anybody fly a pc-12?

[cl65@350]

hello...anybody fly that pilatus? if so...at night, single pilot over the mountains? is that something only i am a little anxious about??

i know that pt 6 is a good engine...but still!

 

[Lumber Yak]

Nice airplane

I have never actually flown the aircraft, but I have flown in it on someone else's checkride. I sat in the cushy chairs in back for two hours as the guy up front practiced touch-and-goes. It seemed like a very solid and fast aircraft. I like the avionics suite up front - nice EFIS. It also had the "feel" of a much larger aircraft - reminded me of a Brasilia...

As for the single-engine issue, my impression is that the PC-12 safety record is very good. Also, the aircraft's glide-ratio is supposed to be excellent....

Good luck and HAVE FUN!

 

[vortex]

I have spent a fair amount of time in SE turbines, inlcuding the PC-12.
Should you be concerned about night, IMC, mountainous terrain? Yes; it is a single engine.

Would I not go because it is a SE turbine? No; the PC-12 is a fantastic aircraft that is designed for a high glide ratio in the event of an engine out situation.

The safety record is great, the accidents that have occured have resulted in very little injury to pax and crew, the plane is built extremely well.

PM me if you have any questions.

 

[fracman]

Accidents

I know of 3 PC-12 loss of power accidents, fortunately no fatalities. One was in Canada during cruise, landed off airport, aircraft destroyed. Another was on a flight between Hawaii and the U.S. mainland resulting in a ditching at sea, and a recent one in NJ just after take-off - I believe they made the airport but the aircraft was substantially damaged.

 

[Diesel]

The PC12 is an outstanding airplane I've got a buddy of mine that flies them for a fractional here in the NE. Actually quite a bit of my friends have flown for alpha. Here are a few misconceptions about the accidents.

One was in Canada during cruise, landed off airport, aircraft destroyed.

The pilot took off with a chip light on, nice huh, continued his flight, lost oil pressure and put it down in the middle of nowhere. Pilatus had a new one to him right away, then they found out that he took off with a chip light. Took it right back.

and a recent one in NJ just after take-off

The pilot took off from TTN and had a catostrophic failure of the gearbox which is a very rare occurance circled back around and landed totalled the airplane. Actually the fire department totalled it after they smashed holes in the wings with their fireaxes.

It's a good solid plane. Sure 2 is nice, but it's a sweet plane.

 

[fracman]

Didn't mean to infer that the PC-12 wasn't a very nice aircraft. I've flown in one and thought it was great. I also have quite a bit of time behind a PT-6 in a Caravan, no question it's a great, reliable engine.

But everything else being equal, I'd choose 2 jets over 1 PT-6 any day.

 

[jetdriven]

everything has its place. The beauty of a PC-12 is 1/2 the cost of operation of a BE-200 for about the same airplane.

I think they teach those pilots how to fly a deadstick ILS in the sim.

Air Midwest has about 4-8 engine failures a year, but those PT-6's have over 10,000 hours and 15,000 cycles.

I suppose if you fly @ FL280 over the rockies you could glide to an airport?

 

[Capthuff]

I have talked with several pilots of PC-12s and they all like them immensely. My concern is, if you lose the engine, wouldn't you lose pressurization too? now a double emergency. I have heard tho that it has amazing glide qualities.
Cappy

 

[jetdriven]

the airplane should take a couple minutes (probably 4 or 5) to depressurize. In that time you could get the mask on. You can breathe with a 14-16,000 cabin alt.

I remember hauling freight in a C404 over the Front range from Colorado Springs to Gunnison. The MEA was 16,000 feet. We were at FL180 westbound when the guy I'm flyign with pulls out a Marlboro Light and opens the storm window and asks "mind if I smoke?"
Before you guys start in about FAR's and company regulations, I just wanted to see if he would pass out. He didnt even turn blue! Cool!

 

[banned username 2]

Re: Accidents

Another was on a flight between Hawaii and the U.S. mainland resulting in a ditching at sea

Ok, that was just dumb... the longest overwater route around and they take a single engine plane... obviously more dollars than sense...

 

[xrated]

I know I have posted similar replies on the PC-12 in the past, so here is my $.02 worth. I've got 722 hrs (just finished filling out an app) in the PC-12 and it never let me down nor any of the pilots I flew with. I flew air ambulance in the plane and at least 1/3 of that time was over the moutains at night. Our typical trip, or mission as we called it, was usually around 35 minutes. When I did fly it at night I would usually climb to a higher altitude then I would during the day to take advatage of the glide performance should the engine take a hike. Instead of a direct routining, I would also try to plan the flights over airports along the way, just in case. This can be difficult in the mountains though since airports are few and far between. I would guess most PC-12 operations don't put the same amount of time on their engines as commuter or freight operators do, so you would have that going for you. Also, the PT6-67B that is hung on the Pilatus puts out 1000shp max cont. with 1200shp for T/O. The same motor puts out 1600shp on the 1900D, so it is babied. As for the pressuriztion issue mentioned in an earlier post, if I lost an engine at altitude, I'd throw on the O2 mask and that would be the end of that issue. The plane glides well, but you're still coming down. I've been flying a twin engine jet (with hot wings) for the last 2.5 years. While flying this type of equipment is very comforting, if my job flying the jet ended tomorrow, I wouldn't hesitate for a second to going back and flying the Pilatus.

 

[LXJ31]

I agree...

You could do pretty much anything you wanted to this airplane (and I did) and it would hum like a fine swiss watch. The cockpit is big and roomy (compared to any Lear) with a well designed layout that makes you think you are living in the not-too-distant future. The FD/Nav system is very intuitive and helpful for single pilot ops at night over big and painful terrain.

There were some issues with the flaps; during hot weather a breaker beneath the floorboards would pop and leave you with whatever you had set until a tech could get to it. Our company had a fix for it after a while but prior to that it was something to consider and plan for during the summer.

I too would not hesitate to go to work flying the same job if my gig ended tommorow.

 

[PC12Driver]

I am currently flying a PC12 for a fractional here in the NE and love it. I have experience in both multiengine turboprops and jets but have no problem with the Pilatus. It has a terrific avionics package (including 4 tube EFIS) coupled with a Bendix MFD for a MAP, uplinked weather, TCAS I, EGPWS, and radar. The PT6 is a very reliable engine coupled with our company’s conservative operating policies and trend monitoring that is done each day for each aircraft. With all that I don't worry too much about the rather limited engine out capabilities. We do practice engine out ILS and complete power loss shortly after takeoff with a turn back to the airport. Cruise checklist includes computing glide time and distance and the MFD will show a list of airports that fall with that range. Last week I flew from the midwest back to New England at FL290 and the glide distance was 78 miles!

 

[Diesel]

hey pc12 check your pm's.

I heard you guys were going to get the avanti and fractional that out. You guys would be the home of whacky airplanes.

That avanti hums though.

 

[PC12Driver]

Got your message and will do. Love to fly the Avanti but don't think so.

 

[jetdriven]

Also, the PT6-67B that is hung on the Pilatus puts out 1000shp max cont. with 1200shp for T/O. The same motor puts out 1600shp on the 1900D, so it is babied. As for the pressuriztion issue mentioned in an earlier post, if I lost an engine at altitude, I'd throw on the O2 mask and that would be the end of that issue.

actually the 1900D is 1279 SHP, but the principle is the same, the PC-12 engine is "underworked".

 

[Jolimon]

Avanti....Sweet Airplane!!!

 

[Future SNA]

"Ok, that was just dumb... the longest overwater route around and they take a single engine plane... obviously more dollars than sense..."

Have a friend who delivers Caravans with a bubble tank in the back to Hawaii, etc. Fuels up at Wichita, first stop Los Angeles(I believe) and then non-stop to Hawaii. Typically goes on to the Marshalls, etc, but he's been doing it for over 10 years, no complaints. I guess it all depends on your perspective on things.

 

[WrightAvia]

Much ado about nothing

I have about 1,000 hours in Caravans 135 freight. The last thing I think about is an engine failure. ICE! that's a different story.

Look at the stats on engine failures...If you compare single engine CRASHES that are a direct result of engine failure and multi CRASHES that are are a direct result of engine failure, you'll see that most of those MULTI crashes result in fatalities.

I would rather fly a single turbine than a piston twin any day, any night and over any terrain.

As for the risk of flying over hostile terrain...what difference does it make if you fly over the mountains at night in a single or over a city during the day time with 1/4 mile vis or lower at the surface with a single? One tree, a parked car or a big rock in flat open field could be hostile terrain during an off airport landing. And yes, I have had two dead stick landings in piston singles and two partial dead stick landings in piston singles. I think turbine singles are going to be seen more in the industry.

Here is an interesting crash of a multi in which an "OFF AIRPORT" landing and an emergency descent, would have saved lives...keep in mind it was beautifull flying wx that day... I flew this same route about an hour before this incident in an Aztec. The point of posting this accident report is...what difference did it make that the plane had two engines, was flying during the day, over basically the best off airport landing areas in the state, in VFR conditions. Most twin piston flyers would never consider closing both throttles, closing both mixtures and feathering the props to SAVE the plane.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20001211X11010&key=1

.

 

[Jolimon]

Interesting discussion...Having flown about an equal amount of single and multi it does raise the question of which is safest. A PC-12 recently had an engine failure on takeoff in trenton. The aircraft was totalled, however no one was hurt. I have about 1,000 hours in a PC-12 in all types of weather and it never let me down. But engines do on occassion fail. If that was a professionally flown Baron or Seneca...Things may have been different, the plane could have returened for an uneventful landing. I guess my fealing, for what its worth, it that for a non-professional pilot the single engine turbine is the safest thing in the sky. But a professionally flown twin either piston or turbine is still safer. Would you agree?

 

[irapilot]

I think the one that ditched went into the Sea of Japan - headed for Russia.

 

[qwerty]

i'm flying a piston single over the mountains 5 nights a week. is this something some pilots consider dangerous or risky?

 

[capnflyright]

The PC-12 which ditched in the Pacific actually ditched in The Sea of Okhotsk on a flight from Tokyo and Petropovlosk. They were on an around-the-world flight and were proceeding to Petro, Alaska and back home to Boise, Idaho. I have flown the PC-12 quite a bit flying aeromedical, charter and cargo. This is by far one of the best airplanes I have had the privilege to fly. The airplane can glide for 80 miles when flown between FL280-300. The drawback is that if you don't have extended O2 then you can glide longer than the pax can breath. The PC-12 is one of the best all-around airplanes cruising @ 250-270kts, landing in as little as 400'(conditions apply), carrying 2,000# of cargo with 3 hrs. of fuel and fuel burn around 350# per hour.

 

[ehclark]

twin??single??

Interesting discussion...Having flown about an equal amount of single and multi it does raise the question of which is safest. A PC-12 recently had an engine failure on takeoff in trenton. The aircraft was totalled, however no one was hurt. I have about 1,000 hours in a PC-12 in all types of weather and it never let me down. But engines do on occassion fail. If that was a professionally flown Baron or Seneca...Things may have been different, the plane could have returened for an uneventful landing. I guess my fealing, for what its worth, it that for a non-professional pilot the single engine turbine is the safest thing in the sky. But a professionally flown twin either piston or turbine is still safer. Would you agree?

I would agree with the twin turbine but twin piston?? I don't know. Still a lot of moving parts. Having flown a senaca to St. Croix and lost the critical one at the farthest point from land it was nice to have another one turning. In my humble opinion a toss up?!!