Any PC12NG guys here?

[BoilerUP]

When comparing turboprops to jets, you need to break down operating costs not only by hour, but per mile...as well as considering the value of the passengers' time.

Case in point:

The 2010 BCA Ops Planning Guide shows a PC12/47 has hourly variable costs of $559.36, a B200 at $836.63, and a CJ2 at $1021.12. But if you break the per-mile cost of a 600nm trip in each airplane, the /47 takes 2+23 and costs $2.22/nm, the B200 2+13 and $3.05/nm, and CJ2 1+37 and $2.75/nm.

Over 600nm, the CJ2 would save 46 minutes compared to the /47 for just $318 more in direct cost. Acquisition cost is also about the same, if not slightly lower on the CJ2. There's also the intangible of flying above most the weather & winds you'd be slogging through in either a Pilatus or a King Air.

That said, the Pilatus is a fine airplane and a very reasonable point of entry into business aviation for a corporation.

 

[rjacobs]

When comparing turboprops to jets, you need to break down operating costs not only by hour, but per mile...as well as considering the value of the passengers' time.

Case in point:

The 2010 BCA Ops Planning Guide shows a PC12/47 has hourly variable costs of $559.36, a B200 at $836.63, and a CJ2 at $1021.12. But if you break the per-mile cost of a 600nm trip in each airplane, the /47 takes 2+23 and costs $2.22/nm, the B200 2+13 and $3.05/nm, and CJ2 1+37 and $2.75/nm.

Over 600nm, the CJ2 would save 46 minutes compared to the /47 for just $318 more in direct cost. Acquisition cost is also about the same, if not slightly lower on the CJ2. There's also the intangible of flying above most the weather & winds you'd be slogging through in either a Pilatus or a King Air.

That said, the Pilatus is a fine airplane and a very reasonable point of entry into business aviation for a corporation.

I completely agree. I am trying to get the guy to understand the big picture and not to just get caught up in the DOC numbers, but he sees that low DOC number of the pilatus and likes it even though a jet might in reality be a better option for him and not cost him any more money. I am starting to work with a broker/management company that has actually already talked to the guy briefely about 6 months ago. It was a weird coincidence a bunch of my buddies work for this guy(broker/management company) and he talked to the CEO already. Him and I are going to schedule another meeting with the guy to discuss more things once this guys runs his numbers for taxes.

 

[svcta]

I don't mean any offense by this, but I'm beginning to get the impression that there is a lot of people not listening to people going on here. It doesn't sound as if the guy your doing the leg work for wants to listen to you. As well, you don't want to listen to outfits which exist solely to answer these questions for whatever reason. Percieved bias, cost, whatever. What's more is that you don't seem to be privy to his thoughts on why his preferences are what they are; be they financial, practical, or that he just saw a neato picture of a PC-12 with a hot babe on the hood once.

It seems like there is a lot to get clear on, and you two can't help each other if you don't know what the rules of the game are. Acquisition budget, annual operating budget, tax situations, blah blah blah. You may well be working against the advice from this guy's accountant who feels like he's giving proper advice, as he is duty-bound to do (this from personal experience), but if you don't know that to be the case you can't offer interpretation based on your expertise. The point being that this decision (as you know better than I) is very nuanced and there are a ton of details that mitigate one cost or inflate another.

I could be wrong, it just seems that the sum of this thread so far seems to be a lot of confusion just between the players on your own team. At the end of the day the boss will buy whatever he wants...and blame you.

 

[gern_blanston]

I don't mean any offense by this, but I'm beginning to get the impression that there is a lot of people not listening to people going on here. It doesn't sound as if the guy your doing the leg work for wants to listen to you. As well, you don't want to listen to outfits which exist solely to answer these questions for whatever reason. Percieved bias, cost, whatever. What's more is that you don't seem to be privy to his thoughts on why his preferences are what they are; be they financial, practical, or that he just saw a neato picture of a PC-12 with a hot babe on the hood once.

It seems like there is a lot to get clear on, and you two can't help each other if you don't know what the rules of the game are. Acquisition budget, annual operating budget, tax situations, blah blah blah. You may well be working against the advice from this guy's accountant who feels like he's giving proper advice, as he is duty-bound to do (this from personal experience), but if you don't know that to be the case you can't offer interpretation based on your expertise. The point being that this decision (as you know better than I) is very nuanced and there are a ton of details that mitigate one cost or inflate another.

I could be wrong, it just seems that the sum of this thread so far seems to be a lot of confusion just between the players on your own team. At the end of the day the boss will buy whatever he wants...and blame you.

SVCTA, you are on the money. Give yourself a pat on the back for knowing how corporate aviation works.

 

[johnsonrod]

Go for an F90 King Air!!!!! Just saw one the other day and I am pretty sure you could find a few cheap versions out there that you could upgrade cockpit-wise with the acquisition cost savings. Just a suggestion...

 

[sleddriver71]

From what I've seen from a buddy that flies multiple versions of KAs and several Pilatus versions, the PC-12 is about the most economical flying machine around. It basically does on ONE engine what the King Air does with two and you are burning about 50-60 gph in the low/mid flight levels.

I'm sure the NG has the -45 ailerons upgrade, not sure. You'll want that, as the older model flew like a dump truck. Newer servo tab version is much lighter on controls.

The NG does have the aileron upgrade. If the old model flew like a dump truck, the new one flies like an F350 dualie. It is still very slow in roll compared to, say, a King Air 90. I don't think it's that much of an improvement personally. I still like it though, it's just not as much fun to hand fly as it should be.

 

[Bleeds On]

Looking at your other thread with trip criteria, I understand your desire for a jet. Any chance you can charter each aircraft and let him do a trip in each? I'd think one trip from STL-SFO slogging through the WX would quickly move his thoughts away from anything with a prop. Also, what's his time worth?
With that said, our hangar has a mix of NG's and older PC12's. Although it does have about 400-500# more useful load, the NG doesn't seem to have much else to justify the premium. The avionics are way overkill, IMO.
It seems some are trying to pit old 200's against the new NG in terms of acquisition cost. If memory serves me correctly, a new 200 is $2M more than a NG(BCA mag). The PC12 also beats the 200 in nearly every category. The plane is real hard to beat when just comparing numbers. You might have to start attaching dollars to time, safety and ride comfort if you want a jet. I hear Netjets is dumping their Excel's cheap...

 

[100-1/2]

Out of Warranty, you will never get to $400/hr (particularly @ Pilatus Shop) and not everything is covered on your MFR Mx 'IN WARRANTY.' Ditto Acquisition vs Budget considerations as posted above, why grief over $120k annual ops budget after dropping a cool $4M. You need a good 10 to 15 years (heavy) ops budget to recover the acquisition cost tilt with KA. If your boss is after bonus depreciation on a heavy liability acquisition, then the more you spend on Ops, is a good thing for the balance sheet?

Stay away from NH and anyone else from Pilatus Corporate Marketing. If you are serious, Try Epps. They are not 'all about' Pilatus and their maintenance is fair to exceptional across a spectrum of Corp A/C.

BTW, you SEL Turbo's in the Mid-FL's are a huge-a55 (moving)speed-bump to those of us transitioning between Terminals and the High-FL's. Particularly within 100nm of a heavy volume C and B airport. After all the time and fuel you spent getting there, are you really saving any $$$ at FL240? With marginal payload lifts, you can't stay there more than 60 to 90 minutes?

100-1/2

 

[TimsKeeper]

PC12 beats the King Air in just about every category except the one that counts the most; Single Engine Failure.

 

[sleddriver71]

PC12 beats the King Air in just about every category except the one that counts the most; Single Engine Failure.

I fly the PC12NG and I like it a lot. Having said that, the King Air 200 outclimbs it and handles turbulance much better because of the considerably higher wing loading. Also the King Air has 20-30 kts higher Vmo which is very nice for descents. Cruise speeds are about the same as well as cabin space. I like the modern avionics and I don't understand why people think the Honeywells are overkill in the PC12NG. The mach meter is pointless for sure but it was already there so I guess they left it. Overall, it's a superior aircraft for EMS for my program anyway. The Honeywell avionics combined with too little computing power is still a little buggy but it gets better with each build.