Apache Midair Alaska
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
Apache Midair Alaska
https://apnews.com/article/us-army-h...33a0e4c1958f1b
2 US Army helicopters crash in Alaska, killing 3 soldiers
JOINT BASE ELMENDORF-RICHARDSON, Alaska (AP) — Two U.S. Army helicopters collided and crashed Thursday in Alaska while returning from a training flight, killing three soldiers and injuring a fourth.
Two of the soldiers died at the scene of the crash near Healy, Alaska, and a third died on the way to a hospital in Fairbanks. A fourth soldier was being treated at a hospital for injuries, the Army said in a statement.
The names of those killed were being withheld until relatives could be notified, the Army said.
Each AH-64 Apache helicopter was carrying two people at the time of the crash, John Pennell, a spokesperson for the U.S. Army Alaska, said earlier Thursday.
The helicopters were from the 1st Attack Battalion, 25th Aviation Regiment at Fort Wainwright, based near Fairbanks.
“This is an incredible loss for these soldiers’ families, their fellow soldiers, and for the division,” Maj. Gen. Brian Eifler, commanding general of the 11th Airborne Division, said in the Army statement. “Our hearts and prayers go out to their families, friends and loved ones, and we are making the full resources of the Army available to support them.”
The Army said the cause of the crash was under investigation and more details would be released when they become available.….
2 US Army helicopters crash in Alaska, killing 3 soldiers
JOINT BASE ELMENDORF-RICHARDSON, Alaska (AP) — Two U.S. Army helicopters collided and crashed Thursday in Alaska while returning from a training flight, killing three soldiers and injuring a fourth.
Two of the soldiers died at the scene of the crash near Healy, Alaska, and a third died on the way to a hospital in Fairbanks. A fourth soldier was being treated at a hospital for injuries, the Army said in a statement.
The names of those killed were being withheld until relatives could be notified, the Army said.
Each AH-64 Apache helicopter was carrying two people at the time of the crash, John Pennell, a spokesperson for the U.S. Army Alaska, said earlier Thursday.
The helicopters were from the 1st Attack Battalion, 25th Aviation Regiment at Fort Wainwright, based near Fairbanks.
“This is an incredible loss for these soldiers’ families, their fellow soldiers, and for the division,” Maj. Gen. Brian Eifler, commanding general of the 11th Airborne Division, said in the Army statement. “Our hearts and prayers go out to their families, friends and loved ones, and we are making the full resources of the Army available to support them.”
The Army said the cause of the crash was under investigation and more details would be released when they become available.….
Top Answer
2nd May 2023, 11:51
If you experience a mid-air Collision while flying a helicopter....and survive....there is no reason for you to ever buy a Lottery Ticket as you have used up all of the Luck owed you in Life in one fell swoop!
Well the chance is inevitably higher due to the fact that military rarely flies alone…. On top of that while flying with 2, 4 or more, the focus is mostly on the ground, especially with attack helos. Add to that the high mission equipment workload in the cockpit and accidents happen. 😞 R.I.P.
Army stand down for non critical missions
CNN) — The chief of staff of the US Army has grounded all Army aviators not involved in critical missions following two recent helicopter crashes that left 12 soldiers dead.
The order from Army Chief of Staff James McConville grounds the aviators “until they complete the required training,” according to the Army.The safety of our aviators is our top priority, and this stand down is an important step to make certain we are doing everything possible to prevent accidents and protect our personnel,” McConville said in a statement.
Army pilots, at McConville’s direction, “will focus on safety and training protocols to ensure our pilots and crews have the knowledge, training and awareness to safely complete their assigned mission.”
The safety stand down comes after Thursday’s mid-air collision of two AH-64 Apache helicopters near Fort Wainwright, Alaska, that killed three soldiers and wounded another.
Last month, nine soldiers were killed when two HH-60 Blackhawks collided during routine night training near Fort Campbell, Kentucky.
The incidents are under investigation, according to the Army, but “there is no indication of any pattern” between the two.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 426 Likes
on
225 Posts
A tragic accident.
In my experience, close formation, at least in daylight, can surprisingly be less risky than a wider tactical formation.
The former leaves the crew in no doubt of the proximity of the other/s and requires full concentration on it. The formation leader takes much of the responsibility for terrain clearance and the radio. It has little practical use in a battle situation.
Tac formation allows more freedom of movement and each aircraft can move around to some extent and individual crews become fully responsible for terrain clearance and lookout for other aircraft, ground threats etc etc. One can temporarily lose contact and awareness regarding the exact proximity of others, especially during or after a turn, where crossovers from one side to the other of the leader may be required.
I recall one instance where I was leading a low level tactical formation in radio silence when another, identical type suddenly appeared and crossed from left to right ahead of us and I had to take very rapid avoiding action. When we had recovered our composure we realised it was our formation number two! There but by the grace of God….
In my experience, close formation, at least in daylight, can surprisingly be less risky than a wider tactical formation.
The former leaves the crew in no doubt of the proximity of the other/s and requires full concentration on it. The formation leader takes much of the responsibility for terrain clearance and the radio. It has little practical use in a battle situation.
Tac formation allows more freedom of movement and each aircraft can move around to some extent and individual crews become fully responsible for terrain clearance and lookout for other aircraft, ground threats etc etc. One can temporarily lose contact and awareness regarding the exact proximity of others, especially during or after a turn, where crossovers from one side to the other of the leader may be required.
I recall one instance where I was leading a low level tactical formation in radio silence when another, identical type suddenly appeared and crossed from left to right ahead of us and I had to take very rapid avoiding action. When we had recovered our composure we realised it was our formation number two! There but by the grace of God….
Well the chance is inevitably higher due to the fact that military rarely flies alone…. On top of that while flying with 2, 4 or more, the focus is mostly on the ground, especially with attack helos. Add to that the high mission equipment workload in the cockpit and accidents happen. 😞 R.I.P.
In this case, their focus on the ground is at the same level as any other type of helicopter flying back to base.
Anyway, this is getting off topic.
Grounding all Pilots who are not engaged in "critical missions"....GenGen has found a way to prevent flying accidents....stop flying.
Sit in Ops and read SOP's and study Regulations and Manuals.....yep....that is the way to prevent accidents sure enough.
Megan....define "Close Formation"?
Shy has a point....if you fly close enough you. have to look at the other aircraft continuously.....odds are you will not lose track of those aircraft.
Lose all notion of where you are perhaps but at least you are in good company.
Now if another formation attempts to occupy the same exact airspace you are.....bad things might happen.
Sit in Ops and read SOP's and study Regulations and Manuals.....yep....that is the way to prevent accidents sure enough.
Megan....define "Close Formation"?
Shy has a point....if you fly close enough you. have to look at the other aircraft continuously.....odds are you will not lose track of those aircraft.
Lose all notion of where you are perhaps but at least you are in good company.
Now if another formation attempts to occupy the same exact airspace you are.....bad things might happen.
Army pilots, at McConville’s direction, “will focus on safety and training protocols to ensure our pilots and crews have the knowledge, training and awareness to safely complete their assigned mission.”
Much like finding yourself in a hole and realising you need to stop digging.
I assume that the AH64 doesn't have TCAS..
read this post on another site ref the 64 midair, thought they provided some insight to contributing but not the cause possibility:
My resignation letter when I quit working at Rucker (Novosel) in 2019 stated how the Army will see a rise in incidents and accidents when that current Lakota program generation makes PIC (I said 3-6 years from then).
The program doesn't teach competency, everyone gets an A, and over-reliance on automated systems. It was HOW things were being taught; not WHAT was being taught. All fixable issues with a simple POI changes.
When that generation of students also reaches the 1000hr mark the accident rates will be worse than prior 1000hr mark students because this generation is even more complacent and over-reliant on systems to fly the machine.
The Aviate, Navigate, Communicate skills aren't being focused on enough. More effort spent on understanding upper modes and the G430 than head outside the cockpit, power management, and stick/rudder skills.
Will be interesting to see if these pilots were also primarily CW2's. Mid-airs can/do happen whether due to tactical flying loss of situational awareness or focus on systems inside loss of situational awareness. In this case, rank wouldn't really matter.
I'll just be extra sad if it's young guys as the contributing factors about how hey were trained only stacks things against them.
Rucker buddies have confirmed they've taken one step forward in some aspects of fixing the program there but 2 steps back in others. Really sad as we trained highly competent guys there for years then it was an obvious drop when they re-wrote the program when they got the Lakota.
My resignation letter when I quit working at Rucker (Novosel) in 2019 stated how the Army will see a rise in incidents and accidents when that current Lakota program generation makes PIC (I said 3-6 years from then).
The program doesn't teach competency, everyone gets an A, and over-reliance on automated systems. It was HOW things were being taught; not WHAT was being taught. All fixable issues with a simple POI changes.
When that generation of students also reaches the 1000hr mark the accident rates will be worse than prior 1000hr mark students because this generation is even more complacent and over-reliant on systems to fly the machine.
The Aviate, Navigate, Communicate skills aren't being focused on enough. More effort spent on understanding upper modes and the G430 than head outside the cockpit, power management, and stick/rudder skills.
Will be interesting to see if these pilots were also primarily CW2's. Mid-airs can/do happen whether due to tactical flying loss of situational awareness or focus on systems inside loss of situational awareness. In this case, rank wouldn't really matter.
I'll just be extra sad if it's young guys as the contributing factors about how hey were trained only stacks things against them.
Rucker buddies have confirmed they've taken one step forward in some aspects of fixing the program there but 2 steps back in others. Really sad as we trained highly competent guys there for years then it was an obvious drop when they re-wrote the program when they got the Lakota.
Won't soon forget my near midair during an IP low level form qual in NW FL. We were supposed to be combat cruise and no less than 3 rotor diameter. I was engrossed in the map and the Stan IPs were trying to give us a good view of a dificult checkpoint at 200'. My SIP was closer to parade than cruise. Very bad. A rapid turn by lead resulted in overlapping rotors. Was certain for that fraction of seconds we would hit and thinking hope this doesn't hurt. After a long silence he managed a "really sorry about that".
"...My resignation letter when I quit working at Rucker (Novosel) in 2019 stated how the Army will see a rise in incidents and accidents when that current Lakota program generation makes PIC (I said 3-6 years from then).
The program doesn't teach competency, everyone gets an A, and over-reliance on automated systems. It was HOW things were being taught; not WHAT was being taught. All fixable issues with a simple POI changes.
When that generation of students also reaches the 1000hr mark the accident rates will be worse than prior 1000hr mark students because this generation is even more complacent and over-reliant on systems to fly the machine.
The Aviate, Navigate, Communicate skills aren't being focused on enough. More effort spent on understanding upper modes and the G430 than head outside the cockpit, power management, and stick/rudder skills.
Rucker buddies have confirmed they've taken one step forward in some aspects of fixing the program there but 2 steps back in others. Really sad as we trained highly competent guys there for years then it was an obvious drop when they re-wrote the program when they got the Lakota.
The Lakota is a nice chopper, it is heavy on systems automation but it reflects the operational equipment that the guys n girls are going to go work on. Helicopters of any level of complexity will always have bits of the envelope where the skill of the driver will be a major factor.
Midair accidents happen, they did in the past, they do now, and they will in the future. Tactical ops in any type of formation has an elevated risk, and most of the time the crews cope well. Losses are regrettable, but they are not going away anytime soon where there is a need for more than one machine in the same airspace at one time. The Blackhawk and the Apache MAC's do not seem to be out of the statistical rate of events, but I haven't reviewed those for a few years. These accidents are high profile, but I doubt that they are statistically significant to indicating a trend. A safety stand down is a valid command response to concerns, whether the stats underpin a real or a perceived problem.
I've spent that last month surrounded by MV-22's and various other types, and as a casual interested observer, the crews are doing a pretty professional job IMHO. We should appreciate what they do as much as be critical of the mishap causes, that would seem to be balanced.
Seems some inter-mixing of issues going on here.
Two mid-air collisions within a short period of time thousands of miles apart involving two very different types of aircraft does not a "Trend"....make.
Invoking possible latent problems with the advent of a new more complex type for training without any empirical evidence to substantiate that also seems a stretch.
What should be part of the discussion is what similarities were there in the two accidents and then assess those for how that might have been caused by the current tactic,,training (both in the particular aircraft and in flight operations at night.
Some thought might be afforded how training areas are controlled re traffic separation and spacing.
It also goes without saying that the individuals involved in these tragedies and their level of training, currency, and proficiency should be reviewed.
Harken back to the mid-air collision of two USMC CH-53's off of Hawaii and what the results of that Investigation revealed.
Any. commonality between that one a nd these two beyond all three involved collisions between the same type of helicopter (meaning two 53's, two UH-60's, and two 64's) colliding during training sorties.
Did the Safety Stand Down result in concerns of the good folks at the level of where the rubber hits the road make it to the top of the Totem Pole or did the NIH Defense (Not Invented Here) stop those concerns being heard at the most senior levels?
Two mid-air collisions within a short period of time thousands of miles apart involving two very different types of aircraft does not a "Trend"....make.
Invoking possible latent problems with the advent of a new more complex type for training without any empirical evidence to substantiate that also seems a stretch.
What should be part of the discussion is what similarities were there in the two accidents and then assess those for how that might have been caused by the current tactic,,training (both in the particular aircraft and in flight operations at night.
Some thought might be afforded how training areas are controlled re traffic separation and spacing.
It also goes without saying that the individuals involved in these tragedies and their level of training, currency, and proficiency should be reviewed.
Harken back to the mid-air collision of two USMC CH-53's off of Hawaii and what the results of that Investigation revealed.
Any. commonality between that one a nd these two beyond all three involved collisions between the same type of helicopter (meaning two 53's, two UH-60's, and two 64's) colliding during training sorties.
Did the Safety Stand Down result in concerns of the good folks at the level of where the rubber hits the road make it to the top of the Totem Pole or did the NIH Defense (Not Invented Here) stop those concerns being heard at the most senior levels?
Sunday statement from U.S. Army Alaska spokesman seems to be removing weather as a factor in the crash; i.e., weather was “calm” at the time of the crash.
I’ve yet to see a time-of-day for the crash. Anyone?
I’ve yet to see a time-of-day for the crash. Anyone?