I attended NBAA and saw the NGX in person. I also saw the Denali mockup. I prefer the Denali cabin and cockpit. The NGX definitely has the BMW influence and it is nice, but I felt the Denali's seats were more comfortable. The Denali's big round windows are awesome. The NGX's glare shield is tall, really tall. I imagine forward visibility in the flare can be a challenge. The Denali cockpit is much easier to get into as the center pedestal is much smaller. The Honeywell Epic system seems to be very capable, but a little overwhelming. The NGX test pilot spent quite a bit of time with me explaining the changes and going through the avionics. I love it when the mfgs have knowledgeable staff (engineers and test pilots) demonstrating their product, no offense to the salesmen. I asked the test pilot if he was aware of Jim's cowl mod. He wasn't, but said he was very skeptical that an 18kt improvement could be achieved (no offense, Jim, just relaying his opinion, but I think we're all rooting for you). The windows are actually not the same as the PC24, they are slightly smaller. The windows are approximately 10% larger than the previous oval windows. He told me forget about a higher pressurization differential, the cargo door makes such nearly impossible. I asked how Cessna achieved it, he said they haven't, yet. Which is very true. Pilatus is selling planes, Cessna is selling promises. Cessna has a great track record and I'm sure the Denali will be certified at or near the projected performance, but there was quite a contrast in announcements this week between the two manufacturers. One is announcing a new model you can actually buy with some great enhancements. The other is announcing delays.

Another interesting fact. The test pilot said there is no airspeed penalty in cruise when operating the prop in low speed mode. He did say the takeoff and climb performance is compromised (can't remember by how much), but it is permitted.

I’d hate to be Cessna waiting on GE to deliver an engine. Who knows how long that could take? Seems they could go ahead and push forward with a PT6

Or better yet, a TPE.

I’d hate to be Cessna waiting on GE to deliver an engine. Who knows how long that could take? Seems they could go ahead and push forward with a PT6

Interesting thought, but I doubt GE would play along.

Mexico doesn’t pre-mix. You need to bring your own cans

I’d hate to be Cessna waiting on GE to deliver an engine. Who knows how long that could take? Seems they could go ahead and push forward with a PT6

Article sounds promising. I hope they fly a Denali soon. 2020 is only 2 months away.

Whats the fastest altitude for the PC12?

When they say 290 kts TAS on the GNX at what altitude is that?

Were can I find cruise charts?

They are quoting 290 tas at FL220

They are quoting 290 tas at FL220

Depends on OAT. There's a 20 knot swing between a hot day and a cold day.

I was 261TAS today at FL260 over Florida. It was -19C at FL260. In the winter I've seen 280+ at FL260.

Mine is a 2008 Model. The 2016's are 5 knots faster than mine. The NGX's are 5 knots faster than the 2016's. The airframes have been cleaned up a bit since they built mine.

No use looking for faster in the same type. +5/10/20 knots is a joke. You want fast then start looking at swept wing .85M+ aircraft. And don’t fret about the training requirements as that’s just the cost of going fast.

Yes and no. Jason has made the excellent point, that I have thought about a lot, which is that the extra training time is virtually impossible to make up. People talk about more gas as a speed mod and 2 weeks initial and 4-5 days recurrent every year is about the biggest drag you can put on an airplane.

I may move to a jet some day. But if I do it won't be to save time in the overall sense but because I want the illusion of saving time and because I just want to.