NTSB issues it's preliminary report on the Dallas air show crash and this video explains what happened.


www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRVqg-pCb6o

No mention of any Drone.....The New Air Boss screwed up royaly and it cost Six lives.

Just another youtube 'EXPERT" .... waiting for MS Cleo to chime in on it.

Lack of maneuver communication prior to execution, so far. I'll wait until the final report is issued, but that is from their preliminary report.

In the picture that showed the aircraft from the front there is an image below the B-17 that almost looks like a drone at first glance. But, because the image is taken from a long distance, the "drone" is blurry and out of focus. But, I believe it is actually a B-25 that is further behind the B-17.

DaveRS23……why did you state a drone caused this crash in the title of your thread?

No mention of a drone that I see.

The NTSB report said nothing about any drone.

Are Moparts members using "clickbait" titles on their posts now?

The report is out. It was the air boss that changed the lanes of flight for the fighters and bombers while the show was going on, causing the two to collide as they went to their new positions.

The pilot of the smaller plane failed. He disregarded or forgot flight safety rules in regards to maintaining visual of planes and maneuvering.

He lost track of the bomber when banking as it got lost under his wing and due to momentum slid into the bomber. He should have passed BELOW the B17 and thus be able to maintain visual of the plane.

That fighter planes cockpit is way forward of the wings, no way that they could or would create a blind spot in front of the pilot or even looking up to 120 degrees to the rear of the pilot
Sometimes things happen that have no reasonable explanation

The video gives a good explanation of how and why this happed. Changing the designated flight path causing the aircraft to cross paths with no altitude separation looks to me to be the root cause of this unfortunate accident. The air boss definitely screwed up big time.

No window on the floor of the cockpit.

He was BANKING, the B-17 was directly under the fighter's wings and the pilot never saw him. Inertia from the bank slid him right in.

https://youtu.be/IRVqg-pCb6o?t=567

The guy even states in the video the pilot was banking into the turn and could not see the B17

No.

This early report may have reached a premature conclusion. And after having read several opinions, it looks like I conflated the two theories.

www.planeandpilotmag.com/news/the-l...startling-change-in-flight-path-of-p-63/

I apologize for the confusion if it does turn out that a drone played no role in this disaster.

Can you change the title or edit ?

I didn't think that I could after this length of time, but there it is.

Thank you for the suggestion.

And again, sorry for the mistake.

Maybe you should look at the report instead of blaming it on the smaller planes pilot. A lot of people had this same opinion but the facts are clear in the report.


Edit: I see you posted the video that explained everything but still are blaming the pilot because he was going where they told him to go?

Even if the air boss changed the pattern it's up to the pilot to maintain visual contact. He didn't.

Wow.

Exactly

This makes 2 in every crowd

Correct.

He disregarded flight safety rules which mandate maintaining visual contact.

Interesting how folks with little to no aviation experience or actually having flown in an air show are still placing blame on the small plane pilot even after reading the report.

I'm pretty sure the rules around airport airspace dictate you fly wherever your air traffic controller tells you to.

According to the report the SOP for airshows was not followed by the Air Boss. Bombers are supposed to maintain one lane, the fighters lane 500 feet further out with an altitude difference between the 2 lanes. Apparently the the bombers and fighters were directed to cross lanes and there was no altitude difference.

The only thing I find puzzling is why the pilots didn't question the lane change and altitude contrary to the flight plan. That being said I am assuming this wasn't everybody's first show.

Kevin

He disregarded flight safety rules which mandate maintaining visual contact during an event.

This take precedence over everything else.

.

Visual Flight Rules, see and avoid
I've had one close call while landing in the mid afternoon at my local uncontrolled airport, I was on short final (about 500 ft. to the runway and around 300 ft above the terrain when my wife saw another airplane beside us less than 20 ft. from my left wingtip at the same elevation trying to land at the same time. That runway is 50 ft wide and my airplane wingspan was 38 Ft without the tip tanks, I immediately started making a climbing right turn and started my go around, I got on the radio and ask him what his intention were. He landed and hid his plane in one of the hangars before I could land and have a discussion with him.
God was looking after me and my wife and him that day That could have been deadly for all of us, be careful and look all around you when driving, boating or any other type of transportation going faster than a slow walk

Exactly!

LOL.

The plane crashed into the B17, it was clearly the small planes fault.

Seriously. It's like you are sitting at a light and some rando just crashes into you.

The B17 WOULD HAVE BEEN FINE IF NOT CRASHED INTO by the other plane.

Okay now tell us about your aviation experience and how many flying hours you have. Just wondering. I have over 4500 hours accumulated in Air Force helicopters and C-130s. Much of it flying formation with other aircraft.

Common sense is dead.

The bomber was flying in a straight line.

The other plane crashed into it.

End of story.

In gdonovan's life, everything is so simple. Have you read any of his political posts?

Think of it this way; let's say that someone is approaching an intersection that has a traffic light and his light is green. And another car is approaching the intersection and his light is green also.

What you're saying is that whichever car happens to strike the other is at fault. Rather than placing the blame on the malfunctioning traffic light.

Interesting logic. As usual.