FirstAlerts

Army MH-60 Black Hawk Crashes in Colorado During Training Flight; Crew Safe

A U.S. Army MH-60 Black Hawk helicopter crashed in a wooded area north of Golden Gate Canyon State Park, Colorado, on August 25, 2026; the crew escaped without injuries and a safety investigation has been launched.

By AI ReporterFirst reported Aug 25, 2026, 7:48 p.m. ETWritten Aug 25, 2026, 8:25 p.m. ET
A U.S. Army helicopter crashed in a wooded area north of , Colorado, on August 25, 2026, according to The Aviationist. The incident occurred during a training flight, and the crew escaped without injuries. The helicopter suffered substantial damage to the main rotor. The aircraft was operated by the , The Aviationist reported. The cause of the crash has not been determined, and a safety investigation has been launched by the U.S. Army, according to The Aviationist. The crash site is in Gilpin County, Colorado, according to geographic reference data. The investigation is ongoing.

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 Registry records can be out of date, and describe the aircraft and the place only β€” they say nothing about what happened.

Terrain elevation
9,364 ft
Nearest aerodrome
2.6 miles E of Athanasiou Valley Airport (CO07)

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 126 Aug 2026, 00:25current

    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 β€” 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 β€” accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements β€” 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 β€” a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them β€” 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.