There has to be. Only reasonable that they are, but wanting to know more of the Denali before they finalize what the NG+ (my guess) will be.

Cozy up to the Cessna sales associate on the Denali. I'm sure they would love to have a "convert" and would have some motivation to do so.

Then when Pilatus finds out your cozied up with Cessna, they might share their NG+ plans.

Can’t imagine that a new higher performance, significantly, will come for Pilates+ Jason. Maybe an avionics change or small speed increase like TBM with aerodynamics. If more than that it would require new certification which would be years in the making. Get a new one now and stay with whatserveds you well particularly if your misssion hasn’t changed. The Pilatus has no challengers when you need to carry the girls you do on trips. You would not be happy on the shorter and more numerous trips with a jet.

Right now you’re faced with an HSI on your bird and that is some potential significant downtime. Trade for a new or close to it if you really want it. Loss of use is a bear....

Decisions decisions...

OK... if that's the path I choose, should I go ahead and get a new one by years end? They're offering me a good deal.

Mine is 10 years old. 1750 hours. The new one is full warranty and 4 years free service blah blah blah. Plus 100% write down this year.

Jason, or anyone else in the market for a new 8 seat long range SETP with a big cargo door, here is a question: Based on everything currently known about the Denali, and assuming both were the same price (about $4.8 right?), which would you buy?

Scott,
I’d be concerned GE was even going to come through their current turmoil to certify it for the Pilatus. Sad to say. PnW lucks out again.

Yeah GE as a big conglomerate is in trouble but is the turbine engine unit also in trouble? I'd be pretty surprised if GE didn't come through.

Flying the arrival in the Falcon 20 the other day ATC was descending us with 40 minutes left. We were below FL200 with with 20+ minutes left in the flight.

Yes but the Denali is "new certification" and new motor. I just have no idea when it might be available.

Based on what WE know about the Denali right now I'd stick with Pilatus for the simple fact that Denali will have a few years of bugs to work out. I'm sure Denali will be a great plane though.

I simply cannot believe Cessna would be dumb enough to build a carbon copy of the PC12.

Philip......thanks for the “real world” opinions. Phenom 100....no doubt beautiful piece of machinery!

Based on what has been announced, and assuming Pilatus does nothing, there are a number of differences:

Engine - no HSI, longer TBO, FADEC
Airframe - very slightly larger cabin, rear lav (external service), user configurable
Avionics - G3000
Price - very slightly less

Speed, range, fuel burn, and payload appear to be about the same as of now. Are the above differences enough to say it's not a carbon copy? If not, what would it take?

Until I see an "actual" airplane...... It's just words on a paper so I have no choice but to assume "carbon copy". Those differences are very minor and not worthy of a "clean sheet" design..... IMO.

The differences are also minor enough that Pilatus easily has a new PC12 already complete and ready to go with major changes that makes the Denali instantly "obsolete".

One interesting thing is that Cessna hasn't announced the usable fuel for the Denali. I read a flyingmag article yesterday that specially said it's undecided until after first flight (https://www.flyingmag.com/first-look-cessna-denali). The wing design must be done by now and with 3D modeling software it's just a few clicks to figure the volume. So they know what it could be but have decided to hold that information. To my knowledge they also haven't released fuel burn specs (but you could calculate that if you knew usable fuel). The GE engine is supposed to have "10% more power on 20% less fuel". If that turns out to be true then the Denali could have a fuel consumption advantage over the PC12 which Pilatus would have a hard time matching. P&W might have FADEC in the works, but I very much doubt they have something with all the advances of the GE engine: 16:1 pressure ratio, variable stators, etc. If they did it would't even be a PT6 anymore really. If I were in charge of the Denali design I would add fuel capacity until reaching 400 lbs useful load to give it crazy range for a couple people that want to go cross country. I would also do everything I could to reach 300 KTAS. Maybe it's impossible but from a marketing point of view it would be huge. They are quoting 285 now so 300 seems like it could be possible. I wonder where the GE engine temps out? The Denali is also certified to FL310 with 7.55 psi diff compared to 5.75 for the PC12.

Personally I think there are enough small advantages with the Denali to take a big bite out of Pilatus assuming no big changes to the PC12. That's also assuming Cessna doesn't have any big negative surprises during certification but that seems unlikely with a company like Cessna who has certified more new airplanes than anyone.

And Jason, you were saying the CEO of Piltatus swears there is no big revamp of the PC12 in the near future. That seems believable since they just finished with the PC24. I doubt a company the size of Pilatus could take on those two projects concurrently. Most likely the 24 took everything they had to get out the door.

Then there's this from Pratt:
http://aviationweek.com/nbaa-2017/pwc-o ... wth-engine