PC-12 Type Rating

[Cap'n P8]

Don't know about the /47 series PC12s but the /43 and /45 (most common one I think) are definitely NOT high performance. For the /45 Vso at gross is 64 and VNE is something like 236.

As far as POCs go, I believe the intent was to establish some sort of professional standards for corporate flight departments, so that when the boss tells the employee to get on the company aircraft, the employee has some assurance that they aren't being unnecessarily being put at risk. That is why a POC fairly closely follows the req's of a commercial operation, (although yes there are certain elements of the flights which are less restrictive.)

If joe blow goes out and buys a PC12 for his own personal use, ie. friends and family he would not require a POC. If he were to operate the same aircraft for the transport of his company's personnel the aircraft would then fall into the requirements for a POC (turbine powered and/or pressurized.) I am still trying to find the reference to back up this last paragraph. Any TC types have the official word?

[polar one]

Here is a thought Cap'n

Why dont you take a few minutes and search CARS 421, 604/621, then have a little look at CBAA's website.


Then read your post over again. You might just want to make a few changes to...well just about the whole thing.

[Cap'n P8]

Here is a thought polar...be civil, your tone comes off very condescending. I have read all that you have mentioned.

Re. 421 - I flew a PC12 never required a type rating, although as I mentioned I don't know the specifics of the /47 I only flew the /45

Re. 604 - It says "for the transport of pax" do you think that means his wife or for business pax in a company...what if he decides he only wants to fly by himself?

Re. 621 - Standards and obstruction markings...oh I get it, you meant 624...

CBAA...you mean the Canadian BUSINESS Aircraft Association

But then again maybe I'm completely wrong. I think I will call TC and CBAA tomorrow, lord knows I have enough time to kill.

[Vickers vanguard]

[quote="Cap'n P8"]
But then again maybe I'm completely wrong. I think I will call TC and CBAA tomorrow, lord knows I have enough time to kill.[/quote]

what the heck ? don't they keep you busy on the lear at BA ?

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Ahh this is truly entertaining reading all the rules and stuff you have to comply with ( If you can figure them out. ) in Canada.

Thankfully we could operate most of our business under FAA part 91...so much more efficient and sane.

[polar one]

1. I did mean 624...typing error.

2. And yes I did meanthe CBAA , as in Business They manage the POC program for TC....

. You are giving advice which you know nothing about. And quite frankly you should check out the CBAA website and look at the POC program.
Now you are willing to be "condescending" yourself with regard to the CBAA which, I assume, means you have no idea about how the POC certification works.....great for giving advice.

[Cap'n P8]

I know about CBAA, I work for a company which operates under part 604. I have also looked into starting a corporate flight department in the past...for a company which intended to use an airplane to move company personnel around in the process of doing business.

Now can you please tell me why TC or CBAA would care for instance about some dude flying his own PC12 to his own cottage with his wife and kids on board, if it was only ever utilized for his own personal use?

Maybe I'm wrong, but I honestly think the intent of the legislation was to cover business use of an applicable aircraft.

I do realize for sure that I made a mistake in some semantics with the and/or part of a previous comment.

And for the record, I'm not trying to be condescending about anything. I would just like to hear the correct interpretation. I know in some cases TC has links for clarification on some rules, like for instance duty regulations. I have no idea where to find those.

Vickers...sometimes yes...sometimes no! Right now...not so much!

PS got nothing better to do tomorrow then watch Entourage anyways!

[Cap'n P8]

Well, just got off the phone with a gentleman from CBAA...apparently I stand corrected. TC and CBAA do expect someone flying their own personal use PC12, TBM750, Meridian, etc. etc. to obtain a POC. One word, wow.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the CBAA and POC's for corporate flight departments, but for personal use of an aircraft only, it seems like a lot of overkill. General aviation in the states sure is a lot more user friendly, (after you've dealt with customs anyways!)

[polar one]

To answer your question

Now can you please tell me why TC or CBAA would care for instance about some dude flying his own PC12 to his own cottage with his wife and kids on board, if it was only ever utilized for his own personal use

I dont know why they care. As you are flying under 604, does your ops manual/SMS program not address the subject of regulatory compliance?

Now back to your question, it is actually a good thing that they do care, in my opinion as it ensures a level of training, currency, and operations that, again, in my opinion, make things safer. I really still dont understand how you were going to set up a 604 operaton and did not know the role of the CBAA in the process, but good for you to take the time to actually check it out. Hope the origianal poster does the same instead of taking the advice of some of those who posted here.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the CBAA and POC's for corporate flight departments, but for personal use of an aircraft only, it seems like a lot of overkill. General aviation in the states sure is a lot more user friendly

That is the understatement of the decade.

Going from the make paper work mentality of Canada where there are so many subsections to their rules you forget what you were looking for by the time you get finished to the rules in the USA under part 91 is the difference between night and day.

I thank God that I no longer have to be part of the bureaucratic nightmare that Canadian aviation has evolved into.

How come a lot of us managed to survive for so long without some drone sitting in a cubicle pounding out rules to cover something they couldn't do them selves?

[Cap'n P8]

Man this thread went a totally different direction from whence it began, and I'm glad it did because I've learned something in the process.

The thread started off talking about a PC12 type rating. As I said before I flew the airplane for two years, and have never heard of a type rating for the PC12. I flew the /45 only so take that into consideration, because I don't purport to know anything about the /47 or NG. I did however find some numbers on the Pilatus' website which lead me to believe that it is not considered high performance, and it is not a "large airplane".

When I was looking into a corporate flight department (planned to use PC12 because of my experience on type), I contacted the CBAA, as I was well aware of the requirement to operate said a/c on a POC! I am aware of the process by the way, through which certification is achieved. Having said all that, I chose not to continue because of other obligations!

This has nothing to do with the company I currently work for, lets get that out of the way right now.


So what have I learned from this? I have learned that the interpretation of CAR 604 does in fact include someone operating a PC12 recreationally for their own personal use even though I can't understand how someone could possibly construe that as business aviation. Only in Canada I guess
I don't know anyone rich enough to actually buy a 12 who wouldn't plan to operate it in support of a business anyway, so it really is a moot point for me.

The real shitty part of this is that if I win the lottery tomorrow and could actually afford to buy my own 12 for my own personal use I would be forced to go through all this hassle even though I know that I am more than capable of safely operating the machine on my own!!!

[Duckman54]

Very enlightening, fellas... I, too, have been pitching the idea of a corporate a/c to my bosses, and doing my homework about this along the way - and found out some interesting stuff...

In the CAR's, I found that NO versions of the PC-12 (despite being a pretty kick-ass machine!) are considered "High Performance", as TC's definition of such is:
CAR 400.01 "High Performance Aeroplane"
a) an aeroplane that is specified in the minimum flight crew document as requiring only one pilot AND that has a Maximum Speed (Vne or Vmo) of 250 KIAS or greater, OR a stall speed (Vso) of 80 KIAS or greater"

The PC-12 has a Vmo of 236 KIAS, and a stall speed (Vso) of only 60 KIAS, so you're well clear of the regs on that issue.


ALSO... with regards to the CBAA, alas they get their fingers into everything, but they're obviously doing a very POOR job of it! Even CBAA website admits that Transport Canada is taking back the whole POC process next year, thus effectively rendering the CBAA toothless and redundant. Having only received their mandate for the POC process in 2003, they've obviously dropped the ball pretty badly to have their whole "raison d'etre" stripped away from them after less than 10 years on the job!

Now, that said, I don't have a lot of confidence that going thru TC for your POC will be any better! But, going through only one agency for all your bureaucratic headache needs might simplify and expedite things a tad. Saving your $1600+change CBAA 'dues' may or may not be offset by some TC fee for processing a POC. I guess we'll hafta wait and see how it all pans out...

'Greg.

[lionheart27]

So a POC req'd for privately flying a PC-12 Correct
Also its High Performance if its NG >250 Vne and 80 Vso

From TC
(c) High Performance Aeroplane

(i) Knowledge

An applicant for an individual aircraft type rating for a high performance aeroplane shall have completed ground training on the aeroplane type.

(ii) Experience

An applicant shall have completed flight training and have acquired a minimum of 200 hours pilot flight time on aeroplanes.

(iii) Skill

Within the 12 months preceding the date of application for the rating, an applicant shall have successfully completed a qualifying flight under the supervision of a Transport Canada Inspector or a qualified person qualified in accordance with CAR 425.21(7)(a).
(amended 1999/03/01; previous version)
*********************************************
So does this make more sense that ORNGE is asking for a 10K training bond in their contract?
No surprise I guess that Thunder Air is under that same roof.
But wait ORNGE PC-12's are not NG's there 47's

[Hawkerflyer]

POC is required. Turbine powered and pressurized. Might want to move fast with the CBAA as Transport is going to be getting involved soon. Its a great airplane. Cant say I'd want to fly it to Australia though. Lots of big fish in that water for a single! Don't get me wrong, I have more than 3000 hrs on a PC12 and never had an issue. Oh, dont mess around with training...do it!

[iflyforpie]

Oh, dont mess around with training...do it!

I would imagine the insurance requirements would be the limiting factor in this case...

[Hedley]

have been pitching the idea of a corporate a/c to my bosses

Get a C421. No POC required. Register it privately. A PPL & MIFR is all you need.

[dash8dave]

Try to figure this one out. I always thought it good for a laugh. PC-12 POC/CBAA will cost you approx $1500.00 year membership + cost of audit every couple of years. For that you can move 6-7 of your closest friends relatives or what have you. Buy a brand new Dhc-6 and NO CBAA (turbine, NOT pressurized) and you can move 17-18 of your employees from point to point quite freely. D'oh. Dhc-6 not a high performance airplane either. Don't need a PPC or a check ride, just a good ol' MIFR.

[vova_k]

Also its High Performance if its NG >250 Vne and 80 Vso

Speeds for NG's are 240 and 67

[woneill_ornge]

So does this make more sense that ORNGE is asking for a 10K training bond in their contract?
No surprise I guess that Thunder Air is under that same roof.
But wait ORNGE PC-12's are not NG's there 47's

Hey lionheart27,

There is no 10k training bond in our contract – this information is outdated.

Also, our PC-12’s are NGs, not 47s.

[lionheart27]

Also its High Performance if its NG >250 Vne and 80 Vso

Speeds for NG's are 240 and 67

Ah yes Indicated and True I was looking at cruise @ alt is 270kts. Good old thin air.

So does this make more sense that ORNGE is asking for a 10K training bond in their contract?
No surprise I guess that Thunder Air is under that same roof.
But wait ORNGE PC-12's are not NG's there 47's

Hey lionheart27,

There is no 10k training bond in our contract – this information is outdated.

Also, our PC-12’s are NGs, not 47s.

woneill_ornge
Oops My apologies, it says you own 47's. somewhere I read.
Someone posted a ORNGE contract stating the 10k bond and Thunder Air works its King Air's with you I thought their bond was one in the same.
So..When are you hiring and what are your minimums?

[Aft CofG]

NG's are 47's.

There is PC-12/45, PC-12/47, and PC-12/47 NG.

[2.5milefinal]

Actually if you look on some of the 'older' POHs its a PC-12/47E.
I have heard that Pilatus started not to like the letter 'E' (or something) and would really like for it to be called the PC12 NG.


http://www.pilatus-aircraft.com/00-def/ ... 0Facts.pdf

[Cap'n P8]

Since we're talking PC12 here. Anyone know where to find info on daily contract rates for captains? I've seen some stuff online but most seem to be American. Not looking to fleece the operator, but also don't want to lowball myself.

[woneill_ornge]

So..When are you hiring and what are your minimums?

We aren’t hiring pilots at the moment, and I can’t give any details on positions unless we are hiring, but as aviation positions come out I will make sure that an appropriate posting to AVCanada is made. Positions across the organization are posted at http://www.ornge.ca/Careers/Pages/Caree ... ities.aspx.

Please note as well that we post vacancies internally prior to putting them on our website, but when they do come out, you'll be able to find them there.

[skymarc]

Found this old tread.

No POC is needed anymore to fly a PC12 or TBM prvately or not for hire, altough you wont get RVSM or any OPS specs without a POC.
As for the TBM you need a type rating as its VMO is 266.