BeechTalk - BT - A Comparison of the Cost of Flying Various Airplanes

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Dec 2015, 15:03

My comments were not a dig, but quite the contrary. The basics of the PC 12 have not changed much because they didn't need to, Its a great already. They have done the normal things, like upgraded avionics and more engine. I love the PC12 and have for a long time, its just not in my price range at this point.
I think what will be innovative is if someone hangs the new GE engine on a legacy airframe, coupled with the latest wizbang Garmin touchscreen panel. That could be a gamechanger.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Dec 2015, 15:06

Username Protected wrote:

My comments were not a dig, but quite the contrary. The basics of the PC 12 have not changed much because they didn't need to, Its a great already. They have done the normal things, like upgraded avionics and more engine. I love the PC12 and have for a long time, its just not in my price range at this point.
I think what will be innovative is if someone hangs the new GE engine on a legacy airframe, coupled with the latest wizbang Garmin touchscreen panel. That could be a gamechanger.

The 2016 PC12 has aerodynamic improvements and a new 5 blade Hartzell prop. Pretty good performance improvement.

Fully electric landing gear came out in last years model. They add something new pretty much every year.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Dec 2015, 15:07

Username Protected wrote:

Is it just me or doesn't this look pretty innovative??

thats my point exactly. Other than glass, its still a PC12, and that's the beauty of it. Its really a great airframe all the way around.
I think of it as a really fast, pressurized Caravan. Easy to fly, tons of payload, short field friendly, and very adaptable to different cargo configurations. Cessna missed the boat, and now they are trying to catch up, but I am afraid they maybe too late.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Dec 2015, 15:08

Username Protected wrote:

I think of it as a really fast, pressurized Caravan.

I think of it as a slow Citation XLS.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Dec 2015, 15:11

Username Protected wrote:

My comments were not a dig, but quite the contrary. The basics of the PC 12 have not changed much because they didn't need to, Its a great already. They have done the normal things, like upgraded avionics and more engine. I love the PC12 and have for a long time, its just not in my price range at this point.
I think what will be innovative is if someone hangs the new GE engine on a legacy airframe, coupled with the latest wizbang Garmin touchscreen panel. That could be a gamechanger.

The 2016 PC12 has aerodynamic improvements and a new 5 blade Hartzell prop. Pretty good performance improvement.

Fully electric landing gear came out in last years model. They add something new pretty much every year.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Dec 2015, 15:11

Username Protected wrote:

I think of it as a really fast, pressurized Caravan.

I think of it as a slow Citation XLS.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Dec 2015, 15:19

Username Protected wrote:

I think of it as a really fast, pressurized Caravan.

I think of it as a slow Citation XLS.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Dec 2015, 15:25

I don't have a wife.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Dec 2015, 15:43

girlfriend...whatever....

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Dec 2015, 20:57

Innovative? You realy think GE can reinvente the turboprop?
Its not even built yet and its already gamechanger...

Pratt as been building its PT6 for over 50 years, if someone can get it more efficient its them. Im sure a new fadec PT6 is in testing right now and will be out before any GE prototype.

Username Protected wrote:

My comments were not a dig, but quite the contrary. The basics of the PC 12 have not changed much because they didn't need to, Its a great already. They have done the normal things, like upgraded avionics and more engine. I love the PC12 and have for a long time, its just not in my price range at this point.
I think what will be innovative is if someone hangs the new GE engine on a legacy airframe, coupled with the latest wizbang Garmin touchscreen panel. That could be a gamechanger.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Dec 2015, 21:11

Username Protected wrote:

Innovative? You realy think GE can reinvente the turboprop?
Its not even built yet and its already gamechanger...

Pratt as been building its PT6 for over 50 years, if someone can get it more efficient its them. Im sure a new fadec PT6 is in testing right now and will be out before any GE prototype.

PT6 has not really increased in efficiency in the last 50 years; except the A models.
GE if you believe the press, has increased the efficiency way beyond what is in the current market.
PWC has announced some improvements recently, question is who will make it to market first.

Tim

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Dec 2015, 21:36

Quote:

.Pratt as been building its PT6 for over 50 years, if someone can get it more efficient its them. Im sure a new fadec PT6 is in testing right now and will be out before any GE prototype.

Lack of competition breeds complacency.

Just ask some of the avionics companies that garmin buried.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Dec 2015, 22:16

PT6 can easily by surpassed by just about anything new in the marketplace. Garret's are decades old and still more efficient.

The market is slow...but it is not stagnant.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 05 Dec 2015, 00:29

Username Protected wrote:

(The PC-12 is a rare exception, so far, it's a great plane with great utility and no competition in its niche. It is manufactured by a company which has innovated slowly and managed production well to maintain scarcity, and when they have come out with a new product they have priced it higher, [not at the same price, to the detriment of legacy owners.]) You might even catch a good stretch of years where prices are flat or actually appreciate, it helps to be buying during a financial crisis or buying something well depreciated already (that 700B had lost over 50% of its initial purchase price since new, before slowing the rate of decline). Or, you might catch a hell of a bad stretch of three years time, where everything is down a ton. The biggest way to protect yourself from this risk is to buy stuff pretty well depreciated already.

I am reminded of a rather entertaining and enlightening posting in the TBM owners forum by a rather disappointed owner who had bought a new plane and sold it years later. He provided all of his operating costs, including depreciation (realized, not some accounting figure), and his total ownership costs were a significant multiple of the widely distributed TBM or AVEX published numbers. The guy lost his shirt. Should he have believed the marketing numbers? Of course not.

I'm not quoting marketing numbers on the PC12. A 2001 PC12 would sell right now for what it originally sold for in 2001. It's just a matter of looking at the marketplace (Controller).