The Nomad...

CC: "Form follows function." Look at how many companies make planes that look like a C-172, 65 years later.

Pelican1984 How many? The 172 is utilitarian. It’s relatively cheap but it also feels very cheap. It’s also ugly.

Yeah!! I was going to say the same thing...They copied a "Canadian" Twin Otter and are trying to convince us it's new and revolutionary ....Pffft!!

But with the A350 and the 787 nobody was angry

I've got 2,700 hours PIC in twin Otters, no way can this thing get into the same strips and conditions. This is meant for FedEx to take over for the caravan, small weak gear made for 5,000 foot strips with ILS. I've had otters flying at 35 knots and being stable. Cleared 30ft obstacle and stopped in 500 Ft on grass, 15 kt headwind. The key is to put control surfaces in the prop slipstream so you can maintain control bellow stall, stupid T- tail design; They suck on anything other than king airs.

Derek Hudson Twin Otter is a great bird and every feature was chosen with STOL in mind. On a bird like this, the low horizontal on a conventional tail would interfere with the cargo trucks loading and unloading cargo from the rear cargo doors. Beautiful airplanes do the job they were designed for. The Twin Otter and Skycourier are both beautiful birds, just for different reasons.

@@hud86 I (we) designed similar aircraft, 19-pax A/C, as a capstone project of my degree. Looking at the data and characteristics, SkyCourier is not intended to replace Twin Otter to fly extreme routes and land at rough strips. But it is designed to fulfill FedEx needs to take cargo to remote places with suitable small strips, hence its big boxy fuselage so LD-3 container can fit directly from larger cargo planes without the need of repackaging. Twin Otter obviously cannot take containers that size directly right?

@@muhammadahdalularayhanfasy8092 you're correct. I bet it's fun to fly, and is more akin to a kingair in flight characteristics than an otter. The DHC-6 is basically a huge twin engine cub with even sloppier handling. I remember transitioning from the king air to the otter and thinking if the kingair felt like a Cadillac, the otter is a Mac truck! It's not a smooth aircraft but it takes several tons of cargo off from 1,000 foot sandbars. This will be a nice plane, just wish they'd beef up the landing gear. I see an AD occuring later around that landing gear strut attach point.

Will they put this on skis and land on the arctic ice?

The "T" tail will make it safer than the Twin Otter - no premature deployments over the horizontal stabilizer.

And cargo 🤩

Was going to say twotter / do28 cross.

And the Short Skyvan/S330/S360. The Skyvan predates even the DHC-6

Looks almost similar but the Tail Stabilizer, avionics, engines, etc. All different. Not to mention, cessna dominates the market on high wing with gravity fuel and single point fuel.

Well...its not a twin Otter, but if they gifted me one....I might take it.....maybe.....lol.

@@LynxNYC Twin Otter predates copycats by decades...of course some improvements/changes would be in order. But then...if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Burntsider Its for the shareholders

Meh, they took a Dornier 228, modified it a little and stamped their logo on.

Congratulations to the de Havilland Canada DHC-6 Twin Otter team...very cool aircraft!

They're already made. They're called ATR 42s.

@@themechanic568 Right. 🇺🇸🌝

@@themechanic568 - you can buy 4 of these for the price of an ATR 42

@@Ford_Raptor_R_720hp_V8 if youre going off sticker price... Used ATRs are cheap.

@@themechanic568 - Fed Ex already has ATR-42's

Wait until you see the Cessna Denali

Textron makes the Beech 1900. Beechcraft & Cessna are subsidiaries of Textron.

I'm an Aussie and that's exactly my thought as well, soon as I saw it I thought that it WAS a Nomad that Cessna pinched the whole design and did a modernization on it.

Lynx, I think the proper response to all that is, “So what?” Seriously, this would have been a good achievement in 1965 or maybe even 1970. So you’ll have to excuse the rough reception from folks who think a company that has dominated its industry for so long owes us a bit more innovation rather than glacially paced evolution.

@@nunyabidness3075 as a pilot, I know these things and I fly Cessnas so I should know lol

I agree

Would that put it in the ATR42 type capacity?

Yes. You’d need two pilots to fly that. The FedEx Feeders are also getting brand new ATR 72-600f freighters so no need to stretch this thing. Don’t be surprised if it grows pods though.😁

I think thats what they did.

And how may Twin Otters has DHC sold this year? ;)

@totenkopf And Cessna has already sold 100. Besides, the Cessna can carry three times the cubage. They aren't comparable planes.

GipsAero-Mahindrah Aerospace are starting to build the Nomad again.(Without the 'input' from bureaucrats that killed it the first time)

@@glennh2965 I believe the fault was in the tail structure. Interesting that an Indian? are picking up the design. Was a good idea for a Porter replacement back in the day. Look fwd to seeing the results.

@@HMASJervisBay GipsAero are Australian, they were I think partially purchased by Mahindra (?)

@ora et labora it's a dead ringer for the old DeHaviland. Twin Otter.

Short and CASA copied both wheels and ailerons from somebody else. Therefore they must be poor designs. ;)

just watch the price!

Y-12 was derived from Twin Otter

@@cruxader27 The Y-12 is a coffin

More Looks Like IAe N219 Aircraft

yeah, people are like "copy of twin odder" no its not. the only similarities are that it has 2 engines and high wings. the beech 1900 is much more similar

@@samtatenumber1 thank you!!!

Ldictated by local airflow from the props, to avoid overheating of the wing surfaces, and staining ..

Be a normal pilot.

Flight training. Flight school is the very first step for you to fly a plane as a pilot. Doesn't matter if you want to fly cargo, courier, regional, charter or airline. Flight training has always been the first step.

Go to flight school, get your Commercial Pilots Certificate, an Instrument Rating, Mulienging airplane rating. Then go build up about 2500 to 3000 hours of flight time with 500 of that Multiengine time and some turbine time and maybe if one of the Feeder Cargo Haulers for Fed Ex, Like Mountian Air Cargo, is hiring, you might have competitive flight times. If you start right now, you should be competitive around 2030 or so. Aviation is in a deep slump so there are a lot of pilots on the streets right now, and more so with the companies where you would build your flight time. It's going to be a good 5 to 7 years before FEDEX gets those 100 aircraft if that is even going to be on the table in another year. So bottom line you will have a lot of work struggle and a lot of out of pocket money to get into one of those seats. It's double but It going to take a lot of effort, being very flexible to go to where the work is while you are building time most of all a lot of hard work. This COVID thing pretty much put me into retirement after 45 years of flying for a living. If you have some specified questions, post here and I will try to answer it for you. It's a tough business. After a while, it's just long boring hard work. And yeah I would love to fly this one too.

@@GeorgeSemel Thank you so much for the insight. sure is and odd/hard time for pilots. wow there is a lot more to it than I initially though .

Easy. Get a job in fast food so you can learn to work for little money.