Defense & Military
Settlement Reached in 2021 Navy Helicopter Crash Lawsuit
Families of sailors killed in 2021 Navy helicopter crash settle lawsuit over design defects and maintenance issues with Sikorsky Aircraft.
On November 24, 2025, a significant legal development occurred regarding the tragic 2021 crash of a U.S. Navy MH-60S Sea Hawk helicopter. The families of three sailors who lost their lives in the incident reached a confidential settlement with Sikorsky Aircraft Corp., a Lockheed Martin company. This agreement resolves a lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, bringing a conclusion to the legal battle over allegations of design defects and negligence.
The lawsuit, originally filed in August 2023, centered on the mechanical failure that led to the loss of the aircraft, known by its call sign “Loosefoot 616.” The plaintiffs represented the estates of Petty Officer 2nd Class James Buriak, Petty Officer 2nd Class Sarah Burns, and Petty Officer 3rd Class Bailey Tucker. These sailors, along with Lt. Bradley Foster and Lt. Paul Fridley, perished when their helicopter experienced catastrophic vibrations and fell from the flight deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln into the Pacific Ocean.
This settlement marks the end of the civil litigation against the helicopter manufacturer for these specific families. While the financial terms remain undisclosed, the case has highlighted critical issues regarding military aircraft maintenance protocols, design safety, and the legal frameworks governing accidents at sea. We examine the details of the allegations, the technical findings of the Navy’s investigation, and the broader safety implications for the fleet.
The core of the plaintiffs’ case against Sikorsky Aircraft rested on the assertion that the MH-60S helicopter contained a design flaw within its hydraulic hose assembly. According to court documents, the families argued that the hydraulic damper hoses were positioned too close to the main rotor attachment point. This proximity, they alleged, made the components highly susceptible to damage during routine maintenance operations.
Legal representatives for the families, specifically attorneys from Pilot Law, P.C., contended that the manufacturer failed to warn operators of this vulnerability. The lawsuit claimed that the design allowed for the steel braids inside the hose to be flattened or crushed without leaving visible external signs of damage. Consequently, maintenance crews could not detect the structural compromise through standard visual inspections, creating a latent hazard that could lead to catastrophic failure during flight operations.
The complaint was filed under the Death on the High Seas Act (DOHSA), a federal statute from 1920 that governs civil recovery for deaths occurring beyond three nautical miles from the shore of the United States. The plaintiffs sought to hold the manufacturer accountable for what they described as a preventable defect that directly contributed to the fatal sequence of events on August 31, 2021.
The lawsuit argued that the design allowed damage to occur easily and that the steel braids inside the hose could be flattened without being visible during visual inspections.
A command investigation conducted by the U.S. Navy, released in 2022, largely corroborated the technical theories presented by the plaintiffs. The investigation identified the root cause of the crash as the in-flight failure of a main rotor damper hose. This failure resulted in a total loss of damping for the main rotor system. Upon landing on the flight deck, the aircraft immediately entered a state of violent “ground resonance”, severe lateral vibrations that caused the rotor blades to strike the deck and the aircraft to roll over into the sea.
The Navy’s inquiry pinpointed the likely mechanism of damage to the use of a specific maintenance tool known as a “spindle pry bar.” Investigators determined that if this tool was used incorrectly or without sufficient clearance, it could inadvertently kink or crush the damper hose. Because the internal damage was not visible to the naked eye, the compromised hose remained in service until it failed under the stress of operations. Following these findings, the Navy took immediate remedial action to prevent a recurrence. In late 2021, an “Interim Support Equipment Change” was issued, directing the modification of the spindle pry bar. A “hard stop” was added to the tool to physically prevent it from contacting the damper hose. Furthermore, a “Rapid Action Change” ordered the fleet-wide inspection and replacement of damper hoses. A 2022 memo signed by Vice Admiral Steve Koehler formally acknowledged that these modifications were necessary to prevent damage, validating the concerns regarding the interface between the maintenance tools and the aircraft’s design.
The resolution of this case draws attention to the legal complexities facing military families seeking redress for accidents at sea. Because the crash occurred approximately 60 nautical miles off the coast of San Diego, the case fell under the jurisdiction of the Death on the High Seas Act (DOHSA). Historically, DOHSA limits recovery strictly to “pecuniary loss,” which refers to the financial support the deceased would have provided to their dependents. It generally excludes damages for the families’ pain and suffering or the pre-death pain and suffering of the victims.
This legal limitation has been a subject of legislative debate. The “Fairness for Fallen Sailors Act,” introduced in the 2025-2026 Congress, aims to amend DOHSA to allow for non-pecuniary damages in non-commercial aviation accidents. While the bill had passed the House as of April 2025, it was still navigating the Senate at the time of this settlement. The existence of such legislation highlights the hurdles families face in securing what they view as comprehensive justice under current maritime law.
With the settlement now finalized, the civil litigation against Sikorsky regarding the “Loosefoot 616” crash is concluded for these plaintiffs. The case serves as a somber reminder of the critical importance of integrating human factors into aircraft design and the necessity of rigorous maintenance protocols. The modifications implemented by the Navy following the crash remain in effect, serving to protect current and future crews operating the MH-60S Sea Hawk.
Question: Who were the plaintiffs in the lawsuit against Sikorsky? Question: What was the technical cause of the crash? Question: What is the Death on the High Seas Act (DOHSA)?
Settlement Reached in Lawsuit Regarding Fatal 2021 Navy Helicopter Crash
Allegations of Design Flaws and Negligence
Investigation Findings and Technical Cause
Legal Context and Future Implications
FAQ
Answer: The lawsuit was filed by the families of Petty Officer 2nd Class James Buriak, Petty Officer 2nd Class Sarah Burns, and Petty Officer 3rd Class Bailey Tucker.
Answer: A U.S. Navy investigation determined the crash was caused by the failure of a main rotor damper hose, likely damaged during maintenance by a spindle pry bar, which led to severe vibrations upon landing.
Answer: DOHSA is a 1920 federal law that governs wrongful death claims occurring more than three nautical miles from U.S. shores, typically limiting recovery to financial (pecuniary) losses rather than pain and suffering.
Sources
Photo Credit: US Navy MC Seaman Marco Villasana
Defense & Military
Embraer KC-390 Successfully Completes Cold-Weather Tests in Sweden
Embraer’s KC-390 Millennium multi-mission jet completed cold-weather tests in Sweden, demonstrating rapid deployment and Arctic operational capability.
This article is based on an official press release from Embraer.
Embraer has successfully concluded an intensive cold-weather testing campaign for its KC-390 Millennium multi-mission airlift and tanker jet. The demonstrations took place at the Vidsel Test Range military facility in Sweden, showcasing the aircraft’s operational viability and resilience in extreme Arctic environments.
According to the official press release from Embraer, the campaign was specifically designed to validate the aircraft’s performance under severe winter conditions. A primary focus of the operation was to demonstrate the jet’s compatibility with Agile Combat Employment (ACE) concepts, which require rapid and flexible deployment capabilities.
As European nations increasingly prioritize logistical responsiveness in the High North, the successful trials of the KC-390 Millennium highlight its potential as a highly capable asset for modern military-aircraft operations in demanding climates.
During the testing at the Vidsel military facility, the KC-390 crew executed rapid engine and system startups despite the freezing temperatures. Following these quick starts, the aircraft performed short takeoffs and landings, a critical requirement for operating from austere or compromised runways in Arctic regions.
Embraer’s press release noted that the aircraft successfully demonstrated its capacity to load and deploy heavy military hardware rapidly. Specifically, the KC-390 handled SISU GTT military all-terrain vehicles while maintaining adequate cargo space for additional troops and essential equipment. This performance confirms the aircraft’s suitability for missions that demand high logistical responsiveness.
The ability to operate with high logistical flexibility is a cornerstone of the Agile Combat Employment doctrine, which emphasizes mobility, dispersion, and the rapid repositioning of allied forces. Embraer states that the KC-390 is fully compatible with these modern operational concepts.
“The KC-390 Millennium demonstrated once again its versatility and its ability to successfully perform the most demanding missions under the toughest conditions, all with 100% reliability. This next-generation aircraft, which is fully compatible with the Agile Combat Employment concept, represents an unbeatable combination for operations in Northern Europe and the Arctic,” said Bosco da Costa Junior, President and CEO, Embraer Defense & Security, in the company’s release.
We note that the successful cold-weather trials in Sweden represent a significant milestone for Embraer as it seeks to expand the KC-390’s footprint in the European defense market. With allied nations prioritizing Arctic readiness and flexible logistics, demonstrating 100% reliability in these specific conditions directly addresses the strategic requirements of Northern European air forces. The emphasis on ACE compatibility further aligns the aircraft with current Western military doctrines focused on survivability and rapid force projection. Engineered as a 21st-century medium multi-mission airlift and tanker jet, the KC-390 is designed to address both current and emerging threats. According to Embraer, it stands out as the most capable aircraft in its class, offering a blend of superior performance, cost efficiency, and operational flexibility.
Beyond heavy airlift and rapid troop deployment, the aircraft’s mission profiles include aerial refueling and rapid response operations across diverse and challenging environments.
The KC-390 Millennium is a medium multi-mission airlift and tanker jet designed and built by Embraer to perform complex missions, including aerial refueling and rapid troop deployment.
The demonstrations were conducted at the Vidsel Test Range military facility in Sweden.
During the campaign, the aircraft successfully loaded and deployed heavy vehicles, specifically SISU GTT military all-terrain vehicles, while retaining space for troops and additional equipment.
Cold-Weather Operations and Tactical Capabilities
Rapid Deployment in Arctic Conditions
Strategic Implications for Northern Europe
Supporting Agile Combat Employment
AirPro News analysis
About the KC-390 Millennium
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the KC-390 Millennium?
Where did the cold-weather testing take place?
What vehicles were deployed during the tests?
Sources
Photo Credit: Embraer
Defense & Military
Airbus Bird of Prey Drone Completes First Demo Flight in Germany
Airbus and Frankenburg Technologies demonstrate reusable Bird of Prey drone intercepting kamikaze drones with lightweight Mark I missiles in Germany.
This article is based on an official press release from Airbus.
Airbus Defence and Space has successfully conducted the maiden demonstration flight of its “Bird of Prey” uncrewed interceptor drone. According to a March 30, 2026, press release from the company, the test took place at a military training area in northern Germany, marking a significant milestone in counter-drone technology.
During a realistic mission scenario, the system autonomously searched for, detected, classified, and engaged a simulated medium-sized, one-way attack (kamikaze) drone. The successful interception was achieved using the newly integrated Mark I air-to-air missile, a lightweight weapon developed by Estonian defense tech startup Frankenburg Technologies.
This development highlights a rapid industry pivot toward cost-effective air defense solutions. As noted in the official announcement, the project moved from concept to flight in just nine months. The joint effort aims to provide armed forces with a reusable, highly mobile defense system capable of countering mass aerial threats at a sustainable cost.
The Bird of Prey is built upon a modified Airbus Do-DT25, a jet-powered aerial target drone originally developed in the early 2000s. According to the Airbus press release, the prototype features a wingspan of 2.5 meters, a length of 3.1 meters, and a maximum take-off weight of 160 kilograms. Supplementary industry data indicates that the underlying Do-DT25 platform can reach maximum speeds of 300 knots (555 km/h).
While the prototype carried four Mark I missiles during the recent test, Airbus states that the final operational version will be capable of carrying up to eight interceptors. Crucially, the platform is reusable; unlike traditional interceptors or kamikaze drones, the Bird of Prey fires its payload and returns to base. This design choice significantly reduces platform replacement costs and allows for multiple engagements per mission.
The Mark I missile, provided by Frankenburg Technologies, is billed as the lightest guided interceptor developed to date. The Airbus release notes it weighs less than 2 kilograms and measures 65 centimeters in length. Additional technical specifications from industry research reveal a 60-millimeter diameter, a solid-fuel rocket motor, and an electro-optical seeker equipped with both day and low-light capabilities.
The high-subsonic, fire-and-forget missile has an engagement range of up to 1.5 kilometers and can reach altitudes of 1,500 meters. It utilizes a 0.5-kilogram high-explosive fragmentation warhead paired with a proximity fuze, allowing it to neutralize targets at close range without requiring a direct hit. Frankenburg Technologies aims to offer the Mark I at roughly one-tenth the price of traditional short-range air defense (SHORAD) missiles. The proliferation of low-cost, one-way attack drones, such as those utilized extensively in recent Eastern European conflicts, has fundamentally altered modern air defense economics. Western militaries frequently rely on scarce, high-end surface-to-air missiles to neutralize cheap drones. For context, industry estimates place the cost of a conventional FIM-92 Stinger interceptor at approximately $500,000 per unit, creating an unsustainable economic imbalance when defending against drones that cost only a few thousand dollars.
“Against the current geopolitical and military backdrop, defending against kamikaze drones is a tactical priority that urgently needs to be tackled,” said Mike Schoellhorn, CEO of Airbus Defence and Space, in the company’s press release.
Frankenburg Technologies, founded in 2024 by Estonian entrepreneurs Taavi Madiberk and Marko Virkebau, aims to drastically lower the cost curve for air defense. The company is led by CEO Kusti Salm, former Permanent Secretary of the Estonian Ministry of Defence. According to recent financial reports, Frankenburg raised €30 million in February 2026 to establish two mass-production sites within the European Union, with an ambitious goal of producing over 100 missiles per day at each facility.
“This is a defining step for modern air defence,” stated Kusti Salm. “Together with Airbus, it marks the first integration of a new class of low-cost, mass-manufacturable interceptor missiles onto a drone, creating a new cost curve for air defence.”
To ensure seamless operation within NATO’s integrated air defense architecture, the Bird of Prey is designed to operate through Airbus’ Integrated Battle Management System (IBMS). The company notes that this integration allows the counter-UAS solution to act as a highly mobile, complementary building block within layered defense grids, multiplying the force effectiveness of existing radar and command nodes.
We observe that the rapid nine-month development cycle of the Bird of Prey, initially teased by Airbus in March 2025 under the moniker “LOAD” (Low-cost Air Defence), reflects a growing urgency within the European defense sector. By combining an existing, proven target drone airframe with a newly developed, mass-manufacturable micro-missile, Airbus and Frankenburg are bypassing traditionally sluggish defense procurement timelines. If the planned 2026 live-warhead tests succeed and Frankenburg meets its aggressive production targets, this system could offer a viable, scalable answer to the drone swarm tactics currently dominating asymmetric conflict theaters.
What is the Airbus Bird of Prey?
It is a reusable, uncrewed interceptor drone designed to autonomously detect, classify, and neutralize kamikaze drones using low-cost micro-missiles.
What missile does the Bird of Prey use?
It uses the Mark I air-to-air missile, a lightweight, high-subsonic interceptor developed by Estonian defense tech startup Frankenburg Technologies. How much does the Mark I missile weigh?
According to Airbus, the Mark I weighs less than 2 kilograms and measures 65 centimeters in length, making it the lightest guided interceptor developed to date.
When will the system be operational?
Airbus and Frankenburg plan to conduct additional test flights utilizing live warheads throughout the remainder of 2026 to fully operationalize the system and demonstrate its capabilities to potential buyers.
The ‘Bird of Prey’ Platform and Mark I Missile
Drone Specifications and Reusability
The Frankenburg Mark I Interceptor
Strategic Context and Industry Impact
Addressing the Asymmetric Warfare Challenge
Frankenburg Technologies’ Rapid Ascent
Integration and Future Development
Command and Control
AirPro News analysis
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Sources
Photo Credit: Airbus
Defense & Military
Russian An-26 Military Transport Crashes in Crimea Killing 29
A Russian An-26 military transport crashed in Crimea on March 31, 2026, killing all 29 on board due to a technical malfunction, officials say.
This article summarizes reporting by Reuters.
A Russian Antonov An-26 military transport aircraft crashed in the Crimean Peninsula on Tuesday, March 31, 2026, resulting in the deaths of all 29 individuals on board. According to reporting by Reuters, which cited Russian news agencies and the Defence Ministry, the aircraft went down during a scheduled flight. Search and rescue teams later located the wreckage, confirming there were no survivors.
The incident highlights the ongoing risks associated with operating aging military aircraft in high-tension regions. While the Crimean Peninsula remains a heavily militarized zone amid the ongoing conflict, preliminary official statements from Russian authorities indicate that the crash was likely the result of a technical malfunction rather than hostile action.
We at AirPro News are closely monitoring the situation as specialized investigative committees examine the crash site. The loss of the aircraft and its personnel underscores the logistical and human toll of sustained military operations relying on legacy aviation assets.
The An-26 lost contact at approximately 18:00 Moscow time on March 31, 2026, according to comprehensive research reports detailing the event. The aircraft reportedly collided with a cliff in Crimea. The 29 fatalities consisted of six crew members and 23 passengers.
“A Russian An-26 military transport plane crashed in Crimea, killing 29 people aboard,” Reuters reported.
Russian state news agencies, including TASS and RIA Novosti, relayed statements from the Russian Defense Ministry confirming the loss. Officials explicitly ruled out external factors, stating there was no damaging impact on the aircraft from missiles or drones. A specialized committee affiliated with the Defense Ministry has been dispatched to determine the exact sequence of events that led to the technical failure.
The Antonov An-26, designated by NATO as “Curl,” is a twin-engine turboprop tactical military transport aircraft. Designed by the Soviet-era Antonov Design Bureau, the aircraft was manufactured between 1969 and 1986. Industry data indicates that the airframes currently in service are several decades old. The An-26 is designed for short- to medium-haul transport, featuring a rear loading ramp. It is capable of carrying up to 40 passengers, paratroopers, or approximately 5.5 tons of cargo.
Because of its ability to operate from short and unpaved runways, the An-26 has been a mainstay for frontline logistics and medical evacuations. However, its advanced age and widespread use in challenging, austere environments have contributed to a mixed safety record, with the aircraft being involved in numerous aviation accidents over the decades. Since its annexation by Russia in 2014, the Crimean Peninsula has served as a critical logistical, naval, and military hub. It is heavily utilized by Moscow for supplying troops and launching strikes during the ongoing invasion of Ukraine. The airspace over Crimea is highly contested and heavily monitored.
The crash occurred against a backdrop of intensified military activity in the region. According to regional research reports, Ukrainian forces have increasingly targeted Russian military assets in Crimea. In September 2025, Ukraine’s military intelligence reportedly destroyed two Russian An-26 transport aircraft in a drone attack. More recently, on March 24, 2026, Ukrainian forces reportedly destroyed a Zircon hypersonic missile launcher in the area. Furthermore, on the same day as the An-26 crash, unverified reports from Ukrainian media and Russian aviation bloggers suggested the loss of a Russian Su-34 fighter-bomber.
While Russian officials have attributed the March 31 crash to a technical malfunction, we note that the heavy reliance on Soviet-era airframes like the An-26 in a high-tempo combat environment significantly increases the probability of mechanical failures. The aircraft involved was at least 40 years old, as production ceased in 1986. Sustained operational stress, combined with potential supply chain issues for legacy aircraft parts, creates a precarious situation for military logistics. Even without direct hostile action, the attrition of these transport assets represents a notable degradation of tactical airlift capabilities in a critical theater of operations.
Preliminary statements from the Russian Defense Ministry indicate the crash was caused by a technical malfunction. Officials have stated there is no evidence of external hostile impact, though investigations are ongoing.
According to Reuters and Russian official statements, all 29 people on board the aircraft were killed. This included six crew members and 23 passengers.
The An-26 is a Soviet-era, twin-engine turboprop military transport aircraft manufactured between 1969 and 1986. It is primarily used for short- to medium-haul logistics, troop transport, and medical evacuations.
Sources: Reuters, Provided Research Report
Russian An-26 Military Transport Crashes in Crimea, Killing 29
Incident Details and Official Statements
The Flight and the Crash
Preliminary Investigations
The Antonov An-26: An Aging Workhorse
Aircraft Specifications
Safety Record and Operational Use
Geopolitical Context and Regional Tensions
Crimea as a Strategic Hub
Recent Aviation and Military Losses
AirPro News analysis
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
What caused the Russian An-26 crash in Crimea?
How many casualties were reported?
What is an Antonov An-26?
Photo Credit: UNN
-
Business Aviation6 days agoJacksonville Begins Otto Aerospace Facility for Phantom 3500 Jets
-
Regulations & Safety6 days agoHelicopter Crash Near Kalalau Beach Kauai Kills Three
-
Aircraft Orders & Deliveries3 days agoAirbus Begins Ground Testing of New A350F Freighter Model
-
Commercial Aviation2 days agoFinnair Announces Fleet Renewal Strategy with Embraer and Airbus Jets
-
Commercial Aviation4 days agoAmerican Airlines Plans Major In-Flight Wi-Fi and Entertainment Upgrade