BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Mar 2018, 17:46

Username Protected wrote:

This is not a practical owner flown plane without a charter mission. At least I think I could find a much more satisfying and rewarding purpose for that kind of money.

It’s all a matter of degree and perspective (and bank account)....for most of us, the money we spend on this flying hobby could, of course, be spent on other items or projects, and it would make more sense to most people.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Mar 2018, 17:51

I agree. Bad Karma to analyze costs of flying. Best to just glance at the bank account, if the numbers are still green, fire it up :peace:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Mar 2018, 17:56

Username Protected wrote:

I agree. Bad Karma to analyze costs of flying. Best to just glance at the bank account, if the numbers are still green, fire it up :peace:

Absolutely! I NEVER add it all up or try to calculate hourly costs.....never!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Mar 2018, 18:13

Those P300 costs include CREW....
At 400 hr/yr owner flown the costs would be $502/hr less.
So total of all costs of $1331 /400hrs, NOT including depreciation.

PC24 would absolutely be my Lottery plane...

On the other hand don't discourage Mr Penman too much....
I believe he once offered to give me a ride in his PC-12, if its a PC-24 that's a way cooler ride. (PC-12 ride is still a dam cool ride.)

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Mar 2018, 18:22

Username Protected wrote:

Seems optimistic, but they say 1833/hr on their advertising for 400 hours, hourly is more for 200 hours per year due to fixed costs, which we are talking about for Penman's personal use ;-)

. OK. The debt service on 8.7 mil is 413,250 per year, which adds another 1000/hr on 400 hours, (would be $2000/hr on 200 hours) and depreciation adds another 1000/hr, which brings us to 3833/hr flying 400 hours per year, and you can see that if you drop that down to 200 hours, due to the debt service and depreciation increasing hourly, you are right back at the 5000/hr. that I stated earlier.

Again, how high does your fever have to be to want one of these unless you are a high volume charter operation? This is not a practical owner flown plane without a charter mission. At least I think I could find a much more satisfying and rewarding purpose for that kind of money.

I agree with your math. The depreciation is what blows these jets out of the water.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Mar 2018, 18:42

Username Protected wrote:

On the other hand don't discourage Mr Penman too much....
I believe he once offered to give me a ride in his PC-12, if its a PC-24 that's a way cooler ride. (PC-12 ride is still a dam cool ride.)

Paul, offer still stands mate.....trying to figure if the towbot will tow the 24 :peace:

Trying to figure out time in Cali to do a little cold water surfing.

Jason, I'm trying to convince EPPS and Pilatus to get us in for type rating..........

Charles, I did some further numbers and believe at 250 hrs a year I may just break even.......

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Mar 2018, 18:54

Username Protected wrote:

This is not a practical owner flown plane without a charter mission. At least I think I could find a much more satisfying and rewarding purpose for that kind of money.

I think there are plenty that will disagree. SP jets with greater utility will appeal to owner/pilots that have the financial capacity. What if they don’t care that much about the cost? What if they just want a nice jet they can fly without a copilot? Textron hasn’t struggled to find customers for CJ3 and CJ4. The pilots that buy the PC24 won’t care as much about the costs as those who can’t afford it will.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Mar 2018, 19:05

Username Protected wrote:

On the other hand don't discourage Mr Penman too much....
I believe he once offered to give me a ride in his PC-12, if its a PC-24 that's a way cooler ride. (PC-12 ride is still a dam cool ride.)

Paul, offer still stands mate.....trying to figure if the towbot will tow the 24 :peace:

Trying to figure out time in Cali to do a little cold water surfing.

Jason, I'm trying to convince EPPS and Pilatus to get us in for type rating..........

Charles, I did some further numbers and believe at 250 hrs a year I may just break even.......

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Mar 2018, 19:43

Username Protected wrote:

This is not a practical owner flown plane without a charter mission. At least I think I could find a much more satisfying and rewarding purpose for that kind of money.

I think there are plenty that will disagree. SP jets with greater utility will appeal to owner/pilots that have the financial capacity. What if they don’t care that much about the cost? What if they just want a nice jet they can fly without a copilot? Textron hasn’t struggled to find customers for CJ3 and CJ4. The pilots that buy the PC24 won’t care as much about the costs as those who can’t afford it will.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Mar 2018, 19:44

Transitioning to a jet tends to increase annual hours. You just can’t help but fly more.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Mar 2018, 19:44

Username Protected wrote:

Michael, If your flying 250hr a year in the PC-12 in the PC-24 wouldn’t the hours go down since your getting there faster. Or do you feel you would use the aircraft for more trips so your hours would stay the same.

The PC24 will save you minutes per flight over the PC12.... Not hours or days.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Mar 2018, 20:39

Username Protected wrote:

.....trying to figure if the towbot will tow the 24 :peace:

Michael you have this deal so dialed in- your biggest concern is if your tug is beefy enough to drag a -24 around. :bow:

I'm actually surprised Pilatus hasn't designed the plane with its own internal plane pusher - like fancy automatic sidewinders on each gear.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Mar 2018, 21:03

Username Protected wrote:

Michael, If your flying 250hr a year in the PC-12 in the PC-24 wouldn’t the hours go down since your getting there faster. Or do you feel you would use the aircraft for more trips so your hours would stay the same.

I flew 473 hrs in the PC12 last year............but I skipped a lot of trips because I could not get above the weather........that's where the Jet is incredible practical

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Mar 2018, 21:06

Username Protected wrote:

.....trying to figure if the towbot will tow the 24 :peace:

Michael you have this deal so dialed in- your biggest concern is if your tug is beefy enough to drag a -24 around. :bow:

I'm actually surprised Pilatus hasn't designed the plane with its own internal plane pusher - like fancy automatic sidewinders on each gear.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 20 Mar 2018, 21:07

Username Protected wrote:

Michael, If your flying 250hr a year in the PC-12 in the PC-24 wouldn’t the hours go down since your getting there faster. Or do you feel you would use the aircraft for more trips so your hours would stay the same.

The PC24 will save you minutes per flight over the PC12.... Not hours or days.

PC24 Now Certified