Solution:

Keep PC-12. Use it the majority of the time for < 500 nm trips and for islands.

Find a dry lease for a CJ3 or P300 for, say, ~50 hours/year. Take the jet on the longer trips. Somebody else owns the jet, so no depreciation. Use it less or more, just lease rate.

If you find little use for jet, drop it. If you find you are flying jet more and more, sell PC-12 and buy a jet.


It is called a 441. ~40-45 knots faster than a PC-12.

Or a TBM, but it carries fewer people.

Mike C.

SP jets vastly outnumber PC-12s.

As you say, the market doesn't lie...

Mike C.

There aren't that many guys on BT flying jets. My antagonists aren't the jet owners.

On the other hand, no jet owner is gonna tell you he owns the jet because it looks cool. They'll try to justify it. But if you haven't owned a PC12 I think you just don't see how low maintenance the experience is. Like I said, my main motivation for the jet is to check the box and look cool.

Totally untrue. Not even close. You should check out FA sometime.

You always "run for cover" with generalizations. All jets are not the same. All turboprops are not the same. All "twins" are not the same. You run from specifics/details.

Totally untrue.

Oh look, a touch back on the thread topic!Never mind, wandered off again.

Back in its heyday it was a regular occurrence to see Citations in Walkers. We used to walk over to watch them land, quite entertaining. Walkers is 2799’.

Gary

Made? Over the last 50 years? Yeah. That's meaningless. Aviation statistics can't go back more than 10 years. We all know your aviation reality ended in early 1980's but a lot has happened since then.

Cool picture. I've learned a lot about the place in the last few months. I love the history.

I think the 2799' includes the dogleg to the right.

Can be done, but not at gross. This means you aren't going too far on takeoff.

Looks like a 550 (II) on the ramp in the photo. Assuming sea level, 30C (86F), zero wind, and 2700' available, the book says:

Landing: max 12,700 lbs (max landing weight for II)
Takeoff: max 11,500 lbs (flaps 15)

Landing is no problem, even at max landing weight, ground roll is only about 1500 ft.

Takeoff is limiting, however. At 11,500 lbs, you have about 3,000 lbs of useful load, so let's say you have 2000 lbs of fuel. That is enough to fly MYAW to KPDK, ~ 500 nm, with tight reserves, or you can do US customs in FL easily with ample reserves.

Takeoff assumes accelerate to V1, engine failure, takeoff on remaining runway, to 35 ft height, or stopping prior to V1 on the remaining runway. So the actual runway usage without engine failure is far less, the jet numbers have lots of safety margins built in.

A morning departure at 25C and with 10 knots wind increases allowed weight to 12,500 lbs, thus another 1000 lbs fuel, so easily makes 500-750 nm trip to US.

PC-12 max weight, to have accel/stop distance on takeoff, is 9,500 lbs, about 1000 lbs below gross. If you don't care about accel/stop, you can depart at gross but that's not realistic since you burned fuel on the inbound (no fuel at MYAW I suspect).

A PC-12 which suffers an engine failure on takeoff becomes a diving attraction for the scuba enthusiasts.

Mike C.

You can "kinda" get 2700 ft out of it in a straight line as shown below:

You can't get 2799 ft without using the dog leg more severely.

In a jet, taking off east, if you abort, you will be pretty slow at the end and can turn a bit. If you are going, your runway number is based on 35 ft crossing height, so you aren't rolling on that part anyway. Taking off west, use the dogleg a bit for early acceleration, so you have the distance.

So I can see 2700 ft. Kinda.

Mike C.

It is uphill, most take off to the west. I went there several times in the mid 70s.
I remember talk of a Lear 24 landing there...

Here is encouraging news for Walkers.

https://www.boatinternational.com/yacht ... mas--37179

If they can come out with a 320 knot Pilatus I'll never get the jet.[/quote]

Light at FL290 the -10 supplement says exactly 320 knots, heavy it is still at 311 knots. Given that these two engines are close to the MPG of the PC-12 and overhaul cost per hour is same or less (my engines were a total of $350k for the 5000 hr overhaul), would a C441 have a place in your upgrade path?

BTW, my useful load is 4120 lbs, how does that compare to the PC-12?

Or just take the Pilatus on long flights like I already do. I already went down the path of dry leasing a CJ3. Insurance company wouldn't cooperate. At the end of the day it was a total waste of money. I'm only saving an hour on long flights. It's not worth the effort. I was only doing it to see how I liked it but at the end of the day it was a huge hassle and expense for an airplane I didn't even own.

As for the 441.... never heard of it. Who manufactures it? Is it as large as the Pilatus? Top end speed is only 30% of the equation. There are many more factors involved. Why would I do a TBM?

I really wanted a Premier to work for me. Bob generously sent me a number of manuals and I poured through a good number of scenarios flying out of SDL and MTJ and found times when it wouldn't work. At the time I was commuting back and forth every weekend in the King Air and departing in whatever temps and weather existed when I needed to go (King Air was a beast, it never cared when we flew or what we flew into).

Mike you gotta be careful when thinking about that 130GPH block to block number. The CJ2 has similar burn rates but on short flights a jet will eat you up. The CJ2 is gonna burn 190 gallons in a one hour flight - so will a Premier. Maybe I'll get faster on the ground and peel off a few minutes but I've done enough short flights to accept that this is the number. I used to hop into the KA anytime and fly it but now I look at these short legs in the CJ and think about getting on the airlines or driving.