PC12 pilots

lyncher · Post by **lyncher** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 8:07 am

I realized something this weekend. We had a charter to sheboygan wisconsin and there was a crew of a King Air 100 there. they wer complainging about something so I gave them a minute to calm down and went over to talk with them about the K.A. well they were complaing because their company was going to get rid of the aircraft they were on for a s/n358 pilatus! I was blown away (I am a pilatus pilot btw) they figured that they were being downgraded!
They had said that they were going to be on rotation, 1 week on the pilatus and 1 week on another King air.

I went on to explain to them that anything that can cruise at 260kts and approach at damn near the approach speed of a cessna 172, is an amazing machine! then they brought up the fact that it only has 1 engine. pffffft.

If you ever talk to anybody that flew a pc12 at one point they would only have good things to say! nobody would ever bring up the fact that "oh, man that airplane was a piece of sh*t because it has 1 engine! it doesn't matter what they're flying now........ They love the pilatus!

Pc12ers am i right? or am i right?

Chuck Yeagermister · Post by **Chuck Yeagermister** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 8:19 am

Be intresting to hear what those guys have to say in 6 months flyin the PC-12, compared to some 1970`s 100.

jet a1 · Post by **jet a1** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 8:24 am

i don't fly the PC-12 but i think the entire single engine argument also has a lot to do with location. the realiability of turbines is amazing but i was just talking to one of our captains who said that over his career he's had to shut down 3 PT-6's, for various reasons....thankfully there was another one attached to the aircraft...lol. the only issue i would ever have with single engine ops would be up north. i don't care how reliable that engine is, the moment it does fail, YOU'RE SCREWED!!! that being said down south and especially in the states there are airports everywhere and even if you have to set down in a field or something, help is only a few minutes away. i really like the PC-12 but it's definately a southern machine...in my mind. a very sweet southern machine at that!
later.
jet.

KAG · Post by **KAG** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 9:11 am

Career wise having EFIS, FMS, and other adavnced systems experience in your log book is great for the resume!!!

But As Jet mentioned it only has one engine. Yes I know they have a great engine, glide well and all that, but like a King Air, some are getting old (ish). I have had to shut down 4 PT6's, and I was very glad for that other engine beside me.
Over flat land with lots of airports sure I would have flown one, over the rocks or up in the artic, not a change.
But thats just me.

Lommer · Post by **Lommer** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 10:35 am

Make sure you note that many of the recorded PT6 failures out there are due to problems with the FCU. The PC-12 has a backup manual override for the FCU for exactly this reason.

The single engine is still cause for concern if you're going overwater or high artic, but I know PC-12 pilots who also fly King Airs and they never cease to expound on the virtues of the Pilatus.

Snowgoose · Post by **Snowgoose** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 10:35 am

I flew the Pilatus for about 4 years. Great airplane. Yes the 1 engine debate always comes up. I think it's moot, some don't.

Having flown a big King Air and PC-12, I would take the PC-12 anyday. There's one but. If you want to move on to bigger and better things the A100 is better career wise. Lots of CP's out there have never flown the PC-12 and think it's the same thing as a 172. No joke. Plus Mr. Insurance Man thinks you are less of a risk it you have lots of multi time in your log book. Even though the King Air and the PC-12 go to the same airports at the same altitudes at the same speeds in the same weather.

Downgrade? Doubt it, one month on the PC-12 and they'll be changing their tune.

lyncher · Post by **lyncher** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 11:17 am

well i dunno about same speeds and same altitudes. we run PC12s and Be100s and in my experience, which is somewhat limited in the king airs, the pilatus flies higher and faster.

altiplano · Post by **altiplano** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 12:20 pm

Higher faster blah blah blah... I'd prefer my 200 ANY DAY.

And I think most CP's/airlines would agree when it comes to recruiting drivers...

lyncher · Post by **lyncher** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 12:22 pm

im assuming you were never a pilatus pilot, so you probably cant really compare them..... I have no experience on a 200 so i cant call bullsh*t either

altiplano · Post by **altiplano** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 12:33 pm

true dat -

But I have spent some time in and around them and I'm not arguing that they're not a capable machine...

Hell if I had to fly a 100 I'd probably take a long look at the -12...

lyncher · Post by **lyncher** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 12:34 pm

plus with my goal being the RCMP ill take my pc12 time.

altiplano · Post by **altiplano** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 12:50 pm

I heard RCMP is slowly reverting to members as pilots... Trying to get largely out of civilian pilots again... Any truth?

lyncher · Post by **lyncher** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 12:55 pm

I've got a couple friends in there, and one whos retired but still knows everyone in there and it doesnt seem that way. they used to but i dont think so.

Panama Jack · Post by **Panama Jack** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 2:47 pm

I guess I would have to agree with altiplano, from the perspective of a career-building pilot.

Nevertheless, and this is just my opinion and speaking from the perspective of a large multi-engine jet transport pilot, the PC-12 seems like an amazing airplane, both in terms of capability, comfort, and economics. Never have flown one before but would love to some day.

I think the only thing that will come close in competition are some of the up-and-coming Very Light Jets. Exciting times ahead in aviation.

lyncher · Post by **lyncher** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 3:06 pm

anybody seen the next gen cockpits for the pc12.... effin sweeeeet

Dave T · Post by **Dave T** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 3:08 pm

The engine debate is always going to be out there. The engine is very reliable and it does have a manual over ride lever for the FCU. That being said things can still happen. People should be careful and consider the risks of the terrain they are flying over.

Other wise, having EFIS, autopilot, GPS, and a modern cockpit it is a pleasure to fly. It can easily be stopped in 1000 feet on landing and goes fast.

An awesome airplane, some people might think it's a downgrade from a King Air, but it really depends on what you yourself are looking for.

teacher · Post by **teacher** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 7:23 pm

Panama Jack, you mentioned VLJs, most if not all VLJs won't hold a candle to a PC12 in terms of range and payload, especially the new ones coming out. I've heard of Harley's being forklifted into the back of one. 7 pax plus a lav and bar, not bad on one engine.

But to answer the question, great plane to fly, lots of redundancies just not so great in the logbook. Same operation as a twin, just wrong column.

Here's a pic of the PC12 NG cockpit.

http://www.barco.com/barcoview/images/P ... pit-bg.jpg
[/img]

sanjet · Post by **sanjet** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 7:52 pm

I dont care what anyone says... you can have all the FMC / PNC / MFD / etc... you lose that engine, you're facked!

Maybe good for the US, just aint made for the north where civilisation can be hundreds of miles apart and in moutainouse regions...

lyncher · Post by **lyncher** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 8:22 pm

depends where you're going up norht, there are some strips up there you cant fit a twin into....

ScudRunner · Post by **ScudRunner** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 9:49 pm

I dont know about the rest of you but I got my start bombing around way up north in piston Singles. These planes were usally equipt with the most basic of instruments, MEL was a pilot and a map. Majority of the flying was low level in all weather "VFR" The engine quiting was never really a thought other than I can finally open that bottle of JD in the survival kit or I can test out my new gun on some woodland creature to pass the time.

If your always worried about the stove quiting on you, then you shouldn't be flying it. The PC-12 is an awesome airplane with modern avionics and systems all designed with redundancies to keep you safe, I wouldnt't think twice about taking it way up north. Great machine easy to fly, Airlines are starting to wise up to the PC-12, heard they useally have more trouble training King Air guys VS PC-12 drivers who are already well adapted to the modern Cockpit. Nothing against King Airs personaly but I know a few guys who said they would never go back to a king air after they fly the Pilatus.

185/310 · Post by **185/310** » Tue Jun 26, 2007 10:58 pm

I dont know, in my opinion I would say time in a king air is better for the logbook then time in a PC12. The PC12 out performes a 100 any day of the week, and has alot better toys on board, but for future jobs I would say the king air is the better machine hands down. In my opinion a navajo is a better time builder then the PC12. Also depends on what your aiming for though.

Panama Jack · Post by **Panama Jack** » Wed Jun 27, 2007 1:58 am

Thanks, teacher, for the cockpit view of the new PC-12's that are coming out. Also saw that the new ones have a new blended winglet design and they have worked on the control forces to make it even nicer to fly. I also am impressed by the seats that they are installing in the PC-12's-- I remember flying King Air 90's that had very crude seats with pleather-covered cushions. Yuck!

Sure, the new VLJ's do not have the same range, capabilities or payload capacity as the PC-12. I was thinking more in the terms of entry-level corporate transport, including shared-ownership, where individuals want a reliable private aircraft that will take them somewhere fast and at a reasonable cost. Of course the aesthetics of VLJ's will appeal to some "looks like a small Citation" as well the two jet engines, rather than the whirly prop thingy on the front, and the fact that there are two jets rather than one turboprop should eliminate the single-engine concerns. Obviously they perceive that there is enough of a potential market out there that so many manufacturers are jumping into the fray.

Comparing the PC-12 in terms of reliablity is interesting when you start comparing it to light or medium piston twins.

Panama Jack · Post by **Panama Jack** » Wed Jun 27, 2007 6:26 am

Got valid points clunkdriver, but nowhere in aviation (or any other realms of life) is "Safety 1st."

Economics heavily drive the equation. For example, I use to drive a Toyota Tercel and now I drive a slightly bulkier Hyundai, but I never have considered buying Volvo despite the increased safety benefits, even though the risk of being in a car accident is said to be greater than in aviation.

The same mentality of "good enough" has driven the path towards extinction of 3 and 4 engined turbine aircraft crossing the oceans.

Well, I'm off for a haircut. You'll be happy to know that when I do I hand my barber my own safety razor (although it is one of those cheap plastic ones that I took along with the soap and little bottles of shampoo from the hotel on my last layover).

teacher · Post by **teacher** » Wed Jun 27, 2007 7:29 am

You are very right Panama Jack. I guess it always comes down to client needs and wants. Perception of safety is always a big one too. I've met both people who wouldn't trade their PC12 for anything because of the roominess and comfort and others who would rather fly a tiny CJ and make a few fuel stops in a cramp cabin only to have their 2 engines.

I really think the VLJs will benefit the owner operator market a lot more or those charter/taxi companies that do shorter trips.

ScudRunner · Post by **ScudRunner** » Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:47 am

slightly off topic, I saw somewhere that the 767 is the most prolific aircraft crossing the atlantic everyday. In all that time since it started crossign the pond and all those flight there have only been 4 engine problems 3 where precautionairy shutdowns 1 was a total failure. Just goes to show the reliability of those engines and aircraft.

I think I was watching a Discovery chanel program.