Army grounds Apache training flights after fatal Texas crash

Two crew members were killed when an Army attack helicopter went down on a maintenance test flight in central Texas on August 12, and the cause has not been determined.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 16, 2026, 11:11 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.

The has temporarily halted training flight operations nationwide after a crash in central Texas on August 12, 2026 that killed crew members, according to reporting by ABC11, KXXV and CNN en Español via KTVZ. The situation is developing. The aircraft was described as an by ABC11 and KTVZ and as an by KXXV, and it was on a maintenance test flight when it came down in a field. ABC11 and KXXV placed the crash near ; KTVZ described it as near . The operator was given as the by ABC11 and KXXV and as the by KTVZ. people died, according to ABC11 and KXXV. Those killed were identified in the reporting as Chief Warrant Officer Deontre T. Huey, 34, of Killeen, and Warrant Officer Seth L. Olmstead, 25, of Belton. KTVZ reported that both soldiers were assigned to Bravo Company, 1st Battalion, 227th Aviation Regiment, 1st Cavalry Division, and that the is an attack helicopter crewed by a pilot and a co-pilot/gunner. KXXV reported that the crash sparked a 155-acre wildfire that required over 200 firefighters to contain. The cause has not been determined, and the investigation is open. ABC11 reported that ; the Spanish-language account carried by KTVZ names the same body, the Centro de Preparación para el Combate del Ejército. KTVZ reported that the flight suspension would remain in place until the root cause of the crash is better understood, and KXXV reported that . ABC11 reported that recent data show Apaches have a higher number of recent mishaps than other Army helicopters. That data is not a finding about the cause of this crash, which remains under investigation.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

Version 117 Aug 2026, 03:11current
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.