ECHO24

I don't know if it is or isn't. There does appear to be a drone in some frames. I just posted it because this is not good news now that we are tied to drones.
https://eurasiantimes.com/mid-air-ho...cobra-collide/

A few days ago Politico ran a story about hundreds of DJI drones being spotted around the White House and surrounding restricted areas. They have some expert talking about how easy it is to hack geofencing. If you know Politico the purpose could very well be a psy-op. The point is it's bad news for us even if these stories are spooled-up and exaggerated for propaganda purposes.
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/1...enate-00070591

Hydro Junkie

Not buying it. Politico is a seriously left wing publication and we all know the left will do anything to get and/or keep in power. That dark spot in the video could be a drone, but it could also be a bird, something on the camera lens, something added after the fact to change the story or even a UFO. The only ones that would know that would be the P-63 pilot, the guy that is flying the possible drone or doctored the video. We all know the P-63 pilot won't be talking and, if it was a drone, the person flying it won't ever say anything. I'm seriously doubting it's a drone since the P-63 was built to take damage and be agile in the air. If it was a drone, it might have dented the aircraft's skin but, at the same time, what I noticed is how thick the aircraft's prop is shown to be after supposedly hitting the drone. It looks to me like a hand drawn line, not the shape of an aircraft prop and that tells me the video has been doctored

scale only 4 me

My Feedback: (158)

Neither a bird or a toy drone is going to cause a P-63 to alter it's course in any drastic way to "cause" that collision,, that was bad Piloting to allow the B-17 to enter his blind spot

Stay of the CT web sites man,, LOL

ElectriMan

In this video starting at 2:33 Dan Gryder refutes the drone claim.

aymodeler

My Feedback: (3)

This video provides a pretty clear analysis and an alternate video perspective that appears to show that the P-63 was off of its assigned track and was in a bank trying to correct, which put the B-17 into its blind spot. It does not appear to be in a stall or out of control, just in the wrong place. Regardless, it was a horrible accident.

ECHO24

The Politico article isn't about the airshow crash, it's about hundreds of Chinese (DJI) drones detected over the past 2 months over the White House and surrounding restricted airspace.

ECHO24

The P63 pitched down just before it struck the B17. Being that low the P63 would have plowed into the ground if it hadn't hit the B17. My reaction when I saw the original video(s) - Wow, did the guy take direct aim? However, the plane was in a steep bank and at a much higher stall speed. My guess is the pilot initially pulled up out of formation after something broke. The Twitter post in the Eurasion Times article is showing two clips. The object he claims is a drone is below and behind the P63 when it first pitches over. At the time there were 3 raw cell phone vides on YouTube. I don't see those now only news clips.
.

aymodeler

My Feedback: (3)

It is really hard to tell details from the videos, but one thing is pretty clear, the P-63 was not following the same track as the P-51s which were ahead of it in the fighter parade. We may never know why it was off that track, but before the supposed "drone strike" the P-63 was out of position. From the footage in the "drone strike" video, the P-51s seem to be flying almost directly overhead of the person taking the video, but the P-63 is traveling across that person's field of view. It appears that the P-51s completed their turns at a point further back in the circuit than the P-63 and were on a path that was roughly parallel to the that of the B-17. It's hard to tell but it also seems like the P-63 going faster than the Mustangs, which may be why it did not complete the turn on time and follow behind them. Why it was out of position is not clear, but it does not look like it as anything to do with whatever that spec on the footage might be.

ECHO24

The airshow crash is one of those with just enough information, none of it conclusive, to go on for days. Everyone with a keyboard is an expert air accident investigator so I knew that would get attention. I just wasn't counting on no one following the lead. It was to introduce the Politico article, "lawmakers briefed" on hundreds of Chines drones penetrating the restricted airspace over and around the White House. That's not good news for the RC flying hobby.

franklin_m

Yep. Does are a big risk from a critical infrastructure perspective. Hence the push from national security agencies in favor of remote ID.

ECHO24

That was fast. The NTSB preliminary report says the air boss called for the fighter and bomber formations to cross paths, bombers to the 1,000' spectator line. fighters to the 500' line, closer to the spectators. At the same time the 3 fighters were passing the bombers. The P63 pilot thought he had cleared the B17.