Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

17 Dead in Montanta

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
Max pax for the PC-12 is 9 pax plus pilots. So I doubt the 17 number. Typical of the MSM, more important to get the story out first and worry about the facts later!

Flight aware has it as N128CM.

My thoughts and prayers go out to all those families effected.
 
Last edited:
Storm Chaser said:
Max pax for the PC-12 is 9 pax plus pilots. So I doubt the 17 number. Typical of the MSM, more important to get the story out first and worry about the facts later!

Flight aware has it as N128CM.

My thoughts and prayers go out to all those families effected.
Click to expand...
It's 17.
 
Interesting to know why the flight diverted to Butte instead of going to Bozeman as planned. Anyone know the weather in Bozeman at the time?
 
what about the reg only 12pax in a single in the US? Its tight with 8 pax in a PC! Unless this was a useal more money than brains situation and he had stuffed with kids cause "there small its ok!"?
 
Re:Aircraft Type??????

Are we absolutely certain of the aircraft type???I hope we are not going to trust the news media to get this right!!!!!
 
Last edited:
Yup it was a PC-12 and they for sure had too many people on board. The last FBO where they got fuel at the line guy said the kids just kept climbing out of the plane when they landed. A whole bunch of them. The Operator who owned this aircraft should be put in jail if he was involved with putting that many people in that aircraft. Something around 15 to 17 people.
 
Btm

I flew freight in and out of BTM many years back. There are two cemeteries on the west side of the airport and if memory serves me Holy Cross Cemetery is south of the terminal and Butte Aviation.

Looking at flightaware, this guy was coming from the southwest (from the Salmon VOR). No radar coverage below 10,800'.

The wind on the last METAR was 300@8 favoring runway 33. Could he have been on a 45 for a right downwind to runway 15, then just turning downwind he decided to make a 180 right over the Holy Cross Cemetery and enter a left downwind for 33, at which point the PC-12 got too slow?

I know, speculation, speculation. My Bad.

CC
 
PC-12 crash

I agree with everyone about media mistakes. That is why I wait a couple days for them to get most of the details ironed out.

Most PC-12s have 6 or 8 seat configs. in the cabin. There is a config. with 9 seats in the back but very few have this. Even with 9 in the cabin plus 2 in the cockpit that leaves 3 children that would have to be under the ages of 24 months for this to be technically legal. It appears that only one child was under 2.

What no one knows is how much gear they had for a ski trip for 14 people. It will be very difficult to determine where the CG was toward the end of this flight. Even with the small children, I am amazed that someone would load 14 people on this plane.
 
This one kept me up last night. We fly in the mountains of MT and WY often. Let's not speculate since we don't know the facts.


It is possible that with kids that young the kids' ski gear is small and light. Or if they had a ski home in the area, most of the gear could be there and not in the plane. Unfortunately, we don't know.

Fly safe.
 
Let's not speculate since we don't know the facts.
Click to expand...

Here we go again ....

We're not speculating, so much as sharing info. Many of us here fly these same kinds of missions or even the same aircraft. And I for one want to know everything I can about what MIGHT have happened from those more experienced than I. If you don't want to read it ... don't click the thread.
 
CitationCapt said:
I flew freight in and out of BTM many years back. There are two cemeteries on the west side of the airport and if memory serves me Holy Cross Cemetery is south of the terminal and Butte Aviation.

Looking at flightaware, this guy was coming from the southwest (from the Salmon VOR). No radar coverage below 10,800'.

The wind on the last METAR was 300@8 favoring runway 33. Could he have been on a 45 for a right downwind to runway 15, then just turning downwind he decided to make a 180 right over the Holy Cross Cemetery and enter a left downwind for 33, at which point the PC-12 got too slow?

I know, speculation, speculation. My Bad.

CC
Click to expand...

IIRC, the stall speed on a PC12 in landing config is very low. But considering he was most likely overweight and in a turn ... it could be something like this indeed happened.

One of the first things my mentor drilled into me was that saying "No" to taking off with too little fuel, too many passengers, or into bad weather might one day save my life. I feel for this guy's family ... but he blew this one. Fourteen pax in a PC12 ... anyone who'd be talked into doing that is likely capable of all sorts of idiocy.

And another thing ... every time something like this happens it reflects on all charter and corp pilots. All of us. The perception becomes that we're cowboys or somehow less-well-trained than our airline counterparts (and that is a wee bit true, actually, to an extent). This one was pilot error. I'd bet my left testicle.
 
Speculation

NJAOwner--- hardly one qualified to speculate of course. Since you are an "owner", how many times have you and your friends come to attempt to overload your airplane for the wary crew? I've flown many supplemental trips for NJA and have seen this myself.

The guy in the back is hardly in a position to speculate from a pilot's perspective.

CC
 
Last edited:
Snakum said:
...And another thing ... every time something like this happens it reflects on all charter and corp pilots.
Click to expand...
That's an aspect that isn't yet clear to me.
What was the likely arrangement to make this flight happen?
Was the aircraft leased long-term from the Oregon company?
Was the purpose of the flight to take the families of the CEO of the California company from California to Montana?
Was the pilot a regular employee of that CEO?

If so, all those point to a valid Part 91 flight with the only certain issue being carrying more people over age 2 than the number of seat blets provided. Neither Part 91/135 issues nor seat belts provided were the cause of the accident, but will be mentioned in the final.
 
CitationCapt said:
NJAOwner--- hardly one qualified to speculate of course. Since you are an "owner", how many times have you and your friends come to attempt to overload your airplane for the wary crew? I've flown many supplemental trips for NJA and have seen this myself.

The guy in the back is hardly in a position to speculate from a pilot's perspective.

CC
Click to expand...

That did not sound like speculation to me. It sounded more like a thoery, a suggestion.

How many times have you speculated over out current banking system/economy? Let's not get all spun up just because someone is offering a theory.

Plus, how do you know he/she is not a pilot? I know plenty of owner/passengers who are rated pilots.
 
Last edited:

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top