After the sale of my 421 in June, I arranged an hourly dry lease with a local company that was looking for more use of its plane. It helped that I've known the chief pilot for 30+ years.

WHAT I LOVE
The cabin is phenomenal and the build quality of the airplane is nothing other than Swiss. It is a fantastic piece of machinery. The cabin is large, modern, airy, with a wide aisle and huge cargo door.
The range is spectacular. It is a non-RVSM bird, but the range at FL280 is stunning.
The reliability is off the charts. The plane just goes and goes with hardly a squawk.
Electric freon air conditioning: wherever a GPU is available, the cabin can be pre-cooled.

WHAT I DON'T LIKE
APEX: remarkably capable, but remarkably klunky. The bootup sequence is a hassle. This avionics system belongs on a plane with an APU.
Pressurization: The max diff is only 5.75 psi. The computerized control is rougher on the ears than any other pressurized plane I've flown.
Turbulence: given its low wing loading, I guess I shouldn't have been surprised, but I am surprised by how much it moves around in the bumps. Slowing down a lot helps, but does not solve the problem. My guess is it that without engines out on the wings, the roll inertia is so low that it is easy for the bumps to work their magic. Passengers have complained.

Michael,

In what I am sure will be a vain attempt to prevent the Ultra thread from becoming a KA v Pilatus thread, I'll answer your question here.

My inclination for the King Air is based upon a preference for a lower capital cost and acceptance of the King Air's higher operating cost. Does this make economic sense if I plug the numbers into a spreadsheet? Probably not. But it is my preferred tradeoff.

Another significant factor is the ride in turbulence.

Are these just rationalizations since I can't afford an NG? Probably.

Dan,

I'll agree with your love/don't love list for the PC12 except for the Apex. Would a G3000 be better? Absolutely, but the Apex/AP is rock solid (assuming you are on the latest software build). The bumps surprised me the first time as well. Like you said, if you slow it down - like in the 170KIAS range, it helps out a lot. Wing loading is around 25#/sf lightly loaded and 37#/sf at gross so bumps will be felt when you are light.

One other consideration with the PC12 vs the KA is your payload/range. You'll be able to take 8 people a lot further in the PC12 than a KA200; I'm guessing a KA350 is around the same range/payload.

In theory, I agree with your financial analysis. We were looking at a KA200 to begin with and ended up going with the PC12 because of the amount of hours we planned on flying 300-400/year.

Jan 2017 marks 4 years and 2 million flight hours since the PC12s last fatal accident. The fleet has 6 million flight hours and 16 fatal accidents. Hovering around .26/100,000 hours fatal accident rate. Those are near single pilot twin turbine rates.

Its good that you leased it so now you have real world knowledge. Not many PC12s for lease - most are highly utilized.

I don't have much pc12 time but the turbulence thing was quite noticeable. As was how slow it was. Good reasons to be less upset that I cannot afford one!!

Interesting that you note that. In my steep descents/ greater than 1500 ft/min, the controller limits the depressurization to around 350/400 ft/min



Don't have much to comment on as I did not spend enough actual flying time in a King Air.......my PC12 was my first real airplane. It seems like glass to me, but maybe it's because I was used to the ride down in bumps in Florida/Panhandle/New Orleans and Texas



One place I have to disagree. Have about 30 hrs in the TBM on the G1000.

Boot up sequence takes about 45 to 75 seconds, but that is not an issue for me at all.

I find the Apex to be very easy to use and it has every single toolset within it that I need. Route and flight planning is very simple to enter/manage.

The autopilot in the NG is very, very good. I believe it's used on the Gulfstreams.

Even with outrageous parts pricing my hourly cost has been low, in the low $4/500's without reserves. With reserves I would say I'm around $600/$650......I also had a 45k annual, which I knew had a few expensive parts, like the VCCS and new brakes, which required new wheel assemblies.

I find the speed fine as I normally cruise at between 265/273knts TAS. It's the long legs where the airplane really shines. I always make KTEX to KFXE non stop eastbound and land with 500-800lbs of fuel, enough for another 1-1.45hrs of flying.

As you know the cabin is just frigging huge........I've been blown away by the airplane........i've toyed with the Phenom300 but the PC12 just does everything so frigging well. Landed on 9'er at KFXE and almost made the Hotel turnoff, and that was without any reverse........it can land and take off in seriously short distances..........

John L has a very nice 200 and I need to fly with him on some long legs to truly make an objective argument.........

Correct about the turbulence. They don't like it. I actually think the pressurization in the NG works quite well. Ive never had any issues with it and its very smooth. The avionics are nice, the boot up is something you get used but I love the apex. The system does come from larger corporate airplanes.

Dan,
I didn't catch your negative comments on the pressurization at first read. I agree with Shawn and Michael, it's great. You might let the operator know to have it checked out something doesn't seem right.

On the Apex boot time, turn on standby bus at preflight when doing your cockpit checks, complete your outside preflight, then right before you shut the door, batteries on. Before you are strapped in, the Apex will be waiting on you. Or if waiting on pax and get a GPU, hit start and your off. The rudder boost and auto-feather checks in the KA will delay you more than the Apex.

If I were you, and you plan on few hours, I'd continue to lease the PC12.

Good morning Dan,
We just transitioned to a PC12/45 and are based at ABE. While the NG is beautiful, the 45 does everything we need it to. We purchased the airplane with relatively low time, but with the 5 bladed prop and upgraded GTN 650/750. I am not sure what your mission is, but for us the /45 does everything well.
Feel free to send me a PM if you'd like to discuss offline. BTW, are you leasing CAC's airplane?

First I've read of the turbulence issue. Thanks.

I flew a Malibu once out of Phoenix on a summer morning. Within 5 minutes I knew it wasn't for me. My 421C (at the time) felt like an airliner compared to that ROUGH ride.

APEX
1. The autopilot is great. No complaints there.
2. Boot: Have you NG guys never turned on the batteries too soon and messed up the boot? Or done everything properly and still had items not come alive and had to reboot? I agree that the issue is minor when there is a GPU, but I find it both cumbersome and finicky.
3. Have you NG guys never entered the flight plan and weights correctly, but still can't the V speeds to compute? At that point, I go back to re-entering things and hope the computer takes the data on the second try.
4. If you are taking off from an airport and intend to do practice approaches at that that airport, what do you enter in the flight plan, including destination and departure?
5. On a routine flight, if you are cleared direct to some waypoint farther down in your flight plan, how many twists and pushes and prods does it take? When you highlight or select that desired waypoint, what is the default option that Apex provides (it is not direct to)?
6. How convoluted is it to reload a different approach?
7. If your serial number NG is wired so that the squat switch disables the radar from transmitting on the ground, do you know how to overrride that?
8. If there is a likelihood that you will miss the approach at your destination, do you enter the alternate in alternate field in the flight plan before takeoff?

I recognize that APex has big brothers in all sorts of fancy jets, and I would be delighted to have the Honeywell panel in my Falcon with 2 crew, but Apex does not seem to be a good fit for an owner-flown single pilot airplane. Maybe Apex and Honeywell and I have a personality conflict, but that is how I see it.

PRESSURIZATION
It sounds like other planes are better, but the one I fly seems to think that whatever the current climb or descent rate is, that rate will continue to either FL300 or touchdown. For example, while cruising at FL260, the controller issues an expedited descent to FL200. If I descend at 2600 fpm, the pressurization system extrapolates that to being on the ground in 10 minutes at my sea level destination, even if that destination is 30 minutes away. Since cabin altitude is about 7,000' at FL260, the controller descends the cabin at about 700 fpm. The old-fashioned selector and rate knob on my 421 did a much better job.

A max diff of 5.75 psi is too low for this plane. At FL230, the cabin is just over 6,000'. At FL260, the cabin is almost 8,000'. A TBM has 6.2 psi, a 441 6.3, a King Air 6.6, and Erwin's Merlin is 7.0.

Overall, I love the Pilatus and am in awe of its talents. But it brings its set of compromises just like every other airplane.

Jesse,

When it is rough, my pax lament the loss of the 421.

But other than that, the pax love the cabin, the greater speed, and making longer legs non-stop.

The Ultra with have you at just over 6000ft cabin at FL400!

This is the first I've read of the turbulence issue and the pressurization issue and I have 1000 hours in mine. I flew a 777 back from Turkey last summer and I noticed how the turbulence felt exactly the same as in my Pilatus.

As for the Apex...... I used to hate it but the Honeywell really improved it a lot. No, it's not in the level of Garmin but it does what it needs to do well and It has never crapped out on me. Works every time... even when I start up in minus 8 degrees.

Yuppers



On the 200 startups last year I only had one that was finnicky and that settled after it had been on for a while. One thing to note is that it's a computer. If they have HAPP they can switch out the cards if there are any issue. What you are describing are technical issues that should not be happening.



I can enter a full flight plan in less time than you can put it into any other system. I do weight and balance on my app on my iPad (IF I NEED IT), most times I'm way under weight. CG is very, very rarely an issue. I never put the V speeds into the FMS. Those should be in your brain



There are a number of tricks to deploy, but one is to enter the initial approach fix and then the destination. Or just take off and then enter the approach



Zero, you select that waypoint and any other prior are deleted. Very, very simple.



Very simple, takes 3 clicks. Do it from the descent and approach page.



You can set that up in your FMS.......go the the page setup in the MFD



I don't but you can. You can also choose whether you want the FMS to show/not show the alternative airport.



I find that the exact opposite is true. APEX is butt assed simple once you know how it works. Come fly with Brent/Jason/Shawn/myself and we'll show you how easy the APEX is. Now with build 10.7 it's like butta!!!!!



You airplane is busted. Get the folks to get that fixed.



I cannot comment on the psi difference as I've not spent much time in other turbines except the TBM. I've never had a complaint or issue about the pressurization altitude.........I do however now live at 9,000ft, so that may be something

[quote="Michael Penman"]
You airplane is busted. Get the folks to get that fixed.

[quote]

Busted? Is that like having an ugly baby? Good news - he is only leasing the busted up plane. This made me laugh today. Thank you Michael! Peter