PC-12 Challenge??? What is better??

FlightFX · Post by **FlightFX** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:39 pm

So, if so many people can put down this aircraft cause it only has one engine than what compares to it?
Really, what comes close to the price tag, equipment, performance numbers, operating costs, size, usable loads and, the new generation cockpit not to mention the soft wooly seat covers to plunk our asses in???!

I am interested knowing if there's any other aircraft that comes to mind in the same legue for around the same price?

Thanks for your input.

grimey · Post by **grimey** » Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:45 pm

And when the one PT-6 fails, how much would you pay for a second one? I'm not arguing that SEIFR is unsafe, but there's more to (or should be more to) running a company that just how economical and good looking the aircraft are.

KAG · Post by **KAG** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:06 am

How much does a new PC 12 cost?
The only thing that is similar in size, speed, goodies, is a new BE20 - which sells for around 7 mil, give or take. I'm sure the 12 is cheaper to buy, run and maintain. That said, I'd rather have a 200.

Schlem · Post by **Schlem** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 5:30 am

Disregard...

El Comat · Post by **El Comat** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:14 am

As usual, no matter what question you ask regarding the PC-12, you get those who step up to the podium and are unable to contibute other than saying "I'd rather have a 2nd engine!" or "When your stove quits, you're screwed!". Folks, read the question first, then answer accordingly. His question said nothing about single engine safety, he was asking for some comparisons to the PC-12 in terms of performance, costs, etc.

That being said, I can only think of the BE20 as a direct competitor for the PC-12. Although, for a charter machine (no freight runs/specialty missions), it's hard to beat the BE10 for the price. It doesn't burn much gas (I've got it down to ~400 lbs/hour up at FL220, about the same as a PC-12), and it carries a good load (our BE10 with raisbeck will take about 2200 lbs, and that's with full fuel). However, it is about 30 knots slower and is very limited with respect to baggage space (we have one BE10 with a pod that eliminates that problem, but also sucks another 20 knots or so from the TAS).

Again, it's hard to find a true match for the PC-12 in terms of capability. It's hard to match the speed, versatility and comfort.

EC

Hedley · Post by **Hedley** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 7:47 am

A busty nymphomaniac who's father owns a chain of liquor stores?

Doc · Post by **Doc** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 7:48 am

While we're on the subject of comparing aircraft, number of stoves aside, what is there that compares to the Caravan?
Or a new Beech 200?
The only segment of aviation where there is a real choice, is some light to medium jets. Okay, there is choice in the 19 seater commuter segment as well.
But, the PC12 has no competition.
The Beech 200 has none......it's a different beast than the PC12. The PC tries to compete with the Beech......but it's like apples and bananas!
You only get REAL choice when, you start talking Boeing vs. Airbus?
So no, the PC12 has no peer. But, that may well be simply because no other aircraft company really wants to compete? There is only so much market for an aircraft with one fan, at the price? It's not the same game as Ford and Chevy play. The R&D for an aircraft must be in the hundreds of millions of dollars. And the PC12 is already there.

flyinhigh · Post by **flyinhigh** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 8:05 am

Hey Doc in regards to the caravan there is a aircraft in the competion market of it now

http://questaircraft.com/index.php?filename=kodiak.php

Amazing piece of machinery

Doc · Post by **Doc** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 8:25 am

Gee, will I go with an aircraft from Quest (who?) or something from Cessna? I must look further. It looks like a Caravan. It smells like a Caravan. Good thing I didn't step in it!

Hedley · Post by **Hedley** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 9:10 am

The way I look at it:

Single engine (piston or turbine) is ok for freight (or non-paying pax) over friendly ground (ie cornfields) not water or mountains. If you lose an engine, the landing is survivable.

You wanna fly freight (or carry pax for hire) over water or mountains, have 2+ engines, because the landing is likely not survivable.

I know, I'm a dinosaur.

FlightFX · Post by **FlightFX** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 9:34 am

Thanx Comet, thats exactly what I wanted to know.
These guys that can't respect the single engine apperently can't fly it the way it was ment to. I may be wrong but, didn't they all train in a single engine aircraft???
The reason I ask is for a possible charter operation in southern ontario. Perhaps a VLJ (eclipse 500) would be the better way to go??

So thanx for all your consern about having 1 engine.

spartacus · Post by **spartacus** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 9:48 am

FlightFX wrote: These guys that can't respect the single engine apperently can't fly it the way it was ment to.

How hard is it to set up best glide and hope for the best?

harveymushman · Post by **harveymushman** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 2:50 pm

looks like a PC-12 with a conventional tail to me

http://www.ibisaerospace.com/Collateral/overview.html

wallypilot · Post by **wallypilot** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 3:34 pm

flyinhigh wrote:Hey Doc in regards to the caravan there is a aircraft in the competion market of it now

http://questaircraft.com/index.php?filename=kodiak.php

Amazing piece of machinery

looks pretty good....compared to the 208, it's got 10% more horsepower, with 20% lower MCTOW. they should put that -34 in the van....could use the extra HP. You won't carry a load in that kodiak like in a van, though. so, it's hard to say if it a competitor or not...depends how much you want to haul.

Every aircraft in the small aircraft segment is so unique that's it's hard to compare them. Each one has it's own positives and it's own draw backs. Depends what you want to do with it.

Navajos serve a purpose, as do caravans and PC-12's and Be20's, Metro's, etc.

Doc · Post by **Doc** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 5:01 pm

What ever happened to the twin pack somebody was installing in Caravans?

linecrew · Post by **linecrew** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:36 pm

Doc wrote:What ever happened to the twin pack somebody was installing in Caravans?

Ah yes, the Pathfinder 21 with the Soloy "Dual Pac". This is a modified Grand Caravan with two PT-6's turning one prop and a 72 inch plug (!) installed aft of the wing.

http://www.soloy.com/path21.html

ch135146 · Post by **ch135146** » Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:44 pm

Seen the Piper Jet? I was in Chapters browsing and saw it on the cover of Flying. The fuselage looks like it's based on the Malibu:

http://www.newpiper.com/piperjet/

squawk 7600 · Post by **squawk 7600** » Wed Dec 20, 2006 5:24 am

Doc,

I'm with you when it comes to supporting the Van. I have thousands of hours on it and it's an amazing machine...nothing can compare. The people that bash it on here are the ones that have never flown it...thus have no idea what it brings to the table. As far as icing is concerned....it is great in the ice...you just have to respect it. Do a little flight planning and no problems.

Blakey · Post by **Blakey** » Wed Dec 20, 2006 7:02 am

ch135146 wrote:Seen the Piper Jet? I was in Chapters browsing and saw it on the cover of Flying. The fuselage looks like it's based on the Malibu:

http://www.newpiper.com/piperjet/

Good God! A six-seat jet with a full-fuel payload of 800 lbs! That full fuel still only gets you 1300 miles and these are the brochure numbers! We have a new definition of "useless" here. And they offer an optional 7th seat. What for? In case you want to fly 6 passengers on a local sightseeing trip? I can see the ads now "Pilot wanted - jet experience an asset but must weigh 110lbs or less."

ch135146 · Post by **ch135146** » Wed Dec 20, 2006 10:58 am

Blakey wrote:And they offer an optional 7th seat. What for?

I'd elect for the optional lavatory. It would be fun to use it after a big meal of curries washed down with Newcastle Brown Ale. Just after calling level. In turbulence.

2R · Post by 2R » Wed Dec 20, 2006 12:44 pm

A better bird ,well as a bird watcher told me "nothing can compare to a large breasted matress thrasher"

Blakey · Post by **Blakey** » Wed Dec 20, 2006 5:48 pm

ch135146 wrote:
Blakey wrote:And they offer an optional 7th seat. What for?
I'd elect for the optional lavatory. It would be fun to use it after a big meal of curries washed down with Newcastle Brown Ale. Just after calling level. In turbulence.

Yes, I did note it's location - right behind the co!! I do hope ANC headsets come standard with the lav option!

tailgunner · Post by **tailgunner** » Wed Dec 20, 2006 10:14 pm

The cessna conquest 2 ( 441) whips the PC 12 in all performance areas except t/o field length and landing length. The pc 12 has a larger cabin, but the 441 is certified for 11 pax! 441 will true 305kts @ 35000.I have seen fuel burns of less than 400lbs an hour total! 3200lbs of gas gives you 8 hours of fuel. Range 1800 - 2200nm. Plus the 441 flies quite nicely on 1 engine for as long as you need. Price 1.5 - 2 million.

No Conflict · Post by **No Conflict** » Wed Dec 20, 2006 11:18 pm

Apples and oranges.....Yes a 441 might be close to the 12, but (biased of course) the 12 has never let me down... the PT6 is almost bullet proof, carries 9 pax easily, has incredible performance (T/O distance, Landing Distance, soft/gravel field, icing, overall performance).

2 stoves might be good, if that other stove can carry u thru a missed approach... in cruise, well, at max payload, the second engine gets you to the accident site quicker.... the 12 has a glide ratio of 14-1.... pretty damn good...

Combined with the fact that then 12 is 20 years younger, with updated systems, EFIS, and a bunch of buttons that are fun playing with..

which is better? Well, we are comparing a SE to a ME..... As far a SE's go, the 12 Rules.... nothing comes close...

As for ME.... why not go with the KA super 350? http://www.beechcraft.de/Neu/350/2007_350_perf.pdf

http://www.raytheonaircraft.com/beechcraft/aircraft/
Value: $1,600,000 to $4,900,000 pre-owned. 350 $5,970,580 new

NOW, before I get slammed by others, remember what we are talking about.. SE VS ME....

Johnny · Post by **Johnny** » Wed Dec 20, 2006 11:22 pm

tailgunner wrote:Plus the 441 flies quite nicely on 1 engine

Same goes for the Pilatus.