To me? Not at all. Trying to hang on someone else's coat tales.

That said; new engine, maybe better performance, as someone mentioned Garmin over Honeywell. Maybe they get some of the market share.

To me? Not at all. Trying to hang on someone else's coat tales.

That said; new engine, maybe better performance, as someone mentioned Garmin over Honeywell. Maybe they get some of the market share.

If you think so I have no problem with that.

Someone for some weird reason disliked my comment about Cessna. I like Cessna. And there’s nothing wrong with being a copycat. Why let Pilatus have all the fun? Actually wouldn’t be surprised if I get started in a Mustang. But have they made some mistakes? Sure. We all have. Personally I love the innovative thought of personal flight but I wouldn’t hang my hat on the SF50 being that. It’s sort of a “poke “ in that direction. VTOLS is where I would look.

I like Cessna. I was just pointing out that none of the airplanes Cessna doesn't make are a grand departure from what Cessna already makes. I don't think Cessna should have allowed the Phenom 300 in the door. I think they could've brought the XLS into the 21st century and had a better product. Now they have the PC24 to deal with also.

Pilatus is a big, established company. They're not an upstart. The invested a BILLION of their own $$ to develop PC24. You don't have to be a little guy to innovate.

I like Cessna. I was just pointing out that none of the airplanes Cessna doesn't make are a grand departure from what Cessna already makes. I don't think Cessna should have allowed the Phenom 300 in the door. I think they could've brought the XLS into the 21st century and had a better product. Now they have the PC24 to deal with also.

Pilatus is a big, established company. They're not an upstart. The invested a BILLION of their own $$ to develop PC24. You don't have to be a little guy to innovate.

The Denali will have something the PC-12 can never have, the Textron service network.

One area the Denali could beat PC-12 is engine reserve costs. The PT6A-67 is major $$$ in that area and the GE engine could be significantly less.

The Denali doesn't have to do a single thing better than a PC-12 to be a success.

Mike C.

[quote="Mike Ciholas"

The Denali doesn't have to do a single thing better than a PC-12 to be a success.

Mike C.[/quote]

Depends on how you define success. Denali will NEVER be the success the 12 is. But it MIGHT be a financial success. Agree with you on Textron support. It’s pretty amazing, but maybe it needs to be.

The Pilatus has a great service network. I've been part of it for 6 years now. Never been AOG.

and don't forget the biggest advantage Pilates has vs Textron etc - Pilatus doesn't have to torture the numbers for quarterly conference calls

This statement seems to contradict itself.

I’ll go with financial success, no reason it can’t achieve at least equal or better success than the PC-12 on take your pick, per unit/per annum/per program.

It just have to be as good as the PC12, not better.
There is a big market for SETP in this class. I could see another 100 units a year easily.







Depends on how you define success. Denali will NEVER be the success the 12 is. But it MIGHT be a financial success. Agree with you on Textron support. It’s pretty amazing, but maybe it needs to be.[/quote]

If there is a wait list for new PC12s, then that is the market's way of asking for a competitor. If the Denali were to just match the PC12 it will sell. Me, I think it is going to be better. The pressurization difference alone is a reason to buy it over the PC12.

If Pilatus and Denali are selling 100 units each per year it's because folks are ditching their jets.... which may well happen.

Scott, what that guy did was work his tail off. To put it in perspective I'm currently late 40's and I have only 15 patents to my name. That guy was about the same age at that time, and he had over 500. He made his first money licensing a process related to manufacturing o-rings etc. Mundane stuff but critical to all our lives.

He was always thinking - while the family seemed to be on an eternal holiday, that guy did all his work in his head and he was always working. My favourite part of that job was when i got invited to dinner with the family and got a chance to just talk about whatever.

He had more money than he could ever spend, but no trophy wife nonsense. He was married to the girl who lived next door when they were kids. One of their children was mildly autistic, and they doted on that boy.

He could have had any jet but said an airplane was for going places and the king air could land anywhere. He drove himself around in an old land cruiser for the same reason.

They would be at their beach house and I'd get a call at 3AM from him saying, come pick him up, he needed to get to the lab and try something that he just woke up thinking of.

He had a stroke and passed before age 60. Who knows what he might have invented with more time. Heck of a nice guy and the most pure genius person I've ever met.

Both planes are similar however, better pressurization, FADEC, G3000, Externally Serviceable Lav. and I believe a forward baggage/storage area like TBM's/Piper M350 are the main pluses I see for the Denali.