Understood.. however when you put something like that out there, you know how much it causes f16 to stir (as it has) especially when people have no idea the details of the EDV/dal flow and all they can do is ***** and speculate. Not trying to be an internet a-hole, but there's just some things that I will speak up about. Thanks.

How about the multiple posters claiming DEI?

Declining the flow is a bit of an eyebrow raiser in itself IMO. Why?

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

Only watched on my phone...

No flare, I think so three wheel sets hit at almost the same time. BB will confirm WoW times. Going to watch again to see the control see the surfaces.

Edit to add... There was a bounce and I thought I saw the right wing to dip. Can't tell the angle of the wind from the little bit of blowing snow in the video, but VASAviation had ATC saying it was from 270, or 40* off the right front. Could dip the wing a little, maybe. But that video looked smooth other than the pancake roll up ending

---

It looks like he landed first on the right wheel which then appears to collapse causing the wing strike and subsequent roll.

---

Right wheel first would be proper when crabbing into a crosswind. They were landing on 23 so a heading (within rounding) of 230*. THeir nose was pointed SW.

ATC in the Tower reported winds 270 at 23 gusting 33. So 270*, wind was coming from due West at 23 knots gusting to 33 knots.

IF this is sufficient to require significant crabbing you point the nose towards the wind and the strength of the wind keeps pushign you away so you're flying kinda sideways. If you've ever seen a crab walk sideways on the beach, hence the term; crabbing.

Just before touchdown they'll straighten out. But you keep the wingtip on the upwind side just a bit low to keep the wind on top of it. If the wind gets under that wing it can really lift that wing and roll the plane. So that could be why the right main would touch first.

Still gotta flare though. You're trading forward and downward velocity for increased drag with some extra lift to settle the plane gently.

Sidenote... Shorter runways they'll sometimes stick the plane in a little harder when you don't have that extra room to roll out. Longer runways pilots can trade some distance to make it smoother. Crosswinds of course just make it all more difficult.

I'll let one of the pilots here say how "severe" a wind at 40* off the nose is in terms of crabbing etc. 40* on a clock face would be at 1:30.

---

Good summary. I wonder if they had constant winds at or above reported, or a sustained gust and then lost it in the last ~50 feet? If that happened (big if, this is speculating) I'd think that's going to be a smidge bit of pilot error for riding so close to Vref with winds like that.


But yeah, looks like a gear collapsed with the right wing already dipped for the crosswind. So, already configured to "want" to roll right and, well... we see what happened. Yikes.

Not at all. Let's say your 60, top 15-20 in the company seniority wise, what benefit do you get leaving to only go back to the bottom of the seniority list and all that goes with that? Especially quality of life wise. DEI? That's just normal grumblings lol

Disclaimer.... I'm a Geologist.
Senority was one of my thoughts... Delta has some 57s and 67s but isn't a big chunk of their fleet Airbus? Are they still looking at Spirit or weren't they? So move from from the CRJ, re-type to the Airbus, then pick up all of the Spirit flight crews?

Now you're REALLY on the bottom of the seniority pile, especially on type.

That makes sense, is that the case here? With all the movement over the last decade it's hard to imagine too many 60 something's at regionals, but I don't have experience there. I only worked for endeavor for two days haha.

JetBlue was told no by the feds when they wanted spirit. Frontier has also expressed interest. I haven't heard anything about Delta going after Spirit

Just re-read a comment from an off TexAgs convo. Their thinking was if Spirit goes BU, Delta might make a bid for the planes but not the pilots. So no sonority issues there.

Undoes my whole earlier comment.

2 days?! Haha! Where are you now? Yeah, majority of everybody there 56 and older stayed mainly because they were at the top of the pay scale, did not want to switch bases, and would not qualify for Delta flight benefits after retirement since you need 15 years at Delta to qualify for them. And surprisingly, there's a couple guys I knew that wanted to stay there just because they liked it there. Wasn't what I wanted to do career wise so I was fortunate enough to get out of two years before my flow number came up but to each their own.

Finally the Blancolirio Update

SpiDer2008 said:

---

Not at all. Let's say your 60, top 15-20 in the company seniority wise, what benefit do you get leaving to only go back to the bottom of the seniority list and all that goes with that? Especially quality of life wise. DEI? That's just normal grumblings lol

---

Why have you eliminated DEI as a possible factor

No real smoking gun here. ADSB data shows a greater than 3% sink when he was over the threshold. No out of whack descent rates on final. Black boxes will have more detail.

He was a bit short on touchdown. Obviously hit hard enough the gear punched up through the wing/fuel tanks.

Juan says crosswind component based on avail info was around 14 kts. CRJ driver in comments (who actually flew this aircraft) said company rules was Vref +10 so they were over that.

Also interesting pilots noted that training limited the Type to Vref + 20 due to low wing design and wing proximity to ground. Definitely came into play as right wing tears away leaving left wing as only lift resulting in the flip. Actually good the right wing tore off since it was on fire.

Went back and looked again at the video, then compared it to Google Maps

Pilot put it on the numbers. Which is well short of the desired touchdown zone 1/3 of the way down the RW. The video is shot from behind the 23-05 hold line and you can read the markings on RW. YOu can also see the taxiway signage. As the CRJ touches down you can see it's in line with one of the distance markers. That sign is visible on Google Maps immediately opposite the runway numbers.

I think my initial commentary above holds, adding that as the R MLG collapsed the right wing tip touched and Blancolirio's commentary that the left wing was still producing lift (unbalanced at this point) causing the roll along the longitudinal axis of the plane. Somewhere in this sequence tip touch with subsequent loss of air under the wing, unbalanced lift, roll wing break-off... Fuel leak and fire.

Any yaw to the right was minimal I believe now.

The runway numbers are short of the touchdown zone but not by much. The touchdown zone starts 500ft down the runway, not one third of the way down. You're supposed to land no further than 3000ft or 1/3rd of the runway, whichever is shorter (unless landing performance/stopping margin dictates something more restrictive). Runway 23 is 11,120ft so a third down the runway is too far.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

Finally the Blancolirio Update

---

lol "you can always go around. You can even go around after you hit the runway. But probably not advisable if you're missing a wing."

They got a great PR angle right now. "We crash safer" is significant these days.

I personally like reading the Aviation Herald.

https://avherald.com/h?article=52439b47&opt=0

Generally some good comments with decent knowledge.

My 0.02 as a non-current ASEL certificate holder -
Displaced threshold and ice / snow covered runway. PIC thought he/she/it was further down the runway with high crosswind. Hence no flare. Time will tell.

gkaggie08 said:

---

Deerdude said:

---

They got a great PR angle right now. "We crash safer" is significant these days.

---

Nobody can roll their eyes when people clap after a successful plane landing anymore

---

Yeah they can.

There are some 45,000 flights per day in the US. Not all are airlines, but the vast majority are. In the three weeks since the crash in DC, there have been what, four major incidents?

4 out of 945,000 flights in those three weeks.

99.99957% success rate

&ct=g

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

Finally the Blancolirio Update

---

He pointed out that the left wing was still creating lift. That explains why it rolled over so easily.

From your grandmother's Facebook Feed

Apparently the only cockpit this guy has actually been in was a porno

Yes, its fake, in case anyone's unsure

Thanks?

The Kraken said:

---

sts7049 said:

---

will have to see, but a microburst or downdraft of wind could certainly have created a hard landing. that wouldn't be all on the pilots.

the new twitter video out though certainly looks like a hard landing which collapses the gear. super fortunate that everyone got out of this, and a good reminder to keep yourself buckled up tight!

---

I can't imagine a downdraft/microburst in those weather conditions in the last video. The cockpit voice and data recorders will be interesting to analyze.

Also interesting that the person in the right hand seat in the jet holding short recorded that landing.

---

yeah, after watching blancolirio's update it seems much more plausible the opposite - they perhaps didn't set the proper speed to account for the loss of wind gust. his point also about blowing snow could support why they didn't flare, it might have accounted for a momentary distraction or loss of orientation.

Not the best video angle, however it appears to me that they thought they were higher than they actually were and why the right wing was too low and the absence of flare.

The pilot's name is going to come out, and Delta is just going to draw more attention to it by delaying this information from the public. Pretty silly.

Jonathan Simpson was mistakenly identified as the pilot of Delta Flight 4819, which crash-landed in Toronto, Canada. The confusion arose from a viral post on X (formerly Twitter) that featured an AI-generated image of adult film star Johnny Sins in a Delta pilot's uniform,…

— King Stud (@Nevermind_Incog) February 19, 2025

GAC06 said:

---

Thanks?

---

1) I found t amusing

2) I figured it would get out there, and some might believe it

3) A few posts down confirms this misinformation was gaining traction

The longer Delta stays quiet about who flipped their plane, the worse this gets https://t.co/fJLPAGHmCA

— DC_Draino (@DC_Draino) February 19, 2025

This look legit or nah?

If the pilot got an ATP a month ago, that means they have had extensive training, plus a total of 1,500 hours as pilot in command of an airplane.

An airline transport rating is after you have been a student pilot, private pilot, commercial pilot, and have gotten ratings to fly on instruments and with multiple engines.

There may be some waivers and lower requirements, but those are the general rules.

It's not like they never saw an airplane until last week, and they are now flying an airliner.

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

The longer Delta stays quiet about who flipped their plane, the worse this gets https://t.co/fJLPAGHmCA

— DC_Draino (@DC_Draino) February 19, 2025

This look legit or nah?

---

It looks like DC Draino is trying to create the narrative of a conspiracy/coverup.

People like him live to push narratives (in this case he is going for "muh, DEI" one and Delta is trying to hide it) to get the likes and retweets. (He put out plenty of lies and half truth during the campaign, mostly about DeSantis.)

We saw the same thing with the DCA crash. People screaming coverup when the military waited an extra day to identify the other Blackhawk pilot. There was no coverup; simply the family asked for an extra day before making her name public.

Too many people now live to be fed their daily dose of outrage, and this is true for both the left and right. There is an entire industry on social media which exists simply to feed that outrage.

Even if the CRJ pilot was new, that does not mean unqualified to fly the plane. It means less experienced and the real mistake would be by the other pilot for allowing her to land the plane in such poor weather conditions, especially if she hadn't done so before.