3 fatalities

2004-05-25: De Havilland DHC-6 Twin Otter (9N-AFD) — Yeti Airlines — Lukla-Tenzing-Hillary, Nepal

Lukla-Tenzing-Hillary, NepalLanding (descent or approach)

On May 25, 2004, a De Havilland DHC-6 Twin Otter (registration 9N-AFD) operated by Yeti Airlines was involved in an aviation accident near Lukla-Tenzing-Hillary, Nepal during landing or approach. 3 people were killed. Investigators recorded the probable cause as: Controlled flight into terrain. The following factors were identified: - Hazardous behaviour and attitudes of the captain such as overconfidence, - The crew failed to comply with the approach routes, following a direct track, - The crew failed to follow… This summary draws on records from the Bureau of Aircraft Accidents Archives (B3A); 4 related events involving the same aircraft type or operator are linked below.

Sourcesthe Bureau of Aircraft Accidents Archives (B3A)Primary reportUpdated 1781200344Data APIEditorial standards

A cargo flight descending to Lukla Airport from Kathmandu struck a mountain at 11,600 feet near Lamjura Pass. All three crew members were killed. The official probable cause was controlled flight into terrain, with contributing factors including captain overconfidence and procedural noncompliance.

Accident Description

While descending to Lukla Airport from the south following a cargo flight from Kathmandu, the crew encountered poor visibility due to clouds. At an altitude of 11,600 feet, the aircraft struck the slope of a mountain located near the Lamjura Pass, in the Solukhumbu district. The wreckage was found west of the airport. All three crew members were killed.

Official Probable Cause

The official probable cause of the accident was controlled flight into terrain. The following factors were identified:

  • Hazardous behaviour and attitudes of the captain such as overconfidence.
  • The crew failed to comply with the approach routes, following a direct track.
  • The crew failed to follow standard operating procedures (SOPs).
  • The operator's policy for flying in adverse weather were incomplete and not up to date.
  • Lack of communication by the operator.
  • The operator was unable to perform internal investigations and execute corrective actions when required.