BeechTalk - BT - Bought a PC-12

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Jan 2023, 16:38

Username Protected wrote:

Chuck, it's just the Part 25 Transport Category guaranteed performance. If an engine quits and you do your job, you will put it on a runway. I guess it spoils you. Guys who are not spoiled probably see it as a single engine turbine is much more reliable than a piston, which it is.

Reading an earlier post where the pilot had two PT-6 failures in 6,000 hours isn't very endearing.

Part of my job is flying a Pt25, but I fly all sorts of stuff, the PC12 doesn’t remotely concern me, what would concern me is the math on having two PT6 failure in 6k hrs, same plane? Company? Not following checklists? That’s some crazy odds

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Jan 2023, 21:51

Username Protected wrote:

I used to argue about the benefits of the B200 vs PC-12 but I'd say I generally lost the argument here on BT. In December I purchased 50% of a 2015 PC-12NG so now I'll get to see things from the other side - thanks Penman...

Sim school was hard to get into. A friend of mine asked a favor and got me a slot at Simcom and I just finished a week ago. I took an experienced PC-12 pilot along on my first trip as captain on Wednesday. I'm having a really hard time admitting it but it was "purdy nice". My favorite part is seeing three digit numbers (to the left of the decimal point) on my fuel receipts, coming from the CJ, I NEVER saw 3 digit numbers!.

The passenger experience in the PC-12 is incredible! I had another pilot so I went in back during cruise and worked with my team to get ready for our sales meeting. I sat in the club seating with the tables pulled out and it was extremely comfortable and productive. It is quiet, roomy, easy to move around, flexible, well lit and well...its the nicest passenger experience I've ever had. Who cares if it is slower than a jet, it is so much nicer back there I'm sure my guys liked it better than the CJ.

Is it fun to fly? No, everything happens so slowly it is not nearly as challenging or exciting as flying a single pilot jet. Any airplane is boring in cruise but the PC-12 is boring in takeoff, climb, cruise, descent and landing. OK, maybe its fun in some of those but it is so well mannered and easy to fly it just feels like a big 182.

Why do I still miss the B200? The B200 was the first turbine airplane I owned so you never forget your first girl. The King Air was also 5X cheaper to insure and 4X less capital cost - you can buy a lot of Jet-A for that. Also, I did a trip in the PC-12 (in the right seat) in December SDL-APA-SDL and on the return trip it was dark, over the mountains and light to moderate icing for most of the time. I asked the pilot how he'd feel about being a glider right now and he didn't like it either. I never worried about that in a twin. The thing about a twin is it is statistically the most dangerous for 20 seconds after takeoff so that is the pucker factor time - on that night my (admittedly mild) pucker factor happened for a lot longer time. I know it is just emotions but it was real to me.

In summary, if you want to burn jet-a and have the most fun, get a jet. If you are not going to fly a lot but want to have some fun, get a legacy turbo-prop. If you fly a lot and like to be bored, efficient and amazingly comfortable get a PC-12.

I had a very similar experience. We had a B200 and moved to a 350. While the 350 really did just about everything better, it had type rating and balanced field distance requirements. When 2008 hit we sold the 350 and leased a PC12. Just about every FBO lounge “expert” raved about it. They said it was better at everything even close to its class. Better or same speed, less cost, Swiss reliability, stability, comfort, can carry anything, safer, can glide across US, etc. were common comments. In 18 months we learned that you wind up crossing just about everything off that “it is better” list. We had a prop over speed, two inverter failures, multiple flap computer failures, in moderate turbulence the AP would kick off, the overall cost was not less and the ride made a lot of passengers sick. We have since moved back to a King Air and Citations. On the King Air we don’t worry about mountain or over water flying. I had to shut down an engine over the Atlantic on the way to Iceland and diverted to Narsarsuaq. Glad the second engine was there.

Moral of the story is unless the people giving the recommendations actually owned the airplanes they are comparing, their comments should be heavily filtered.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Jan 2023, 23:27

Username Protected wrote:

I used to argue about the benefits of the B200 vs PC-12 but I'd say I generally lost the argument here on BT. In December I purchased 50% of a 2015 PC-12NG so now I'll get to see things from the other side - thanks Penman...

Sim school was hard to get into. A friend of mine asked a favor and got me a slot at Simcom and I just finished a week ago. I took an experienced PC-12 pilot along on my first trip as captain on Wednesday. I'm having a really hard time admitting it but it was "purdy nice". My favorite part is seeing three digit numbers (to the left of the decimal point) on my fuel receipts, coming from the CJ, I NEVER saw 3 digit numbers!.

The passenger experience in the PC-12 is incredible! I had another pilot so I went in back during cruise and worked with my team to get ready for our sales meeting. I sat in the club seating with the tables pulled out and it was extremely comfortable and productive. It is quiet, roomy, easy to move around, flexible, well lit and well...its the nicest passenger experience I've ever had. Who cares if it is slower than a jet, it is so much nicer back there I'm sure my guys liked it better than the CJ.

Is it fun to fly? No, everything happens so slowly it is not nearly as challenging or exciting as flying a single pilot jet. Any airplane is boring in cruise but the PC-12 is boring in takeoff, climb, cruise, descent and landing. OK, maybe its fun in some of those but it is so well mannered and easy to fly it just feels like a big 182.

Why do I still miss the B200? The B200 was the first turbine airplane I owned so you never forget your first girl. The King Air was also 5X cheaper to insure and 4X less capital cost - you can buy a lot of Jet-A for that. Also, I did a trip in the PC-12 (in the right seat) in December SDL-APA-SDL and on the return trip it was dark, over the mountains and light to moderate icing for most of the time. I asked the pilot how he'd feel about being a glider right now and he didn't like it either. I never worried about that in a twin. The thing about a twin is it is statistically the most dangerous for 20 seconds after takeoff so that is the pucker factor time - on that night my (admittedly mild) pucker factor happened for a lot longer time. I know it is just emotions but it was real to me.

In summary, if you want to burn jet-a and have the most fun, get a jet. If you are not going to fly a lot but want to have some fun, get a legacy turbo-prop. If you fly a lot and like to be bored, efficient and amazingly comfortable get a PC-12.

I had a very similar experience. We had a B200 and moved to a 350. While the 350 really did just about everything better, it had type rating and balanced field distance requirements. When 2008 hit we sold the 350 and leased a PC12. Just about every FBO lounge “expert” raved about it. They said it was better at everything even close to its class. Better or same speed, less cost, Swiss reliability, stability, comfort, can carry anything, safer, can glide across US, etc. were common comments. In 18 months we learned that you wind up crossing just about everything off that “it is better” list. We had a prop over speed, two inverter failures, multiple flap computer failures, in moderate turbulence the AP would kick off, the overall cost was not less and the ride made a lot of passengers sick. We have since moved back to a King Air and Citations. On the King Air we don’t worry about mountain or over water flying. I had to shut down an engine over the Atlantic on the way to Iceland and diverted to Narsarsuaq. Glad the second engine was there.

Moral of the story is unless the people giving the recommendations actually owned the airplanes they are comparing, their comments should be heavily filtered.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jan 2023, 00:08

Congratulations John.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jan 2023, 00:16

Username Protected wrote:

Carl,

RE best glide speed in a 30 degree bank. As you know, glide speed increases with aircraft weight. In a 30 degree bank about 1.15 G's are pulled, making the effective weight of the airplane 15% "heavier."

You’re right. That makes total sense. So in this case about 115kts is the 30* bank glide speed in a Meridian at gross weight. :thumbup:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jan 2023, 01:04

Barring crazy winds you should be able to glide a Meridian back to the take off airport from 500 ft. AGL up to cruise altitude in the flight levels. Rarely am I ever out of glide of at least one suitable airport, even flying over the Rockies. Even crossing the gulf of California never out of glide to land. The range rings in foreflight are fun to watch. I keep nearest airports up on one of my windows, as a habit. Very few places where there are not numerous choices.

Attachment:

46E2C9D2-C178-488A-9D15-094EDCEBC2D5.jpeg

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jan 2023, 02:29

Username Protected wrote:

The range rings in foreflight are fun to watch.

Those range rings do not look like they are wind corrected based on them being so circular (and your GS being 297 knots, above your cruise speed, suggesting a tailwind).

They also don't seem to take into account the turn required if not straight ahead.

I would be careful assuming you can reach the range ring limits. A turn and a headwind will limit your range somewhat.

If in doubt, always choose the tailwind direction. You can even do better than flying at best glide, going slower than best glide will increase your range.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jan 2023, 09:45

I was just using one of the most remote areas in North America to demonstrate a point. In the continental US you are going to have so many choices that it is a non issue. Even crossing the rockies if you are careful about not indiscriminately following gps direct you will stay well within glide of good options. The engine failure related fatality rate of the cross country SETPs is better than any of the common twin METPs. TBM/Meridian/M500/M600/PC12. So if engine related fatals are what you are concerned with, the data favors SETP over METP’s. Here are some views over mountains and over the flatlands. Engine failure is not near the top of my concerns, but it is something I mitigate with planning and training. As with all pilots if I auger in one day the extreme likelihood is that I will do it behind a perfectly good engine. Especially flying a PT6.

Attachment:

44F732B7-77A0-470E-9CDD-57102C4B350B.jpeg

Attachment:

EA2D0A16-30E9-478D-8CF2-859513AAA062.jpeg

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jan 2023, 09:59

Username Protected wrote:

The range rings in foreflight are fun to watch.

Those range rings do not look like they are wind corrected based on them being so circular (and your GS being 297 knots, above your cruise speed, suggesting a tailwind).

They also don't seem to take into account the turn required if not straight ahead.

I would be careful assuming you can reach the range ring limits. A turn and a headwind will limit your range somewhat.

If in doubt, always choose the tailwind direction. You can even do better than flying at best glide, going slower than best glide will increase your range.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jan 2023, 10:01

I think FF glide ring is the green one. And it does correct by wind IMO.

Username Protected wrote:

The range rings in foreflight are fun to watch.

Those range rings do not look like they are wind corrected based on them being so circular (and your GS being 297 knots, above your cruise speed, suggesting a tailwind).

They also don't seem to take into account the turn required if not straight ahead.

I would be careful assuming you can reach the range ring limits. A turn and a headwind will limit your range somewhat.

If in doubt, always choose the tailwind direction. You can even do better than flying at best glide, going slower than best glide will increase your range.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jan 2023, 10:11

Username Protected wrote:

I think FF glide ring is the green one. And it does correct by wind IMO.

It clearly isn't in the picture provided since it is circular in all places not impacted by terrain and the winds are clearly not zero based on the ground speed being higher than cruise speed.

It appears the range ring lacks winds aloft data where this picture was taken.

One has to know what information is being displayed and when it can be misleading.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jan 2023, 10:15

Here is what the GTN750Xi Smart Glide shows, this is in my TBM. If you have done high/low key training the AGL altitude over the airport is invaluable

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jan 2023, 10:17

Yeah, the glide rings are wind corrected if they get a feed. Not sure why sometimes I get wind correction and sometimes I don’t. They do have the equipment in the plane to send the information. In practicality, I’m not ever going out to the edges of my rings anyway. If I lose an engine, I’m picking a long runway in a city with good emergency resources, and an instrument approach although I don’t plan on using the instrument approach. That just guarantees that there’s decent infrastructure for the runway. All that information is displayed on my nearest airports window, including the orientation of the main runway. Just like in training, my plan is always go direct, spiral down over the airport, and then plan the entry to the runway with my available altitude the. M600 will Almost follow a 3° glideslope engine out, just barely comes up short. So, if you ever did follow an ILS, you certainly want to come in a couple of dots high. But I’m spiraling. Reproducible. Even 0/0 synthetic vision will take you to the runway.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jan 2023, 10:19

John - what’s.pc12 cost per mile look like compared to cj2?

All the spreadsheets I have seen and operators I have spoken w seem to indicate a lot of what you save in fuel you trade away in Maint/insurance etc.

I think a pc12 is perfect if you are not pilot flying. Big comfy cabin to relax in. Who cares if it takes an extra 30m to get somewhere.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Jan 2023, 10:19

Username Protected wrote:

M600 will Almost follow a 3° glideslope engine out, just barely comes up short.

What is the M600 glide ratio? And best glide speed?

Bought a PC-12 - still miss the B200!