If you can afford a PC12 you can afford your own hangar.

I'm having a hard time understanding why some think the KA350 is not more capable. It will haul more people further and faster. It burns more fuel, but for that you get twin engine safety. It is like comparing an A/36 with standard tanks to a Baron with extended fuel. No comparison.

IMO, the Pilatus is in a league of it's own. Huge Cabin and pretty fast. It is not a KA 350, though.

My PC12 does 278. I've never seen a 260 knot PC12NG. Yours must be broken.

There is no such thing as "twin engine safety". If there is, please post some stats to back it up.

I'm not saying the KA350 isn't capable. It's very capable. I'll take a Phenom 300 instead.

Todd, please post a mission the 350 can do that the NG cannot do. I've done coast to coast many times in my PC12. So don't tell me I can't

Show me a Single Engine Airliner Jet and I will agree with you. I love your PC12 and would love to have one, but if I had your money I would have a KA350 or a jet. Two turbine engines are safer than one IMO and the Airlines agree.

Exactly. These threads are no different than when my 10 year old stepson would ask me continuously - What's the best airplane? Given what economics and for what mission son? Always an enjoyable discussion, but never a right answer.

Yea at -32 SAT!!! When its cold outside they go faster. I don't see those temps until winter time around my area. Also book for that altitude and temperature, max cruise is 29.8 PSI not 30.8.

Book speed at 29.8 would be 270TAS at 412lbs, we run about 2kts faster than book so we would be 272TAS. We push it up to 30.8 we would be pretty close to you. We just run ours differently...

You're getting 278TAS cause its cold and you are pushing a little more power/fuel....

Way back to the original point that the PC12 is large...speaking with a ferry pilot who was flying new PC12s into the states [Pilatus has its office and hangars, or at least some of them, at our airport so we see these new ones come in regularly], he told me that the cabin of the PC12 is about the same size inside as the KA 200. Don't know if that's accurate, but he let me climb up in a PC12 and it was, indeed, rather large.

I don't care if you agree with me. You cannot back up your position. "The airlines use them" isn't enough. Since when do YOU Todd Sanderson do what the government tells you to do?

Yeah. I want a Phenom 300. Are you reading what I'm writing?

Then why you posting pics going 260? That's just silly.

You run it differently? There's only 1 lever. I keep it below 780 "per the book". There's not much else one can do. You sure you have a PC12NG?

There's a cabin comparison tool on the Pilatus website. The PC12 is between the 200 and the 350 in size.

My point is that if a single engine plane was as safe as a twin the airlines would push the jet manufacturers to build a single engine jet. They would save a ton of money on fuel and initial purchase expenses along with maintenance.

The twin/vs single safety record is flawed due to the PILOT at the controls being the safety factor. I would bet anything that most single engine planes are maintained better than twins, are flown more, and have pilots that can handle an emergency better due to the simple operation. In the airlines and when pros fly a ME plane that is well maintained it will always be safer as the loss of an engine is not an emergency - it is simply an inconvenience. When some 30 hr ME pilot that flys 15 hours a year loads up his friends in his 1972 414 at gross on a 90 degree day in the Rockies it is a different story.

Like I said, you have a plane that I will never have and that is awesome, but it is not as capable or a safe as a KA350. Having been to Flight Safety a few times in the KA200 I can tell you that an engine out is really no big deal. We simulated loss of engine at 100 foot on a 200-1/4 mile day. With less than 20 hours in the KA I was able to fly a full approach and put it right on the numbers for a safe landing. The Autofeather and turbine simplicity makes it a whole different plane than an old Duke/421/414, etc. Jets are even easier.

Prove it!

If what you say is true, then why do twins crash? A KA crashed today btw.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/GqBJ2ppoPVk[/youtube]

posting pics of an NG doing 278kts and calling it normal is like a fat chick who only takes pictures looking up to the camera to hide their chin while saying look how skinny I am...

You run yours based on ITT, we run ours based on Torque. We can create engine trends and spot anomolies easier in the engine. By running off of torque we can run a consistent ITT, about 765, if it starts to climb over time (say 20hrs) on the trend we know to take a look at something. There are different ways to run a turbine.

Yes I'm sure we have one, actually we 2 NGs... My boss likes them.

Simply my observation but when I have an emergency I want one at a time if given a choice

In a SETP with a engine failure you have a pressurization emergency, a hydraulic emergency and a electrical emergency.