Was supposed to be in green font

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.

What does a 2008 PC-12 with 1750 hours bring?

$3.1-$3.2

I just flew a PC12NG 550 miles and returned sitting in the back of a near perfect Citation III. Shaved an hour off coming home. Two pilot jet though, no more room in the back and surprisingly loud. Still at 2m less than the Pilatus, not a bad way to go.

Do you think there is a significant PC-12 revamp coming in the next couple of years? Because a new PC-12 is not a whole lot different than a 2008 right? Or is it?

Couple secondary items that haven't been discussed that did factor into my decision to buy the Phenom 100. My engineer total geek spreadsheet evaluated all of the SETP, Lite-Jets (Honda was a paper airplane at the time), and King Air 90. The PC12 topped my analysis given our mission profile with the Phenom 100 a close #2.

1) The PC12 has a huge 53+' wing span. At the time I had to hangar at an FBO; they could not fit a PC12 but could fit the Phenom 100. I since bought a hangar and the PC12 won't fit. If you are paying an FBO for hangar space it will cost you a fair amount more then the so called "baby jets". They charge by square foot.
2) Getting over weather. The PC-12 has a 30K feet service ceiling. While not a huge factor I can top 98% of the weather at 41K.
3) The Phenom looks great on the ramp; cool factor matters.
4) My wife likes two engines so who am I to argue.
5) Regarding the Honda Jet - It has no trunk space! Good luck getting a huge suitcase into the cargo hold. The Phenom's cargo hold is huge.

After flying the Phenom for 4+ years I can honestly say that I'm very happy with the jet. It is fun to fly, the passengers are very comfortable, my dispatch rate has by excellent, and overall the service has been very good. The majority of my missions are east coast. I can pretty much get anywhere this side of the Mississippi without a fuel stop. When we do travel out west we make several fuel stops. My wife actually enjoys them; she likes seeing new airports/FBOs and makes a point to photograph everyone we visit.

The negatives that have been discussed are mostly true and apply more/less to all the lite-jets. They all had to compromise engine power with entry level jet cost. I wish it had better hot-high performance; haven't flown the new 100EV but plan too soon. I wish it had longer legs; another 30 minutes of flight time would make a big difference when flying westbound. I am typically under gross so more fuel capacity would be the answer.

Regarding the "time" comments. That is also true, sometimes. When I'm on a business trip time is all that matters; I want to get there and get home. For me, the Phenom has been awesome as my office is in Chicago. On the other hand, I fly because I enjoy the challenge. Having to plan routing, take-off, fly DPs, STARs, land and navigate airports is part of the challenge, it is part of the fun of being a pilot. Droning along at FL360 on autopilot is exactly challenging. So when I'm not pressed for time I do enjoy making the fuel stops and seeing parts of the country I would fly over on a commercial cattle car tube. We are flying out west in a few weeks. If time or money was the primary factor we'd fly 1st class commercial airline. Are we going to; you've got to be kidding!

a new PC12 is almost identical to my 2008. I feel there has to be a big revamp coming.

I just met with the CEO of Pilatus at NBAA and he swears there is no revamp coming. But the Denali is coming. I think they're just not showing their cards yet.

a new PC12 is almost identical to my 2008. I feel there has to be a big revamp coming.

I just met with the CEO of Pilatus at NBAA and he swears there is no revamp coming. But the Denali is coming. I think they're just not showing their cards yet.

It seems like there has to be something coming. It’s been 10 years which even by airplane standards is kind of long. But there is no way he would say anything until just before it is ready. One, new PC-12NG sales would tank while people wait for the new version and two, they don’t want Cessna to know. IDK if I were you I would probably wait. Even if they give you a smoking deal it must still be an extra million just to save maybe $40k per year on opex with the warranty, MX, etc. Have you done the 10 yr demate and HSI?

Yes I've flown a bunch of the 5 blades. Flew one back from Denver last week. I don't think it's quieter. In fact, I forgot I wasn't in mine. Ha.

The 5 blade looks great though. Speccing out a new one with my paint and interior and 5 blade prop would be fun. But I'm still going the same speed.

Are you broadly saying jets, or part 23 jets? The difference is part 23 jets aren't as restricted, they don't have to display the same level of performance to legally takeoff. All single pilot jets are part 23, and what you should be comparing. Saying the Falcon is stuck in Aspen for a couple of days isn't as relevant as saying the Phenom 300 is stuck (to single pilot guys). Scenarios exist that if a Falcon jet was reclassified as part 23 it could legally takeoff, but because it part 25 it can't.

Also already touched upon, beyond the part 135 limits many charter restrictions are purely business: the NetJets scenario was purely a business decision, don't risk the entire day for these few customers. Not sure why they didn't go to Rifle as Gunnison is even further...but being turned off from a jet based upon operators business or regulatory issues isn't overly relevant to an owner/operator.

FWIW: I fly a Gulfstream 100/Astra SPX, I fly VFR occasionally to get out quickly (I will do so tomorrow), short repositions that I don't plan to go high, get more direct routing etc. It can't do short fields like a PC12, but it gets in and out of most places easily. Regarding your Falcon20 issue: for kicks 5 passengers and luggage, 1,000nm trip: want to fly Telluride to Atlanta, no problem for the G100 jet (under 2.5hrs) whereas in a PC12 you are 4.2 hrs. I think your friend chartered the wrong jet if the point was to get from point A to B quickly.

Seemed significantly quieter to me, but only about 10 kts faster. Either way the Pilatus was quieter than the 650 I just flew home in.

I'm not speaking in terms of "legality".... I don't even know what's legal. I've never flown a jet as a 135 pilot. I'm speaking strictly of performance. Aspen has 1 runway for use for takeoff and it always has a tail wind.

I understand the Netjets scenario was a business decision.. It was still a $56K round trip for my friend who was treated like 2nd class IMO.

G100 in 2.5... PC12 in 4.2. It's still only 4.2. How much $$ is G100 to operate? Most folks drive 6 hours to the beach. TEX to Atlanta in a Pilatus in 4.2 hours non stop. Big deal! This is what I mean.... How much more should I be willing to pay to do what I'm already doing? A G100 must cost $1MM+ a year to operate and were flying the same missions. I'd also bet if we took off at the same time from TEX the time's would be much closer in reality. I'm also not willing to have to fly/live with another pilot.

I think this is your deciding factor. Flying VFR. You can fly VFR if it's your thing, but your range and speed advantage will evaporate in a jet flying low.