Not zero.

Mike C.

John,

Congratulations on the new plane and thanks for telling us about it. Your experience, and comparison, of the PC12, B200 and CJ2 are interesting and useful. As folks chime in on their opinions of your choices I'm reminded that there are a lot of tools we can use to solve our needs, sometimes our needs and the right tool change, and one of the most fun parts of flying and airplane ownership are the experiments we run and experiences we collect.

As long as the fan keeps turning...

Climbing at 100 is well below Vy (~130). Maybe PC-12 pilots are taught to climb near Vx so they don't get too far from the airport in case the fan quits?

Altitude is better than airspeed if you need to get back to the airport.

Mike C.

A PC12 in the right hands can do a turn back at 500-600 AGL

Used to do it in the sim every 6mo

A PC12 in the right hands can do a turn back at 500-600 AGL

Used to do it in the sim every 6mo

Climbing at Vx 100 is less climb rate than Vy 130, so if altitude is truly the aim, they should fly at Vy 130.

The advantage of Vx climb is that you require less glide ratio to get back to the field, and that you can make a tighter turn at a slower airspeed when the engine quits.

Mike C.

Hey Adam,
What are you doing? We'll never get our Avantis if you keep pumping the market for them like this!

Two airplanes I always wanted to fly were the King Air 200 and the G ll (Hart to Hart) . Never got to fly either.

With everything I've seen and read about the PC-12 it's a great airplane, but I would still have that nagging concern of flying a single engine airplane, no matter that the PT-6 is so much more reliable than the IO 520 in my 182, where engine failure is always in the back of my mind.

Since both a KA 200 and a PC-12 are out of my price range, if I had the money it would be a King Air over a PC-12; I guess a KA350 is the latest and greatest.

I flew for so many years without the nagging thought of an engine failure, I don't think I'll ever get used to it now.

Congrats John. Great plane, well done. Ex airline guys almost to a man say the same thing about singles. I’ll bet you’ll really enjoy all the Pilatus has to offer you and your staff. My only niggle with your description is that I always heard it was like a 172 to land not the 182 . Bet there aren’t many times in flight you won’t be able to find someplace to wedge that horrible SETP into if worst came to worst.

Chuck, it's just the Part 25 Transport Category guaranteed performance. If an engine quits and you do your job, you will put it on a runway. I guess it spoils you. Guys who are not spoiled probably see it as a single engine turbine is much more reliable than a piston, which it is.

Reading an earlier post where the pilot had two PT-6 failures in 6,000 hours isn't very endearing.

the problem is....it's not a 180. It's more like a 225 then a 45 in the other direction. It's more than you'd think till you do a few of them.

Climbing at Vx 100 is less climb rate than Vy 130, so if altitude is truly the aim, they should fly at Vy 130.

The advantage of Vx climb is that you require less glide ratio to get back to the field, and that you can make a tighter turn at a slower airspeed when the engine quits.

Mike C.

Yep...that isn't very endearing but brings to questions so many other questions.
IME - almost 5,000 hrs to the side of a PT-6A and I've not had a hiccup

Carl,

RE best glide speed in a 30 degree bank. As you know, glide speed increases with aircraft weight. In a 30 degree bank about 1.15 G's are pulled, making the effective weight of the airplane 15% "heavier."

But in an emergency turn back there isn't much steady state time, and the theoretical difference in glide speed isn't much and not worth chasing airspeed to achieve. Just ball park the speed.

Making an emergency turn back shouldn't depend on precision control to just barely make it. Choose a minimum altitude for turn back that has a generous amount of latitude to make it.