls😔🌈🙏
Agree. This experts doesn't do that...
JD : stop the texts , stop the wrecks🧐
Exactly!
The problem here was 2 things. The pilot of the P63 had no clear sight of the B-17 and should have never made his pass to take the lead without positioning himself for correct visualization. The second is all these planes should have had pre set flight altitudes. The B-17 should have been at a higher elevation in this formation maneuver in the first place. Another tragic mishap that could have been so easily avoided. RIP
Was not a spitfire, was a P63 kingcobra.
Nope, it was the P-63 King Cobra that flew into the B-17 and caused the disaster.
@@adammumford5240 thanks. Corrected
The problem here is 'armchair experts' such as yourself making crap up.
Those 17's were built to climb to 30,000 ft. and rock&roll. He was a sitting duck at that low altitude.
The “spitfire” was a p-63 king cobra there -- arm chair quarterback helicopter guy.
No true expert would be throwing around criticisms only hours after the crash, as they wouldn't have anywhere near all the facts & evidence to back such criticism.
note;former pilots & air force officers are NOT air accident experts, no matter how many hours they've flown.
All the facts? There is video. Everyone has an opinion...Now people can't speculate? What a canceled world we live in.
He didn't even get the planes right. A P-63 is not a spitfire.
its the main stream news… sickening.
"Expert watching show had a bad feeling"
@@secondrule Where did i claim people couldn't speculate?
Oh, I didn't.
Yes, there's video. As you clearly seem to think that is all that is needed, perhaps you will now tell us all the cause of the crash & who was to blame.
Note the 1995 crash involved a 77-year-old pilot with one 1/2-hour flight in the previous year and a half, at the control of a very hot and challenging airplane. His co-pilot had only 125 hours in the type. The B-26 had a reputation for being fatally unforgiving even when everything was working.
Did it just fail in midair, or was it struck in mid air like the collision today?
this is the story over and over again. Im okay with doing dangerous things but they were flying over populated areas and it was lucky no innocent people were hurt.
@@HTV-2_Hypersonic_Glide_Vehicle The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows. the failure of the pilot to maintain minimum airspeed for flight resulting in an inadvertent stall/spin. Factors were the loss of power for undetermined reasons, and the pilot's lack of recent flight experience in the aircraft. My father flew a B26 in WW2 in Africa, Italy, France, Germany. He really loved that "hot" airplane but said you could not be timid. You had put it on the ground not glide in. Minimum airspeed was 160 mph and that scared the hell out of inexperienced pilots.
@@nandi123 thanks for your Dad's Marauder insight!
I was there a day before the (B-26) crash... it was such a beautiful restoration. I watched some guys working on the right landing gear.
I’m an airport manager at a airport with several tenants who base their vintage WWII aircraft. Once a year, these tenants host a fly in where many such aircraft will fly/circle the pattern around, around , and around. The crowd loves the sound those big radial and Merlin make. But often the mix of slower bomber and training aircraft flying in a crowded circle/pattern with high speed fighter can be chaos. There is a video floating around from the Dallas airshow that shows the B-17 and P-63 coming around a turn before they collide. In the background, the sky is crowded with many aircraft. In my opinion, there were simply “way too many” aircraft circling in the pattern, at different airspeed, making a collision inevitable. It’s a damn shame this happened but too often (and I’ve witnessed it with pilots and peers of these vintage WWII aircraft) they want to WOW the crowd with 1000 plane raids.
You never been to Oshkosh fly in have you. You have no concept of a busy airspace they have 10,000 airplanes at the airport. Google it and listen to the controllers handling the traffic.
I stay away from airshows. Too crowded in the air, and too crowded on the ground.
Old airplanes are fun to look at, but why push them past their useful service and contribution? That's seems vain and greedy and dangerous; and it adds no value to their service, or our culture.
Happened in war also . Operated by rich wanna bees .
@@fixento Too bad the Oshkosh controllers weren't in Dallas.
it's easy to be a post factum critic ,no need for brain
Air shows are composed of 100% visual maneuvers and if you can’t see ahead of your flight path for whatever reason you shouldn’t be flying with other aircraft in the pattern, especially with different performing airplanes. Extensive military formation flying training and experience is a must. I had 7 years Air Force and 31 years major airline experience and I early retired at 62 because I no longer felt I had the same safety “edge” as I once had. I can’t imagine flying over 70 years old. No disrespect to the pilot in this case.
'I early retired at 62 because I no longer felt I had the same safety “edge” as I once had.' - Why did you retire early as an airline pilot. Isn't a commercial airline basically on autopilot most of the time, it flies itself. What makes it unsafe for you to pilot? I am asking with all due respect (not to be a troll, just out of curiousity. I suffer from aviophobia.)
@@maxpercer7119 he prob got rich off his job, why keep going?
@@maxpercer7119 He wrote the reason, he said he feels he's not as capable as before speaking of the safety procedures.
@@maxpercer7119 You clearly have no understanding of the function of an autopilot. It reduces the physical load on a pilot who would otherwise have to hold the controls steady for hours on end. Pilots also use flight directors, which string together sequences of machine states and allow an aircraft to perform a sequence of manoeuvres. The pilot has to program the autopilot and the flight director, he still has to plan and manage the flight - the automation simply reduces the physical effort required.
My 98 year old dad watched this, and cried. He flew a B-17 in WW2, he is still sharp and witted and cooks his own dinners, in his Sr. assisted apartment. What a sad movement..losing another B-17, now we have only 2 in the USA.
One B-17 crashed at Bradley Field in the Hartford, CT area about two years ago.
I was thinking about a situation like your dad, imagine how it would have felt fighting for the USA, risking their life, surviving, going back home, just to find out years later possible war comrades lost their life, and also destroying one of the historical planes that made it out in 1 piece, these kind of vehicles really should belong on a museum.
tell your dad first thanks for his service,,my grandfather was in ww1 he was pow for 30 months and made it home ,, sorry to hear your dad witnessed
There are 40 B-17s left, but only less than a dozen of them are air worthy.
Then he’s seen it before this just brought it all back.
As an expert, I can fairly confidently assert that the collision occurred because the two planes where at the same time at the same place.
Exactly! Enough with these so-called 'experts!'
Couldn't agree more. Leave it to the proper experts, the NTSB and the FAA. They will come to a true conclusion without bias.
Maybe we need to hear from the control tower for that information. 🤷♀️ 🤦♀️
And right now, that is about all we know. Both those "gentlemen" should be ashamed of themselves.
Wouldn't it be common sense for two groups of planes traveling at significantly different speeds be at two significantly different altitudes for safety purposes?
part of the aviation community is not speculating, we point out what we know and wait to draw conclusions till investigators can bring us the truth. what we know now is only half truths and giving answers to people who dont know better would be misleading on our parts.
Ambulance chaser already advertising his services on a news channel? This is just sick. For all we know, the pilot had a medical problem.
🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏For the victims, families, friends, CAF, and any person who witnessed this tragic event.🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
People are so cruel nowadays, please don't point fingers. Let the investigation take place.
77 year olds who fly one hour a year tend to be the ones who have medical problems... And when your a pilot you take on a huge responsibility. The man shouldnt have been flying the plane in an airshow and especially over a populated area at low elevations. Not to mention how they were at the same elevation, this could have been avoided so easily.
@@austinthrowsstuff Why do you keep repeating this? I have heard nothing about any of the pilots in this particular incident having only one hour of flight time in these aircraft in the last year, anywhere.
@@austinthrowsstuff , go away , no one likes lawyers
@@austinthrowsstuff provide us with your information! I bet you don't.
You just pointed your finger at a pilot that had a medical problem. If you can speculate why cant someone else?
Pretty low class reporting.
The P-63 pilot lost his situational awareness plain and simple. Sometimes an accident is just an accident.
I can agree with you on that, or he suffered some kind of medical event.
I am uncomfortable with any speculation this early. Also, I neither believe nor disbelieve anything a lawyer has to say on the subject.
This “expert” doesn’t even know what type of aircraft is involved.
You’re going to trust an ambulance chasing lawyer ?
No, are YOU going to trust him? If you actually listened when they briefly presented his background, it appears he has significant experience with the CAF and airshow operations in the matter of crashes where deaths occur. So, you can take all that for what it's worth rather than reflexively blowing him off because of a presumption of practiced legal expertise.
@@jkorshak yeah considering the case more then 25 years ago. A lot was changed at CAF after that accident.
@@patrickradcliffe3837 The circumstances concerning flightcrew, operations experience, and PIC appear to have nothing to do with the recent air collision. But I'll wait for the FAA/NTSB to provide further data to consider. Having a person involved with seeking answers in an earlier instance of a CAF operations fatality is newsreporting 101, giving the viewer a rare and important insight.
@@jkorshak I can already say it was pilot error of the King Cobra pilot.
@@patrickradcliffe3837 The report literally says he was directed to overtake and lead. But you are guessing with incomplete data. I don't give a shit whose "fault" it might be. I flew in the B26 Carolyn with the very same pilots who later died in it. I was pretty sure that would be pilot error, too - and it was - but only an arrogant twat goes out and just says what's what with incomplete information.
Sensational, speculative and exploitative. Typical of 'journalism' today.
Hi 👋🏻 I’m from Sweden 🇸🇪. When I was a teenager there was a big air show above Stockholm. Unfortunately I got to witness a full failure and an ejection from the plane.. it was a miracle that the pilot survived and that NOBODY on the ground was hit. I still remember that day, I won’t forget it. We thought that hundreds of people would be injured or killed but everyone in the audience was perfectly fine.
How easy for the people on the ground to point fingers. The lawyer is probably contacting the families of the dead crewmembers trying to gin up a law suit. Freaking ambulance chaser
Everyone's an expert after the event! Just pray for the poor families and friends affected.
Yeah, ...like that'll do alot of good. Lol . ..
Unless you're flying those planes all the time, like 200 days a year, you really shouldn't be doing airshows.
Maybe a MINIMUM of five hours per month? Sixty hours per year (minimum) sounds right, and I know they don't put museum pieces to this kind of use.
@@MrShobar Yeah they're all in museum hangers, brought out once or twice a year so not much 'practice' for pilots, 60 would be great. I'll bet these guys only had a dozen hours at best in the weeks proceeding the event. Sad, I imagine people would be just as happy to tour the planes in the hanger, get to sit in the seats, hear the history, etc
If you're the one flying the airplane why would you listen to someone on the ground with a radio telling you what to do
They should be able to see everyone in the air, judging their speed and position and warning you to avoid a dangerous situation you as a pilot may not be able to see, not giving very bad advice. You should be able to trust them.
These planes need to be put in museums and not flown. Too many people are dying because of these foolish stunts!
The first thing the attorney said was negligence. Lawyers are horrible people and just out to financial gain even before an investigation is performed.
Lawyers might not be the best persons out there but if you ever need one liability or criminal defense you’ll be glad they’re out there. Can’t say enough good things about my lawyer seeing as he kept me out of prison, and helped me keep my job
David...It's a job. Most people expect to be paid for their work. How about you?
Мои соболезнования семьям погибших
Wow, that is very sweet to say. I personally love all people from all countries because we're all human. It's our leaders that wage wars 😎
i pray for your country, may chaos stop before christmass
@@bullabuck7535
Thank you.
@@bullabuck7535 He is Russian and only Russian soldiers suffer in Putin's war, whereas in Ukraine, both soldiers and civilians suffer.
He says: "My condolences to the families of the victims".
The expert said one plane hit the other? Wow, what understanding he has of the accident.
Gee - he should have waited until all the facts were in before just leaping to that conclusion.
Talking heads shooting their mouths off. They are just trying to get their 15 minutes of fame.
The air boss was just as much at fault as the P-63 pilot. If you watch the spectator video, you will see a fighter ahead of the P-63 that was being followed. There was no reason to have the fighters flying a different circuit; they should have been in formation with the bomber itself.
Oh look; another 'armchair expert'.🙄
ooh, an expert. Yest nowhere near helping the nonexperts.
How is the Air Boss at fault at all? They lead a mass brief with all the performers in the morning, in addition to the brief that the CAF pilots would have had. Biggest things the Air Boss is looking for is showbox violations and watching for unauthorized aircraft entering the air space. The circuits and altitudes are the responsibility of the performer, not the Air Boss. Even then, given the closing speed of the P-63, no radio call would have stopped this from happening. The Air Boss will be interviewed, but I doubt the Air Boss will not have any blame leveraged against them.
@@GARDENER42 He's right, "gardener"...
@@yxeaviationphotogDespite having numerous mass briefings, if somebody who is in charge tells/orders someone to pull a very dangerous move disregarding all obvious safety rules and planning/briefing, they would definitely be at fault. "Forget what we talked about and all safety rules...speed up and cut that B 17 off in front of you"...If the "boss" said anything like that, he is at fault as well as the pilot who followed his ridiculous orders.
May they all rest in peace.
Unfortunately resting in Piece's. 😢
AMEEN
I’m sure the FAA is going to mandate certain changes as to how they operate. At least they need too! It’s like they cobble together a bunch of hot dog pilots flying vintage beauties, and for the most part, they’ve been very fortunate over the years. One thing is for sure, at least in my view, they’re going to need ‘standardization instructors’ for any type of formation flying and FAA certification to allow them to fly within a certain distance of each other. I flew as a standardization instructor in T-34s for the Navy for a few years and it’s a big no-no is to lose sight of the other aircraft under your wing when joining up as wingman. If the P 63 pilot was told to overtake the B-17 as stated in this video, then he should’ve kept SA on that B-17 and never lost sight of them, but sadly it looks like he did.
Spitfire? What are these clowns talking about?
Imagine that, a slimy lawyer chasing an ambulance while blaming someone for an unfortunate accident.
Spitfire ?
P63 Kingcobra - the 'expert' is an idiot.
IMO it's not responsible journalism to feature this kind of critique before the facts are in. Those two are throwing all sorts of claims and allegations around without all the information
You mean that they should wait for the results of the NTSB investigation?
You mean that journalists and attorneys are two of the professions least trusted today? Perhaps only slightly more trusted than politicians, used car salesmen and military recruiters?
You mean that all those here who already "know" what happened should perhaps also wait for the findings of the investigation?
OK
Colburn mis-spoke when he called the P-63 "Spitfire" when, in fact, the P-63 is nicknamed "Airacobra"... Condolences/sympathies to families that lost loved ones. VERY tragic, indeed
Nope, P-63 is a King Cobra, Airacobra is P-39
King Cobra. Late war upgrade of the type. Like the Hellcat to Bearcat.
It is clear that the P-63 Pilot had no eyes on the B-17 the entire time of that incident... the angle that the P63 was on, would obscure the B-17 from sight.... the P-63 Pilot should have leveled off from time to time so that he had visual confirmation of aircraft around him.... this whole Airshow looked to be very dangerous, there were aircraft flying all over the place, a mid-air collision was bound to happen....
Looked to me like they were trying to do a stunt. Was it a stunt gone wrong?
This is not pilot error. Something struck or came off the Cobra. I have a screeenshot of it.
P-63 was notorious for poor visibility from the cockpit, which was one of the reasons why it was seldom used by the US military. From the angle he was flying, he simply couldn't see the B-17. May they rest in peace.
@@Sailor-Dave Should they have not planned out their flying routes to ensure such a collision would not be possible then? If it's known there's a blind spot at a given angle of flight, why have a plane at such an angle at a point in time when the other planes position would put it out of eyesight??? Good to know it wasnt a stunt gone poorly wrong, but still reeks of folks who shoulda known better making a tragic mistake
@@jackburton2680 No stunt was being attempted. The P-63 simply lost visual of the B-17 during it's turn (his own fuselage obscured the site of the bomber in front of him as his nose was pitched up in the turn), and he flew straight into it with no time to react once he realized his mistake.
To many in the circuit...same height...different speeds. Flight plans????
It appeared very haphazard to me too.
What a wasted time of a report! You couldn't you find less informed people to interview? The so called pilot confused the P-63 with a Spitfire? And the photos... seconds before the accident.... really?? They showed NOTHING new... Look I have photos of these aircraft from the 2021 WOH airshow you could have used those too, after all, they were taken "minutes" before the accident.... And what a great conclusion reached..... something bad did happen... really??
The attorney making reference to a case in 1995 as key to say that the CAF has problem? Look people that was about 27 years ago in case you need help with the math!!!
What a waste of report....
Thanks, your comment is right on.
They haven't even cooled off yet and some lawyer begins slandering those involved. Obviously, this "person" has no empathy for the families and is short on facts. The CAF should sue the sh*t out of this guy for slander and defamation of character. It's too soon to be pointing fingers.
First of all, may they all rest in peace, it wasn't a spitfire and i wish it wasn't a P 63 either, let those big birds fly alone please
I was about to make the correction myself, then saw yours. Thank you. RIP.
That doesn't insure safety either not that long ago another restored B17 suffered engine loss of power at takeoff and crashed at the end of the runway killing everyone on board I don't think that these vintage historic machines should be flown at all put them in a museum so that future Generations can see touch and tour these machines every time we lose one of these machines to some rare accident or mishap is one less piece of history that exists. For god sakes I mean why not just rip the Spirit of St Louis out of the Smithsonian and fly it around the country on a airshow tour! Because that's basically what we're doing with these historic machines
@@nathanbond8165 I totally agree. The P-63 that just crashed was the LAST ONE in existence(according to a previous interview on RUclips with Craig Hutain...the pilot involved in the crash). Someone else posted that there are only 2 B-17's left in the U.S. This is very sad.
@@valeriegriner5644 well there are b-17s in museums I don't know how many flying b-17s are left but we do know that this is the second B-17 that has been lost to an accident a couple years ago another B-17 lost engine power on takeoff and crashed at the end of the runway and killed everyone on board at any rate they don't make these aircraft anymore parts are getting harder and harder to find we should not be risking these pieces of History for vanity and nostalgia let's restore pieces of history and then protect them in museums so that one day your great-grandchildren can honor these planes and learn about them
@@valeriegriner5644 let's be honest about what this is about this is a bunch of retired Commercial and Military Pilots that have way too much time on their hand and a lot of money to buy and restore these historic aircraft and then they fly these things around acting as if they're preserving history they're not this is for vanity this is cosplay they fantasize about being World War II fighter pilots in these planes and bombers if they want to build replica planes go ahead I have no problem with building a replica king cobra or replica B-17 with modern safety features but I have a big problem using illreplaceable historic aircraft as your personal World War II flight simulator while you cosplay being a WW2 fighter or bomber pilot this is about ego this is about vanity
It's an absolute tragedy not only for the families of the Fallen Pilots but also the vehicles which are irreplaceable just like their pilots. When a machine survives a major war to go on to be a fine Museum it's quite tragic when the vehicle is lost
Exactly
I wrote this same post. That was the last P-63 in existence, so it would have been nice to retire it in a museum. Very tragic...for multiple reasons.
Are they going to bury the plane.
I don't like this video at all. Just hours after the crash and they're attacking the entire CAF organization like that... They can obviously have their opinions and say whatever they like, but this sounds almost like they're on a path to try and shut down the CAF or something...
I AM NO EXPERT BUT ALL THE AIRPLANES FRYING NEXT AND TOP OF EACH OTHER IS THE PERFECT RECIPE FOR DISASTER'S.
You covered it in the 1st four words.
For the crew and pilots on these planes they're deaths were almost instant but what no one realizes is the trauma and PTSD that hundreds maybe thousands of people at this Air Show have now experienced watching two aircraft Collide and explode on impact? the sound, the site and yes the smell of burning Aviation fuel and human flesh ( when humans burn they make a very distinct smell, ask anyone that's ever been in war) a smell that you will never forget your entire life and so also what about all the children that are always at these air shows that have been traumatized for life. it's not every day that you watch two aircraft Collide and explode in front of you just thought I'd bring that point of view how many people at that air show are going to need years of therapy now to help them process what they witnessed?
Also what about the PTSD that the ground crew the families and the friends and volunteers and workers of this organization as I'm sure they all knew the pilots and crew who died and they sat there that day and watched their friends die right in front of them in a horrific Violet plane crash what about the trauma and PTSD that those people are going to have and guilt knowing that they may have in some small part had something to do with this tragedy
Maybe they can apply for disability from there PTSD
@@cathywallace6990 is that some sort of attempt of a joke or are you trying to make this political either way it's in poor taste PTSD is real and you don't have to go to war to experience it just ask any police officer or firefighter that have seen people die in front of them it's traumatic especially for children think before you comment
I sort of noticed your 1,487 comments on this story. So, why don't you just write a book and be done with it?
@@StvMcQueen1 well I think your numbers are a little inflated but I always respond to someone's reply like I am doing to yours right now and so yeah it does generate a lot of comments thank you Google talk to text LOL
Here we go with Experts….Where were these “experts” BEFORE the crash. Easy to judge after, harder to plan before. Go back to your basements.
Flying a high performance, low wing airplane in a turn in an airplane that is known for having poor visibility, it’s doubtful he ever saw the B-17 before hitting it. “Overtaking “ an airplane simply means pass it, usually not a dangerous thing to do, but if he was told while in the turn, I m netting he didn’t even see it. From the videos I have seen, there was no apparent evasive action taken, which tells me he didn’t even see it. I don’t know how many was on board the B-17, but if it was during the show, it’s likely only essential flight crew was on board. I doubt if insurance would allow passengers during the show itself. Hope not. The P-63 is a single seater.
Do to the plane design, angle etc., he was flying blind.
@@deeri.v.8332 ..or, due to the plane design...
I've been maintaining aircraft for 30+ years and I do not consider myself an "EXPERT". I would consider myself a
"SPECIALEST". Over the years I have met so many self proclaimed experts and hangar lawyers. Airfields and the internet seem to be a magnet for these idiots.
"experts"
Honestly the lawyer sounds like he’s full of it. I’ve flown with CAF pilots before and they’re usually some of the safest and most experienced pilots out there
Safest? Sounds like you are full of it as well
Wait until the accident report comes out before passing judgment.....no one knows what happened yet. A lot of things could have went wrong, mechanical failure, pilot error, ground control error, etc. Wait until the investigation is over before making definitive statements. Rest in peace and what a heartbreaking tragedy.
Well said.
coming from the government they might blame it on Russia.....
we know what went wrong, p63 pilot screw up, end of story
@@bill-nj6fc It's more complicated and not as simple as you think. Why did the P-63 pilot impact the B-17? What lead lead up to the accident? We and you really don't know very much at this time. Many more questions about that airshow need to be asked.
@@av8tor261 the only question that needs to be ask about the air show , is why the hell do we have them, there pointless, dangerous and to much of risk to the public
Here we go with the blame game. I can have an opinion also and it seemed like the B was flying along just fine and smooth and the P came right into it. So some kind of mistake was likely made or a slight possibility of a medical issue with the P pilot Unlikely a mechanical issue. But we will see and no reason to be placing blame anywhere until we investigate.
Not having much aviation experience or knowledge of the planes here, I would generally defer to others as to what happened and why. I have been to many air shows though over the years and from that experience and perspective, they tend to give the airspace to one plane or a similar type of plane flying in formation rather than different types of planes flying at different speeds and altitudes. It just seems like common sense if you have a lot of traffic in the sky with dissimilar aircraft and pilots of varying degrees of skill and experience you will increase the odds of a mishap.
It doesn't seem; it IS common sense.
Bravo.
Fast movers and slow movers should not be at co-altitude. This is a huge planning mistake.
Not be at SAME altitude. I couldn't agree more with you.
Air Boss’s should be licensed Air Traffic Controllers. At least involve them. RIP. 😢
An Air Boss is not the same as an air traffic controller.....they are also trained and certified by the International Council of Air Shows. They don't let just anyone be the Air Boss at a show.
@@yxeaviationphotog I understand that. I served an an FAA Air Traffic Controller for 37 years at Washington ARTCC in the DC to Ny corridor including 9/11 and others. I also served a a Safety Risk Management Controller for 10 years. I understand and respect the difference. That being said, lessons learned, is future safety and awareness. Nothing can prevent tragedies. It’s all about awareness and CLEAR communications and CLEAR readbacks.
@@heavysighs I respect your experience and viewpoint, but becoming a fully qualified Air Boss takes years if not only instruction, but working under more experienced Air Bosses in order to get fully certified. They are familiar with aviation regulations and work closely with ATC during shows. I think having an air boss also be a licensed controller is kind of redundant.
@@yxeaviationphotog I respect that. There does seem to be room for improvement on ‘close proximity’ aircraft operations at an airshow separation standards. My controversial stance is that safe air operation’s don’t always come before the ‘show’. I see both sides. As a pilot myself I get it. We all know the meme’s and saying’s. But… after 37 years directly involved in ATC and Aviation Safety, I think that more layer’s of safety are better; yet less spectacular, and way more boring and inconvenient. RIP to our fellow pilots, and may their families find comfort in the knowledge that they died doing something that they loved. It’s all of our dream to go that way.
@@heavysighs I know at least two highly experienced Air Bosses here in Canada and neither of them put the show before safety. Both have seen friends die at shows they have worked at. I'm certainly not against additional layers of safety and I have no doubt that this will be discussed in the Air Boss forums at ICAS next month. Any accident will always bring some change.....sucks that it usually comes at the cost of someone's life.
Oh the "aviation experts" those who do nothing but criticize and blame the dead. This is what this country become.
Who would you blame? Those planes weren't flying themselves.
I'll Call it now. the P-63 pilot will bare the majority of the blame and rightly so. he fly his aircraft in an unsafe manner and caused the crash. however the airboss shares some blame and should have a lifetime revocation of his licenses.
And your field of expertise is?
What's an "air boss"?
@@MrShobar its the person on the ground that controls all aspects of the airshow. even acts as the air traffic controller. he told the P-63 to go ahead and over take the B-17 even though the P-63 pilot could not see the B-17 while the P-63 was in a sharp turn.
"Mistakes were made."
Translation: Somebody fucked up.
Airshow maneuvers are as "see and avoid" as one can get. Suppose the Cobra pilot had a medical event or control issue?
It looks like he couldn't see the B17 as it was under his starboard wing.
How this position came about is what real experts will be striving to find out.
CBSDFW should be ashamed to broadcast this as news. Two so called experts, one who who was a helicopter pilot who called the fighter plane a Spitfire. And an aviation attorney who makes his money blaming people for accidents. He does not have first hand knowledge. Neither are air accident experts, neither is aware of the flight plan.
This is bloody awful news. My heart goes out to all concerned. 😔
JL : stop the texts , stop the wrecks🧐
I admire what the CAF does in preserving WWIi aircraft but other than that I have nothing positive to say about them. Every encounter I've had with them either professional or personal has been a negative one.
The loss of life and the loss of tangible history is tragic. Thoughts and prayers to all suffering from this terrible accident.
From several videos taken at varying angles, it is clear the P-63 strayed from the parade line of P-51's and into the outer, wider turning circle of the B-17 and B-24, etc. The P-63 also seemed to be flying at max speed as well. Just a very sad day for all.
Let's wait until all the evidence comes in.
During WWII there were many of this kind of accident, tension, low visibility, bad comms. So, what the odds that replicating a war scenario, it would not happen? I prayed for these heroes, flying on 80 years old aircrafts, May the Lord receive them in his glory, Amen
Deepest condolences to family and friends. May they rest in peace.
After reading a few comments, do we need to argue over what plane did what, or who is an expert on this situation? The question is, can we cheat death? Do any of us know the day, hour or manner of death we'll suffer? No ... so be kind. Love your spouse and children making sure they know each day they are loved. Honor your parents bc someday you won't have them ... don't wait until you've become a parent and old, looking backwards to only see regret!
The point is to save lives by finding out what happened and making absolutely sure this never happens again. If you want to fly recklessly with too many different planes in the air that will insure a collision happens, then people will die. You can definitely avoid accidents (cheat death..a stupid expression) by being safe and not doing stupid stunts and disregarding safety rules. A simple one is stay behind the plane in front of you; don't try to pass it unless you have adequate space around it and certainly don't fly too fast, too close at the same altitude. It's not supposed to be a demolition derby with a bunch of hot dogs.
cornball
My grandfather was a B17 radio operator. It’s so sad seeing this beauty crumble into pieces. They’re very rare. God be with the souls lost.
The fast movers (fighter planes) should have been orbiting at a higher altitude than the slow movers (bombers), by maybe 250-500 ft higher .
Orbiting? I guess you are another expert?
So not a Spitfire, but a King Cobra. So much for that "expert".
Obviously some type of mistakes occurred. It is called being human. A police helicopter pilot is far from an expert on fixed wing flying and the aviation attorney is already setting up his next lawsuit that will make him money and harm a historic organization. The interviewers should be ashamed of themselves for starting this needless blame game.
"...It is called being human..." And continuing to remain a human necessitates care in everything you do, especially when operating aircraft of this type. Corners were cut here...
I am sure there will be countless opinions on this tragedy. As a pilot with wide experience 25.000 hrs plus and many, many types. I flew for a while from Falcon Field Az. There is an active war bird museum there with some fine airworthy example of WW2 machines. Lovingly restored and immaculately maintained. From experience I know that display flying is hazardous. The top priority is planning of the highest possible standard so that each pilot was fully aware and capable of maintains a meticulously planned detail from start to finish. There is no part for ad hoc manoeuvres or prima donnas.
I live under a runway approach at Midway Airport and have done so for 41 years. Having said that, the last air show I attended was 55 years ago at age 12. Enough said.
Ha me too Midway .
Their was nothing wrong with the B-17 or the P-63.The pilot of the P-63 just didn't judge the pass of the B-17 correctly.The B-17 crew never knew what happened.What a senseless accident that was so preventable. The P-63 pilot was at fault.
So many planes in such small space, recipe for disaster in my opinion.
I feel that the problem is the fly past air traffic control. if you see the fly past in other countries. Each group of aircrafts formation are at least 1-2 minutes away from each other. The fast and slow aircrafts are in different groups. Normally the faster aircraft in the front formation and slower aircraft behind. If the organizer tried to mix all type of aircraft together. It is a big challenge and every pilot involve need to be inform to fly at a specify cruising speed and height to avoid accident like this. Lack of air traffic control at the air show is root cause for this collision.
No, air traffic control plays zero into this. Once performers are cleared into the show box by the Air Boss, they don't talk on the radio unless they see a box violation or an unauthorized aircraft entering the airspace. The circuits of the aircraft would have been briefed before the flight by all of the crews involved, including altitudes and intervals, etc. So no, this is not an air traffic control/Air Boss issue. Someone was out of position.
@@yxeaviationphotog Too much "Maverick".
@@rideon6140 Huh?🤨
@@yxeaviationphotog "Maverick", someone who breaks the rules because rules are getting in the way - as in, Maverick Top Gun. So good he can eject at mach 10 and walk to a dinner. Maybe in this case they were no rules, that in of itself is breaking rules. Probably there were, if so, somone left the designated envelope. I know, lets wait till all the facts are in, an internet rule.
This was not someone being "Maverick". As well, air traffic control doesn't run an air show, that's done by an Air Boss, who is in charge of the airspace and air show box. Also, the entire aircraft formation briefs where everyone should be and when, so your "no rules" comment is inaccurate. That's how air shows work. So no, a lack of air traffic control has nothing to do with what happened....either the B-17 wasn't where it was supposed to be, or the P-63. Someone messed up, but it wasn't anyone on the ground. I should also note that the same show was held last year, and the same air display was put on, and it included both the B-17 and P-63 that were involved......and no mishap.
There are tons of these airshows every year with 1000s of hours of flying. You never see crashes. I've personally been the the briefings at these shows and always admired how well planes and layed out. Everything is. The same with how strict maintenance is for these aircraft. Whenever there has been accidents in the past the first thing the media does is jump on how old the aircraft are, the pilots being to old or mentally ill. Or say they are sound dangerous stunts. They're goal? To scare people away from going and seeing these wonderful aircraft. These non profits keep these aircraft flying for two reasons. Our veterans and to inspire children to fly.
People just need to wait for the NTSB report and be quiet until then
ntsb, final report, one plane crash into another
@@bill-nj6fc Yes, but why?
ntsb report wont say anything the video hasnt told us already, if you have half a brain you can see what happen, dont need to wait a 12 too 18 months LMAO for some fancy report from ntsb
@@bill-nj6fc If you had any respect for the dead you would keep it to yourself. I am tired of hearing half baked crap after incidents like this, from I saw stuff come off the plane to it was suicide. Yes, I have read some pretty bonehead shit, so if you would like to keep adding to it, go for it! Go nuts!
@@mypl510 ok then
Gotta love all the “experts” with 20/20 hindsight who come out of the woodwork after something like this.
Do all the pre-flight meetings you want, but there are just too many variables in aviation that can't be predicted. It's a miracle that aviation exists as it does, airshows are just an irresponsible show-off of this miracle.
Actually from the understanding I've gathered from pilot channels, specifically fighter pilots. I'm just an aviation enthusiast of course. But ig in aviation its quite the contrary, they say there is no such thing as an accident only mishaps, I forget exactly how they word it. But basically in every single aviation crash there is a series of mistakes that lead to that situation. And at any point the series can be broken. The truth is if this wasn't like a crazy suicide. Then There was a series of mistakes that happened that lead to this. Hopefully that can figure out what truly happened so we can learn from this tragedy
Nothing irresponsible about air shows. If you knew how air shows were organized and run, you'd have a different take. Safety is paramount for all involved with an air show, but even then, you can only mitigate risk, not eliminate it.
A helicopter pilot cannot even properly identify the places involved and, of course, a lawyer jumps in. How about gathering fact?
It looked like a KAMIKAZE aiming straight for the wing area to split the plane on purpose. How does one accidentally time that and hit that spot perfectly?
I guess that’s why it’s called an accident.
Photographer said he overheard radio transmissions from the flight coordinators requesting the King Cobra to overtake the B-17, after it fell out of alignment. That could be a potential smoking gun. Seems that coordination team may have had a serious lapse of judgment.
Don't speak on matters you understand little about
When fly at a distance, the cowl (front) of the plane your flying is larger than the plane in the distance, its covered and can`t be seen until right up on it and then, its to late. Flying at the speed that the P-63 was going, it would have been very very hard to correct the issue. If you look at the angle that he was approaching the B-17 the angle has was coming in at made it even worse. Visibility was almost non existent.
By ACCIDENT, Albert.
That they had to wait 24 hours for the Medical Examiner to tell them how many people aboard doesn't say much for CAF's procedures and discipline. Why crew and passenger manifests are required.
No matter how you spin it, the P-63 pilot made a terrible mistake in trying to overtake the B-17 and got everyone killed.
How do you know he was 'trying to overtake'?
Oh, you don't.
@@GARDENER42 some footage suggests
@@HTV-2_Hypersonic_Glide_Vehicle According to whom?
@@GARDENER42 There were seven other aircraft in the near vicinity of the B17, with at least one apparently flying about willy nilly in an uncordinated fashion, leading to a B17 flying straight and level getting T-boned for some as yet unknown reason.
@@fuzzle9392 Another armchair expert who can outguess the NTSB...
RIP
To the five crew members of the Texas Raiders and the pilot of N6763
Shit happens no matter what the finger pointers say.
Correct. There are always inherent dangers to aviation, just like driving a car. In this instance, it was captured on camera and made for a spectacular show, unlike like a deadly pile up on the freeway.
this b17 could have crashed in a populated area
Terrible accident
1:05 Anyone who doesn"t know the difference between a p63 and a Spitfire isn"t an expert.
"...mistakes were made..."
DAMN.
Aviation ‘expert’ calls a Russian WWII P63 KingCobra a Spitfire… then some loser attorney that has never set foot on these planes thinks he knows how they are maintained or flown… never trust an attorney.
I knew these pilots and they were better pilots than these idiots will ever be.
And as for maintenance, these planes are maintained better than commercial airliners. I know, I have personally watched both.
The screw up seems to have come from the ground. Neither pilot saw each other and in an air show, the air boss makes the traffic call.
P63s were not Russian at all. They were used by the Soviets but were manufactured in the USA.
@@johnandrews3568 The P63s we’re made in America… for the Russians. Never used by Americans.
@@thatguy7085 that's my point
It was a P63 King Cobra not a Spitfire.