FirstAlerts
Plane CrashesVersion 5

Two Army Aviators Killed in AH-64 Apache Crash Near Salado, Texas

The Army identified the soldiers killed in the August 12 crash, which it says occurred during a maintenance test; the cause has not been determined.

By AI ReporterFirst reported Aug 14, 2026, 11:30 a.m. ETUpdated Aug 14, 2026, 2:10 p.m. ET
Developing

This is a developing story. Details reported early are provisional and are frequently revised. Where sources disagree, both readings are given.

aviators were killed when an helicopter crashed near , on August 12, 2026, at , according to reporting by Yahoo News, WFTV, KIRO 7, WSOC-TV and Action News Jax. The cause has not been determined. The Army identified those killed as Chief Warrant Officer Deontre T. Huey, 34, and Warrant Officer Seth L. Olmstead, 25, the outlets reported. Huey joined the Army in February 2014 as a motor transport operator, with a home of record of Killeen, Texas. Olmstead joined in January 2023 as a warrant officer candidate, with a home of record of Belton, Texas. Both were part of Bravo Company, 1st Battalion, 227th Aviation Regiment, 1st Air Cavalry Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division. The Army is calling the crash a "mishap." The crash occurred during a maintenance test, according to the reporting, and sparked a wildfire that burned about 155 acres, which Yahoo News attributed to KHOU. The phase of flight has not been established. A team from — described by WFTV, KIRO 7, WSOC-TV and Action News Jax as the center leading the investigation, and by Yahoo News as the Army saying a team from the center is leading an investigation. No cause has been stated. The specific aircraft involved has not been identified. Registry records list one aircraft under the as operator; that is not an identification of the helicopter in this crash. Weather observations recorded at Skylark Field (KILE), 13.1 miles away and 16 minutes from the reported time of the crash, showed wind from 170 degrees at 10 knots, visibility 10 statute miles, clear skies and a temperature of 95°F. The reading is an instrument measurement and is not a stated factor in the crash. Geographic reference data places Salado in Bell County, Texas, at a settlement elevation of 614 feet, 1.8 miles north of Salado Airport (73TA).

Was this report accurate and useful?

Reference data

From aircraft and geographic registries, not from the news sources. Registry records can be out of date, and describe the aircraft and the place only — they say nothing about what happened.

Terrain elevation
614 ft
Nearest aerodrome
1.8 miles N of Salado Airport (73TA)

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 514 Aug 2026, 18:10current

    Added the soldiers' full unit designation (1st Cavalry Division) and credited WSOC-TV among the reporting outlets.

  2. Version 414 Aug 2026, 17:39

    Corrected the operator fleet figure to one aircraft on the registry under the U.S. Army (previously three) and added KIRO 7 to the attributed outlets.

  3. Version 314 Aug 2026, 17:08

    Added Action News Jax attribution, credited KHOU for the wildfire acreage, and corrected Salado's position relative to Salado Airport to 1.8 miles north.

  4. Version 214 Aug 2026, 16:59

    Added aircraft type (AH-64 Apache), the soldiers' unit, the Army's "mishap" wording, the maintenance test flight, the 155-acre wildfire, and framed the investigation attribution as a sourced range; dropped the developing-situation line.

  5. Version 114 Aug 2026, 16:54

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.