DHC-6-400 in Nepal
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore
DHC-6-400 in Nepal
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/24/asia/nepa ... index.html
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/nepal-plan ... -1.3461441
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/nepal-plan ... -1.3461441
Re: DHC-6-400 in Nepal
Rowdy,
"All are feared dead after a Tara Air plane carrying 23 people -- two of them babies"
Twin otter standard configuration is 19 pax, 2 pilots add 2 babies and you have 23 people on board, a quick search could have saved you an embarrassing comment.
"All are feared dead after a Tara Air plane carrying 23 people -- two of them babies"
Twin otter standard configuration is 19 pax, 2 pilots add 2 babies and you have 23 people on board, a quick search could have saved you an embarrassing comment.
Re: DHC-6-400 in Nepal
There have been a few Twin Otter crashes with abnormally high fatality numbers:
https://aviation-safety.net/database/re ... 19941217-0
28 on board killed
or 25 killed:
https://aviation-safety.net/database/re ... 20000727-0
https://aviation-safety.net/database/re ... 19941217-0
28 on board killed
or 25 killed:
https://aviation-safety.net/database/re ... 20000727-0
Re: DHC-6-400 in Nepal
Besides the number of souls on board, the word "mountain" is also common to all three accidents mentioned here.
Re: DHC-6-400 in Nepal
The first accident involving the new 400 Series.
You Can Love An Airplane All You Want, But Remember, It Will Never Love You Back!
Re: DHC-6-400 in Nepal
Is your dick comment really needed aswell?mbav8r wrote:Rowdy,
"All are feared dead after a Tara Air plane carrying 23 people -- two of them babies"
Twin otter standard configuration is 19 pax, 2 pilots add 2 babies and you have 23 people on board, a quick search could have saved you an embarrassing comment.
We don't count infants as passengers on our flights, but yet they are accounted for in regards to "souls on board."
It gets even worse when the FA's are gingers.
Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
Semper Fidelis
“De inimico non loquaris male, sed cogites"-
Do not wish death for your enemy, plan it.
Semper Fidelis
“De inimico non loquaris male, sed cogites"-
Do not wish death for your enemy, plan it.
Re: DHC-6-400 in Nepal
That made my day.Nark wrote:
It gets even worse when the FA's are gingers.
Sorry I know this is a serious thread...
Re: DHC-6-400 in Nepal
mbav8r wrote:Rowdy,
"All are feared dead after a Tara Air plane carrying 23 people -- two of them babies"
Twin otter standard configuration is 19 pax, 2 pilots add 2 babies and you have 23 people on board, a quick search could have saved you an embarrassing comment.
I know, I have just a few hours in them.
Big hills, big loads, big weather. Very sad.
Re: DHC-6-400 in Nepal
All are feared dead after a Tara Air plane carrying 23 people -- two of them babies
I have pasted the important part of the news article for the idiots that have a problem with general comprehension.
Does anyone think that the above article does not include the crew, 3, 6, or otherwise would not have been included in the count, anyone?
Rowdy, if you have time of any amount on a twotter, why the surprise? Seriously, I don't have anytime on them but I still knew this important detail about them, probably because I loaded them almost 30 years ago but not relevant to the tragic story.
Nark, I guess pointing out that some posters on here don't bother to check on facts or sometimes read the fucking story they're commenting on, not saying this is what rowdy did, but really pointing that out is a dick comment, really.
How about this, why do you feel the need to hold Rowdy's dick for him, he appeared to be able to respond all by his lonesome, maybe you're the dick in this particular exchange.
Do you see anything in the article that references souls on board, anything at all?
Dick!
I have pasted the important part of the news article for the idiots that have a problem with general comprehension.
Does anyone think that the above article does not include the crew, 3, 6, or otherwise would not have been included in the count, anyone?
Rowdy, if you have time of any amount on a twotter, why the surprise? Seriously, I don't have anytime on them but I still knew this important detail about them, probably because I loaded them almost 30 years ago but not relevant to the tragic story.
Nark, I guess pointing out that some posters on here don't bother to check on facts or sometimes read the fucking story they're commenting on, not saying this is what rowdy did, but really pointing that out is a dick comment, really.
How about this, why do you feel the need to hold Rowdy's dick for him, he appeared to be able to respond all by his lonesome, maybe you're the dick in this particular exchange.
Do you see anything in the article that references souls on board, anything at all?
Dick!
Re: DHC-6-400 in Nepal
Wow. Who pissed in your cornflakes? Seriously though...
There are only 19 seats in the back. One of them occupied by a cabin attendant. So now you're capped at 18 pax. With two babies. Have you seen what they'll carry for bags? Sure it's a short 20 min hop.. But that still puts them precariously heavy in and around some big pieces of granite. yes I've also flown the thing at ferry weight many times so I have a pretty good idea how it performs hot high and heavy.I made the comment hoping others would start to query the operation and some of the other factors. Have you checked the strips elevation? Sure would be a terrible place to have an engine calve.
Yes I read the article unlike others on this forum in other past threads. No need to jump on someone so quickly. I think NArk, like yourself is tired of thread derailment and bullshit on the forum too.
There are only 19 seats in the back. One of them occupied by a cabin attendant. So now you're capped at 18 pax. With two babies. Have you seen what they'll carry for bags? Sure it's a short 20 min hop.. But that still puts them precariously heavy in and around some big pieces of granite. yes I've also flown the thing at ferry weight many times so I have a pretty good idea how it performs hot high and heavy.I made the comment hoping others would start to query the operation and some of the other factors. Have you checked the strips elevation? Sure would be a terrible place to have an engine calve.
Yes I read the article unlike others on this forum in other past threads. No need to jump on someone so quickly. I think NArk, like yourself is tired of thread derailment and bullshit on the forum too.
Re: DHC-6-400 in Nepal
Rowdy, I apologize for the terse response before but it's clear that you still don't understand what I've said twice already. 23 "people" on board, people include babies and yes crew are also "people" Ginger or not, there were 23 people on board.
I absolutely agree, what are they doing at 16,000' with a load like that at all.
Nark, I'm not exactly sure of your intent with that Ginger comment, my Daughter is what people would describe as a "Ginger" and I can assure you that if you implied or outright stated in front of me she doesn't count, well......
I absolutely agree, what are they doing at 16,000' with a load like that at all.
Nark, I'm not exactly sure of your intent with that Ginger comment, my Daughter is what people would describe as a "Ginger" and I can assure you that if you implied or outright stated in front of me she doesn't count, well......
-
godsrcrazy
- Rank 8

- Posts: 861
- Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 4:12 pm
Re: DHC-6-400 in Nepal
This is not a new route for this carrier. Nor is it the first time they have flown the Twin otter on this route that heavy. What i do find interesting is this was a new DHC6-400. Wonder if they had an issue with the new aircraft.
Re: DHC-6-400 in Nepal
Oh I hear you loud and clear.. alls I'm saying is that every single seat in the machine was occupied.. plus the two 'babies'. I think we're getting lost in the semantics of itmbav8r wrote:Rowdy, I apologize for the terse response before but it's clear that you still don't understand what I've said twice already. 23 "people" on board, people include babies and yes crew are also "people" Ginger or not, there were 23 people on board.
I absolutely agree, what are they doing at 16,000' with a load like that at all.
Nark, I'm not exactly sure of your intent with that Ginger comment, my Daughter is what people would describe as a "Ginger" and I can assure you that if you implied or outright stated in front of me she doesn't count, well......
@godsrcrazy - I doubt it was an issue with it being 'new'. It was delivered in september and matches a second 400 and a handful of 300's. I do see some conflicts concerning weather. The company said it was 'favourable' but then the search was hampered by dense fog and heavy rain? hmmm...
Isn't Tara the STOL portion of what was Yeti? Hadn't they had a bunch of dhc6 accidents?
He needs to stop taking jabs at me and my gingerbeard !
Re: DHC-6-400 in Nepal
Ok, that's the problem with written conversation, this flight had to be close to gross and I can't imagine does too well on one at 16,000'. Hopefully get some answers quickly.
Re: DHC-6-400 in Nepal
Mbav8r:
Rowdy doesn't need me to fight his battles, however I consider him a good friend and won't let shots taken at him to slide.
Also the ginger reference is a pop culture/South Park reference.
http://southpark.cc.com/clips/103645/gingervitus
Rowdy doesn't need me to fight his battles, however I consider him a good friend and won't let shots taken at him to slide.
Also the ginger reference is a pop culture/South Park reference.
http://southpark.cc.com/clips/103645/gingervitus
Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
Semper Fidelis
“De inimico non loquaris male, sed cogites"-
Do not wish death for your enemy, plan it.
Semper Fidelis
“De inimico non loquaris male, sed cogites"-
Do not wish death for your enemy, plan it.




