PC-12 Thoughts?
 

Okay PC-12 guys, I've watched that plane for years. I remember when it was announced and at one time went to Epps at PDK to check one out for a client who was thinking about replacing Caravans with PC-12s. Thought it was a fantastic plane, big, great cockpit, love the cargo door and best of all at 6'5" I love a front passenger door. I love King Airs but I hate going from the back to the front with passengers already sitting... "excuse me, sorry, sorry, excuse me..."

All that to say, is it a nice plane to fly?

How do you like that engine? I have no problems with single engines btw, but, I never bought into the "It's a PT6 it can never fail!" They fail. If they didn't fail then when I went to King Air training way back in we wouldn't have practiced single engine stuff and V1 cuts. It's a risk but it's safe enough for me. Just curious if that engine is, comfortable?

I used to fly a Caravan, I thought they'd be like a fun C-172 but it turns out they're not as fun as they look. That big broad side, underpowered engine and bad de-ice capability coupled with Cessna-isms. So is a PC-12 as fun as it looks?

I bring this up because I was at PDK this week letting my kids play on that playground beneath the tower. PC-12s everywhere obviously because of Epps so I looked online and there were some youtube videos and I swear that you couldn't tell when the plane landed.

I have been parked next to quite a few of them recently and they look great on the ramp. I'd like to have a chance to fly one some day myself. Yes - that moving from the back of a KA to the front and then climbing into the cockpit with someone already sitting in the next seat is......well......a challenge :o

USMCFLYR

Makes me wonder if with $112 oil if we won't see more? Well, I just looked, one set of calculation says it takes 60,000 miles of annual flying for a used PC12 to begin to cost less than a used Citation 501SP.

But yeah USMC, if Beech ever wanted to shrink the 1900C and make that the new 200 and keep that forward door, I'd be a happy man to fly that. I'm 250 lbs. There isn't enough room for me and them too.

Guess it could be worse, could fly a Duke or Meridian. :D I'd seriously have to teach people how to lock that door because there is no way I could have 4 passengers and me closing that door. No way. Guess some TBMs have that front door, that'd work.

Great airplane! I too have flown caravans. The pc-12 is like a real airplane, while the caravan is like a giant 182. The controls on the -9 series are heavy, but I liked them that way. It's a very solid instrument platform with a good autopilot. Cruise could be up around 180-200kts if you pushed it, we usually did 150 indicated to save gas as we didn't usually go out of the mid 20k' range. I can't remember what kind of TAS numbers we were showing, but even at 150 indicated we would be around 180-190 TAS in the 20's.

Fuel planning was around 400lbs/hr and the trailing link gear really does make for some awesome landings. I don't like the interconnect with the ailerons and rudder when the flaps are extended, but thats just a personal preference. With full fuel, the a/c could fly for over 8 hours!

I love the pc-12. Everybody always talks about how if they win the lottery they'd buy a caravan on floats, well I would be buying a pc-12! The deice equipment could be fussy sometimes, but it always worked, and worked well (unlike the caravan). It was way more fun to fly than the jet I'm in now. Oh yeah, it has the same max gross t/o weight as a caravan, and almost twice the horsepower! Whats not to love!

I've got a couple hundred hours in the legacy and a few more in the NG and they're both nice planes. 260 KTAS in cruise at around 360 pph was pretty standard in the old plane, 265/380 in the NG, but climb performance was better in the NG. Excellent short field performance and very, very easy to land. Trips from the Mid-Atlantic to Fl were normal with 4-6 passengers, flight time around 4 hours. Personally I really like the anti-servo tabs on the ailerons of the new plane, makes fingtertip flying at speeds above 180 possible, where the old plane needed two hands. I fly a King Air now and am kind of torn between the two planes.

Pt6's do fail, like all machinery. We had a KA that had a failure, and it flew away. That extra oil/fuel burn is $ well spent. I think they are great aircraft, as long as you show that single engine a lot of respect (WX, overwater, nighttime, unpopulated area). When I see them being used as an all wx corp shuttle, it makes me a little nervous. IMO, Cockpit comfort means many engines running.

As far as I know, no one has died as a result of that 'only' engine failing in a PC12. Glide ratio is great and flying in the 20s gives you lots of options (unless wx is at minimums everywhere, that's when I get nervous).

It is crazy what this plane can do, takeoff and land in 1000' at 80kt, cruise at FL280 at 250-260KT while burning maybe 280#/hr. And haul anything. All said though, I would like another fire burning out there!

What about the TBM?

Much smaller than the PC12, but a fair bit faster. 6 place cabin; would be really comfortable for a pilot + 3 pax with minimal baggage, with a full boat it'd be kinda cramped for more than maybe 90 minutes.

Never flown one but my boss has casually looked at both the TBM and Meridian to eventually replace our Cirrus.

I have no time in them, but our company is slowly getting rid of King Airs in favor of Pilati... Most of the pilots comments are "It flies like a dump truck.."... But again this comes from guys who are a little miffed about losing their beloved King Airs, so take that comment with a grain of salt.