YouTube description:

According to the pilot-in-command (PIC), he was performing autorotations at the lower part of the main rotor rpm green arc in part due to weight considerations. Upon entering the accident autorotation, he maintained an airspeed between 85-90 knots in the hope that extra speed would allow a more aggressive deceleration flare prior to touchdown, which should in turn further slow the rate of descent and forward speed. The helicopter's rate of descent was high, and as the PIC turned the helicopter onto the runway heading it was apparent to him that the rate of descent was excessive and that he was too low to execute either a proper deceleration flare or perform a power recovery. He attempted to level the helicopter as much as possible prior to impact to minimize the damage to the helicopter and prevent injury. The helicopter landed hard with the left skid contacting the runway first. The left skid collapsed, damaging the outboard landing gear damper attachment structure. The helicopter slid about 100 yards before coming to a stop. According to the manufacturer, the main rotor rpm range is 90 percent to 106.4 percent. At the helicopter's weight and the density altitude on the day of the accident, the main rotor rpm during the autorotation should have been above the 106.4 percent limit (red line), requiring the pilot to increase collective pitch to maintain the rotor rpm within limits. Performing autorotations at the lower part of the green arc provides less availability of rotor energy to perform an autorotation landing. The pilot should have recognized that he was not achieving the required main rotor rpm for the autorotations and terminated the maneuvers. The helicopter was within weight and balance limits.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:

The pilot's failure to maintain adequate main rotor rpm during an autorotation, which resulted in a hard landing.

J.J. Abrams was right! There is lens flare in space

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Good stuff - all of the lens flares and lighting reminds me of a JJ Abrams film.

Why did they put what looks like a firework on the bonnet of the car, next to a can of petrol? (0:18) What 'exploded' at 0:25? Why, when the flames were clearly almost out did pouring 'water' on them at (0:34) cause them to flare up again? It looks a bit like a setup to me.

Saw the new one last night (early release for NZ. In your face, rest of humanity!)

The lens flares are still on the goddamn bridge and there was even a lens flare of J.J. Abhrams name in the end credits.

At this point, I can't help but feel I'm being trolled....

When I first saw this at theatres I never noticed the lens flare thing. But once it was pointed out to me, I can't see anything else... (See what I did there.)

Abrams film left me feeling 'meh' so I'll catch the next one at home...

Upvote for the lens flare.

*FLARE* *FLARE* *FLARE*

do do do do do do do do do do do do do

Evasive maneuvers we got a wedding heading our way !

Can someone help me with a doubt I have about this video? Is the motion of the flare and the sun surface in real time? Does it really move THAT fast?

The thing that amazes me is how accurately this sort of meteor entry has been depicted in countless movies and 'artist's impressions'. Add a lens flare in there, and it'd look nice and CGI.

This isn't Star Trek!!! Where the hell are the lens flares and sword-fights in the sky!

I don't see anything clearly flying away from Earth's gravity here. Not enough information to deduce the distances by eye alone - these things might be flying in the atmosphere or simply passing between Earth and the Camera. The latter seems much more likely, considering the perceived size of the objects and the distances involved. I'm guessing this is what satellites or space debris on orbital trajectories would look like.

The flaring is interesting though, I wonder what causes that.

I got about 10 seconds in and decided to make a lens flare crack in the comments, but I see you already had that covered -- in far better fashion than I would have.

I award you +1 internets for "best use of lens flare joke"!