In 2016 had Textron announced that they're building a 320 knot SETP the size of a PIlatus with cargo door and G3000 available in 5 years..... 6 moths later Pilatus would introduce one available immediately.

The 2019 PC12 is the exact same airplane as the 2008 except for a 5 blade prop and electric motor landing gear. The Apex screens are the same size. The cockpit with all the circuit breakers is the same. Cirrus planes have much larger screens and no circuit breakers in the cockpit. Even the PC24 has large Apex screens and no circuit breakers. I believe Pilatus is ready with an all new, clean sheet PC12 and they're just waiting for the right time to let it drop. Now is not the right time. Pilatus is watching Textron to see what they come up with. If Textron releases a carbon copy of the current PC12 after spending millions of $$ "re-inventing the wheel" Pilatus is going to eat their lunch.

The PIlatus wasn't designed to be what it has become. Imagine a re-design based on the market it actually serves. Yes, I think it'll be a totally new airframe.

The PC24 had to be a big enough leap from a PC12 redesign that the redesign wouldn't affect sales. Yes I think there is a market for a $5MM-$6MM 320 knot SETP the size of a PC12 that can go to FL350.

Even with no competitors one can see the current PC12 is "long in the tooth".

Have you ever tried to run emergencies in a Cirrus? You can't see the CB panel by your leg. You have to look at a diagram and then count circuit breakers down and across to know which one to pull. Unless you are really small you can't get down there and see the CBs under the panel by your leg. Forget any chance of seeing them at night or in smoke. That is not a plus in my opinion. Good marketing, but poor engineering. Now if you take the carpet and seat out, and climb out on the wing with a flashlight...... You can see them just fine .

I'm talking about the SF50. Sorry wasn't clear. I thought it was assumed we were talking turbine airplanes at the bare minimum in the SETP thread.

Just curious Jason, when was the last time Honeywell offered upgraded (faster) video cards/symbol generator boards for the Apex? I recall thos being mentioned a sometimes "slow" by other operators? And it wasn't that many years ago either including the NG. Not trying to say anybody's baby is ugly but the latest Garmin NXi is both slick and fast by comparison. And talking about Pilatus parts price gouging, Honeywell is a past master of the technique in my own experience.

BTW It's EASA that is driving the change away from giving aircrew access to circuit breakers in flight and thereby affecting aircraft design in both air carrier and GA. They say the reason is safety - set a fault code, fail to backup, make it a purely maintenance personnel issue on the ground. Maybe I believe them. But I also know it melds well with the general ab initio mindset in Europe. And another step on the way to fewer/no crew. Paranoid? Hey, it's not my job they're coming for. You can think what you wish.

You're preaching to the choir...... Apex is garbage compared to Garmin but the Apex is very simple and bulletproof. Apex really got me on the "how much whiz bang avionics do you really need?" bandwagon. I can land at any airport in any conditions with ease. It has a DIECT TO BUTTON. How much more you need?

The Apex in the PC24 is very different than the PC12. Probably still not as nice as the Garmin though.

I welcome it. Don't care.

Reading that Cessna 414 crash thread makes me cringe. That thing as 12 fuel tanks, 9 pumps, 14 switches, 10 valves etc. just to manage the fuel system. I do absolutely nothing in the PC12 to manage the fuel system. I put gas in. That's it. Why should I want it more complex?

iPhone is not going to make it without a physical keyboard. Nobody was worried at the time.... BlackBerry.

I saw the cabin at Chicago Executive last Thursday (as I couldn't or didn't want to make Oshkosh). My take a way is I liked the cabin, specifically the pilot seats in getting in and out. Lots of room and easy to get in. No climbing or stepping over center console/FMS stuff. They had the M2 there and a King Air 250 and after going in the M2 with a little climb over center and the King Air is terrible, grab handle overhead, if I had a crew I wouldn't care but when I am up front I don't want to climb over. I think I am just getting older.

Will be interesting to see what the engine does do as I am expecting better than 285kt for reasons stated already.

Even if it doesn't do well, I see it as competition that Daher and Pilatus have to step up.

You're preaching to the choir...... Apex is garbage compared to Garmin but the Apex is very simple and bulletproof. Apex really got me on the "how much whiz bang avionics do you really need?" bandwagon. I can land at any airport in any conditions with ease. It has a DIECT TO BUTTON. How much more you need?

The Apex in the PC24 is very different than the PC12. Probably still not as nice as the Garmin though.

This sounds like a bad idea to me. They copied everything else, they should copy the PC12 bathroom design too. All that's needed in a "refreshment center" is a cooler for drinks in the back. This design will waste a ton of space up front and a "modular" toilet sounds like a pain.

I agree that it should be in the front, but the Pilatus toilet is modular too. It can be removed fairly easily if space is needed.

True... but in front you never need to move it. If you don't need the toilet you can put some bags there. I keep the pitot covers, prop straps and backpack there on short flights. In the cargo area the toilet will constantly be in the way. All to save space for a "refreshment center" ? Also in front the privacy doors are brilliant... how does that work in back?

Pilots were shorter and narrower in 1964. Not like us dinosaurs......

Like you I see the good benefits hopefully resulting from their market entry. If it was me at Cessna I would counsel going to the Board for a significant level of buy-in investment, i.e. as in selling the first 100-200 close to cost or below. If it has *sufficient* speed, whatever that might be(together with its more useful size) it will put pressure on Daher to lower prices on the TBM. Pilatus also then has less pricing flexibility as well. And in both cases you are causing them reduced profits for the first few years from the pricing games as well as from some unavoidable loss of unit sales. Profit that would otherwise be used to invest more in new product, better warranties, etc. It sure is a classic marketing situation and will be a howl to watch! To be sure, Cessna is going to have to do something bold in their approach. I do worry that Textron may be too dollar constrained by the investment going into things like the V-280 Valor development to address this GA activity aggressively but I can't see what other choice they've got to attack a mostly well satisfied by great products turboprop market..... Fun and games! They're gonna have to *earn* their paychecks on this one.

Very enjoyable blog Adam and magnificent airplane!

Cheers

Larry