Pilatus PC12 vs. King Air200

[satpak77]

2 engines versus 1

guys the old twin versus single debate is as old as aviation itself. Largely a result of engine reliability and other things, to include "statistics", which lie when we want them to and are honest at other times.

When ETOPS was just a brain-child of someone, it was argued only DC-10's or L-1011's could cross the ocean, or 4-engine airplanes. 2-engines? Too risky

Even in times of war or troop movement, how many F-16's have dropped into the ocean because of engine failure?

How many engine failures have occurred on King Airs (due to mechanical problems, IE not fuel starvation)?

Very few.

The potential Pilatus operator needs to look at mission profile and assess the risks. If you are doing multiple ocean crossings, or Rocky Mountain crossings, maybe you want a twin, even just for the psycological comfort.

If night hard IFR is your main environment, maybe a twin.

If are not the above, and you mostly are daytime trips and sporadic night flights with of course "normal" IMC (occasional to minimums, more often 1000-2000 foot ceilings, sporadic icing, convective activity but you don't seek it out, etc), then a Pilatus would probably do just fine.

at one point in my life ("younger"), I flew hard IFR night freight in a single PISTON, like alot of us did.

 

[garf12]

How much does a PC-12 cost?

 

[The Natural]

How much does a PC-12 cost?

3.4M New

 

[Kingairrick]

interesting that someone brought up the FCU. My company has a PC-12( I have almost 1 hour in it) and an AD came out recently about replacing the FCUs in all the PC-12s. it seems that that's whats been causing lots of crashes (like the one on the Iowa street.) My 1 hour in the airplane convinced me that it's an amazing airplane. However, when it's 200 and 1/2, and I am taking off, I KNOW I can get a King Air around the pattern and down an approach on one engine if one fails. If the weather was always 1000-3mi, I'd take the Pilatus any day...As always...my .02

 

[YourNameHere]

Does anyone have any additional information on what caused a PC12 to spin in in Pennsylvania a few months ago. Initial reports indicated it may have been an icing problem. How well does the Pilatus handle ice?

 

[KeroseneSnorter]

Does anyone have any additional information on what caused a PC12 to spin in in Pennsylvania a few months ago. Initial reports indicated it may have been an icing problem. How well does the Pilatus handle ice?

I never had any problems in ice, handles about like any other TP in ice.

Not familar with the PA accident but the PC-12 is equipped with a shaker AND a pusher.......that should tell you how it is in a stall. Normally stick pushers are reserved only for sweptwing aircraft or large transport catagory turboprops. Me thinks that it may have some demons lurking if you stall that puppy.

 

[Vector4fun]

Not familar with the PA accident but the PC-12 is equipped with a shaker AND a pusher.......that should tell you how it is in a stall. Normally stick pushers are reserved only for sweptwing aircraft or large transport catagory turboprops. Me thinks that it may have some demons lurking if you stall that puppy.

I went on an Angel Flight with a PC12 pilot a couple years ago riding shotgun. The guy was telling me about the pusher, said it was because the torque of that big PT-6 was enough to torque-roll the puppy if you firewalled it at the stall like a Cessna. No demons in the aerodynamics otherwise.

FWIW;

Sure seemed like a nice airplane.

 

[irapilot]

My question whenever someone selling or talking up the PC-12 and they mention the glide ratio is "that's great in most conditions but let's say you are flying over rugged terrain with clouds right down on the deck and although you took off VFR and your destination is VFR, what happens when the engine quits now, or the prop fails (the awesome glide ratio is predicated on the prop being in feather), with VFR conditions out of glide range, what do you do then?" I never have gotten a good answer that makes me feel warm and fuzzy about that situation.

Also, what are your take-off mins? How low will you go? What are your options when something goes badly wrong and it's low IFR?

As with any aircraft one should manage the risk by taking in the limitations of the operating environment, the pilot and the aircraft hence, comparing the King Air and the PC-12 is like apples and oranges, simply the PC-12 is not in the same league of the King Air. Sure, it is a nice aircraft for certain missions but not anywhere close to a King Air.

I don't think this is the single engine IFR argument either, with the risk managed that can be safe or at least one can know the risks. This is the argument about King Air vs. PC-12 and one cannot compare the two aircraft for the same missions. This is about people selling the PC-12 and saying it is as safe as a King Air and that is simply apples to oranges.

 

[The Natural]

interesting that someone brought up the FCU. My company has a PC-12( I have almost 1 hour in it) and an AD came out recently about replacing the FCUs in all the PC-12s. it seems that that's whats been causing lots of crashes (like the one on the Iowa street.) My 1 hour in the airplane convinced me that it's an amazing airplane. However, when it's 200 and 1/2, and I am taking off, I KNOW I can get a King Air around the pattern and down an approach on one engine if one fails. If the weather was always 1000-3mi, I'd take the Pilatus any day...As always...my .02

I dont think anyone is going to disagree with that.


As far as the PA incident there were reports of severe icing in the area at the time. other than that i dont know much.

In training I did not expirence an over-torque issue recovering from stalls. All stalls were imminent not full as expected in this caliber a/c.

 

[The Natural]

My question whenever someone selling or talking up the PC-12 and they mention the glide ratio is "that's great in most conditions but let's say you are flying over rugged terrain with clouds right down on the deck and although you took off VFR and your destination is VFR, what happens when the engine quits now, or the prop fails (the awesome glide ratio is predicated on the prop being in feather), with VFR conditions out of glide range, what do you do then?" I never have gotten a good answer that makes me feel warm and fuzzy about that situation.

What if the sky falls down? Just kidding, your right. Its your time to be a hero or buy the farm.

Also, what are your take-off mins? How low will you go? What are your options when something goes badly wrong and it's low IFR?

Dive under the deck, with airspeed to burn to buy myself time to look for a place to land. In rugged terrain, pray that you updated your TAWS card, switch to terrain mode on your MFD, but your chances wont be as good.

As with any aircraft one should manage the risk by taking in the limitations of the operating environment, the pilot and the aircraft hence, comparing the King Air and the PC-12 is like apples and oranges, simply the PC-12 is not in the same league of the King Air. Sure, it is a nice aircraft for certain missions but not anywhere close to a King Air.

I dont think so or else this thread would not be here.

I don't think this is the single engine IFR argument either, with the risk managed that can be safe or at least one can know the risks. This is the argument about King Air vs. PC-12 and one cannot compare the two aircraft for the same missions. This is about people selling the PC-12 and saying it is as safe as a King Air and that is simply apples to oranges.

There is nothing safer than two competent pilot and 2 turbines. If you fly extensively over mountains or large bodies of water this may not be your plane.
But with the PC12 exceeding the B200 in range, useful load, t/o and landing distance, cabin space, lower operating cost and with a cruise speed of only 10 knots slower. Expect the PC12 to continue to be the most sold turboprop, especially with the barrel going up.

 

[apcooper]

My question whenever someone selling or talking up the PC-12 and they mention the glide ratio is "that's great in most conditions but let's say you are flying over rugged terrain with clouds right down on the deck and although you took off VFR and your destination is VFR, what happens when the engine quits now, or the prop fails (the awesome glide ratio is predicated on the prop being in feather), with VFR conditions out of glide range, what do you do then?" I never have gotten a good answer that makes me feel warm and fuzzy about that situation.

Been gone a few days and just now stumbled upon this. What I'd do in the above scenario is establish min sink speed which is I'm sure significantly slower than best glide and then after you've tried to relight I'd ask ATC to vector me to known suitable terrian (maybe a river, lake, stream or large road.) I believe ATC has an emergency video map which shows the terrain and other features in great detail overlaid from the radar screen. ATC also I believe has an emergency MVA and MSA or like that which of course is lower than the normal MSA/MVA. After praying to whatever higher power you believe in my #1 priority would be to maintain a minimum forward and vertical speed and try to get an idea from local atis or awos the winds keeping in mind it might vary tremendously over just a few mi in the mtns. I'd rather make a controlled crash into whatever at 5-10kts above stall that lose control from stalling and almost certainly be killed that way!

 

[Vector4fun]

Just so there's no mis-understandings, you're somewhat correct. We have an EOVM map we can call up in terminal facilities. Centers don't have them. Not all App controls have them, but many do. Note that there's no way to map out every cotton-pickin' cell tower out there, just the higher towers. The requirements for an EOVM map are as follows:

Order 7210.3T

Facility Operation and Administration
​

3-9-4. EMERGENCY OBSTRUCTION VIDEO MAP (EOVM)

a. An EOVM shall be established at all terminal radar facilities that have radar coverage in designated mountainous areas and an available channel in their video mappers. This map is intended to facilitate advisory service to an aircraft in an emergency situation wherein an appropriate terrain/obstacle clearance minimum altitude cannot be maintained. (See FIG 3-9-2.)

NOTE-
1. Designated mountainous areas are identified in 14 CFR Part 95, Subpart B.

2. Appropriate terrain/obstacle clearance minimum altitudes may be defined as MIA, MEA, Minimum Obstruction Clearance Altitude (MOCA), or MVA.

b. Alternatives, such as combining existing maps, eliminating a lower priority map or, as a least desirable alternative, merging the EOVM with the MVA map, shall be considered when necessary to accommodate the EOVM.

c. EOVM Use: The EOVM shall be used and the advisory service provided only when a pilot has declared an emergency or a controller determines that an emergency condition exists or is imminent because of the inability of an aircraft to maintain the appropriate terrain/obstacle clearance minimum altitude/s.

d. EOVM Design:

1. The basic design of the EOVM shall incorporate the following minimum features:

(a) Base contour lines of the mountains with the highest peak elevation of each depicted mountain plus 200 feet for natural low obstacle growth.

(b) Highest elevations of adjacent topography; e.g., valleys, canyons, plateaus, flatland, etc., plus 200 feet, or water.

(c) Prominent man-made obstacles; e.g., antennas, power plant chimneys, tall towers, etc., and their elevations.

(d) Satellite airports and other airports which could serve in an emergency.

(e) MVA if the EOVM must be merged with the MVA map for the former to be accommodated.

(f) Other information deemed essential by the facility.

NOTE-
To avoid clutter and facilitate maintenance, information depicted on the EOVM should be restricted to only that which is absolutely essential.

2. All elevations identified on the EOVM shall be rounded up to the next 100-foot increment and expressed as MSL altitudes.

NOTE-
To avoid unnecessary map clutter, the last two digits are not required.

EXAMPLE-
2=200, 57=5700, 90=9000, 132=13200

e. EOVM Production: The preparation and procurement of the EOVM shall be accomplished in accordance with FAAO 7910.1, Aeronautical Video Map Program.

f. EOVM Verification: The original EOVM procurement package and any sub- sequent changes shall be checked for adequacy and then coordinated with the appropriate FIAO to verify the accuracy of its information. Annually, the EOVM shall be reviewed for adequacy and recoordinated with the FIAO for accuracy.

 

[av8orboy]

We fly our PC-12's in hard IFR all the time. I am very confident in the PT-6. I think our company is at 35,000+ hr. in the aircraft. We have not had any problems yet. 140kt at the marker w/ an engine loss and you will make the runway. At altutide it will glide 78nm. If you can't find somewhere to put it in that kind of range your in the wrong biz.

 

[GVJeff]

We fly our PC-12's in hard IFR all the time. I am very confident in the PT-6. I think our company is at 35,000+ hr. in the aircraft. We have not had any problems yet. 140kt at the marker w/ an engine loss and you will make the runway. At altutide it will glide 78nm. If you can't find somewhere to put it in that kind of range your in the wrong biz.

With all due respect, I believe you will be able to better answer this when you have 2,000+ hours of multi-engine time. Perhaps you simply do not know any different right now, and that's fine. If you're flying overwater, no matter what your glide distance is if you're far out over the ocean you're going to land in the water. And remember, NO WIND the glide distance is 78 nm. A 100 knot headwind is not unheard of at 27,000 feet. Your 78 nm number just went down the toilet. You can say you'd make a 180 degree turn and take advantage of the tailwind. Fine, but what will that turn do to your glide distance? Think of the loss of lift as you make the 180.

All I am saying here is remember one engine is one engine. You may have 35,000 hours on the PT-6 at your company but one engine fails (and as you are aware, it HAS happened in the PC-12 series aircraft), and it could get ugly...

Jeff

 

[NEDude]

I used to fly the PC-12 before I moved to the BE-1900. At the time the single engine thing did not bother me. But as reliable as the PT6 is, they do fail, I watched a 1900 land single engine in Boston yesterday.

I have never done a V1 cut in the airplane, but in the sim they are a piece of cake. Folks who have done them in the airplane say they are even easier. I would imagine the King Air 200 is not all that different.

Don't get me wrong, I like the PC-12. It is a remarkable aircraft. But I think my minumums would be much different flying it now than they were a few years ago.

BTW, I did see 271 TAS in the PC-12 once at FL 240.

 

[Geronimo4497]

Having flown both, I would say that they are both incredible aircraft. I currently fly the PC-12 only, so my opinion is slightly biased. Like my Alpha brotha above me, I feel that single engine IMC in the Pilatus is not that big of a deal. Between having 2 pilots and some of the best avionics money can buy, the outcome will be a good one. Yes, you will be meeting mother earth when the engine quits in the Pilatus. That is what training is for. We constantly train for engine out after takoff and the standard breif prior to departure is that we are coming back to the airport at 800 AGL, otherwise straight ahead, while trying to avoid obstacles. At 65-70kts and 23G seats, you should walk away. There are 550 PC-12s out there, and only one fatal accident that we don't know the cause of, the PA accident. The FCU issue should hopefully be solved with the modification, and all of ours have it done, thankfully. This is a great airplane for traveling and lots of folks like the economy of them, along side the comfort factor. Many more will be sold with these crazy fuel prices. Now if Pilatus could only manufacture more per year......................

 

[Gutenberg]

I'm flying on one as a passenger monday from Anchorage to Iliamna for a fishing trip. I think being on that crew might be my dream job.

 

[A Squared]

I'm flying on one as a passenger monday from Anchorage to Iliamna for a fishing trip. I think being on that crew might be my dream job.

Get to know the owner really well and your opinion might change.

 

[av8orboy]

With all due respect, I believe you will be able to better answer this when you have 2,000+ hours of multi-engine time. Perhaps you simply do not know any different right now, and that's fine. If you're flying overwater, no matter what your glide distance is if you're far out over the ocean you're going to land in the water. And remember, NO WIND the glide distance is 78 nm. A 100 knot headwind is not unheard of at 27,000 feet. Your 78 nm number just went down the toilet. You can say you'd make a 180 degree turn and take advantage of the tailwind. Fine, but what will that turn do to your glide distance? Think of the loss of lift as you make the 180.

All I am saying here is remember one engine is one engine. You may have 35,000 hours on the PT-6 at your company but one engine fails (and as you are aware, it HAS happened in the PC-12 series aircraft), and it could get ugly...

Jeff

I don't do AR's. And I especially don’t do them now that I have been thru

<a href="http://www.survivalsystemsinc.com/ged.htm"Survival Systems>
training. Makes you think.

http://www.survivalsystemsinc.com/ged.htm

 

[PC12Cowboy]

Well it comes down to apples and oranges, but if you like the PC12 then you like it....Harrison Ford dumped hid KA and is now a 12 guy....and he loves the range of missions that the airplane is capable of. with that said beech has sold a hell of a lot of KA's and are still doing so...so why cant we all just get along?LOL


VISIT www.redcross.org lets help OUR people