DALLAS — Now that the National Transportation Safety Board has released its preliminary report on the deadly Nov. 12 collision between World War II-era aircraft at Dallas Executive Airport, investigators will work diligently to pin down what exactly went wrong during the fateful air show that ended in the deaths of six people.
The NTSB report, published Wednesday, confirmed what was shown in several videos taken by spectators: A Bell P-63F Kingcobra fighter banked into a single-file bomber formation, colliding with a Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress and sending both aircraft plummeting to the ground. Six people — the lone pilot in the P-63 and five people in the B-17 — were killed. Nobody on the ground was injured.
The Commemorative Air Force, which owned the planes involved in the crash, identified those who died as Terry Barker, Leonard “Len” Root, Curtis “Curt” Rowe, Craig Hutain, Dan Ragan and Kevin “K5″ Michels
The report doesn’t answer the crucial question: What caused the P-63 to cross paths, and ultimately collide with, the bomber? That will likely be addressed in the agency’s final report, which may take an additional year to complete.
“The NTSB is so good, whether they have to build a replica, go into a live airplane, or use computer analysis, they’re going to put this thing together,” said Richard J. Levy, a Flower-Mound based pilot with more than four decades of experience who has served as a crash-analysis expert witness. Levy is not involved with the Dallas investigation.
The “question of the century,” Levy said, is whether the pilot of the P-63 was able to see the B-17 as he angled into his turn.
Other pilots have flagged issues with visibility out of the P-63 cockpit.
A video posted to YouTube in 2020 shows a tour of the same P-63 involved in last month’s collision. The video shows a Commemorative Air Force pilot giving a tour of the plane before eventually sitting in the pilot’s seat.
“The visibility is not as nice as, say for instance, a Mustang,” the pilot said, referencing the popular P-51 Mustang that was widely used by American aviators during World War II and the Korean War.
“You’ve got a lot of framework around here, you’ve got a thick windshield,” the CAF pilot said, indicating two thick, metal pieces of frame on either side of the pilot’s line of sight.
After reviewing the YouTube video, Levy said he saw positive and negative aspects of a pilot’s visibility out of the P-63. Many fighter planes from the era, including the P-51 Mustang, had their wings situated directly under the cockpit, which would obstruct a pilot’s view looking down. The wings of a P-63 are set farther back on the frame of the plane, allowing a pilot to more easily see what’s below.
But the architecture of the framework around the cockpit is “concerning,” Levy said. “That could be a factor, with all that metal,” Levy said. “It really could.”
According to the preliminary report, the P-63 was one of three planes taking part in a fighter formation, while the B-17 was one of five bombers. The air boss, who coordinates the show, ordered both formations to fly southwest of the airport’s runway before returning toward the display area where spectators were watching.
The fighters were told to transition to a single-file trail formation, maneuver in front of the bomber formation, and fly down a line about 500 feet away from the spectators. The bombers were told to fly down a line about 1,000 feet away from the spectators. The report doesn’t mention whether either plane was out of its assigned place.
The report said there were no “altitude deconflictions” — a discussion of coordination and movements between different aircraft sharing the same space meant to reduce the chance of a collision — before or during the show. It’s not clear whether those discussions are standard for an air show; the air boss who oversaw the Wings Over Dallas show did not respond to an email seeking comment.
John Cudahy, the president and CEO of the International Council of Air Shows, a trade group that sets standards for the performances, said Thursday “each show works under direction and circumstances that are unique to that show.”
“The people involved with that show had a morning debrief as they are obligated to under FAA policy,” Cudahy said. “The NTSB will investigate that and determine what if anything might be changed or improved to avoid similar instances in the future.”
“What I have learned is that the NTSB exists for a reason,” Cudahy added. “The resources and expertise they have to conduct an investigation to determine root causes are quite robust. We have learned that it is best to take their lead, to work closely with them to help them do their job and listen closely to the recommendations when they make them.”
Both planes were equipped with ADS-B technology that transmits information such as the aircraft’s speed and altitude relative to other airplanes. But neither plane was equipped with a flight-data recorder. That recorder, commonly known as a “black box,” would have included hundreds of other parameters. Flight-data recorders are required in commercial flights, Levy said, but they were not widely available in the 1940s, when both planes involved in last month’s crash were manufactured.
Levy said the communications between the air boss and pilots will be a central focus of the NTSB investigation. “People will be interviewed and interviewed and interviewed to get a good sense of what was discussed pre-flight.” Levy said the agency might hold formal hearings to discuss the crash and interview witnesses.
“They take their time, but for good reason,” he said.
