Dreaming of Pilatus PC12

N521MA

N521MA

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
129
Display Name
Display name:
FlyBoy
Saw Pilatus on a ramp; read a ton about it; seems like it blows TMB and Mustang out of the water! Looks huge on the ramp. Cant stop thinking about it....

Anyone had any real experience with this bird? I wonder what would be insurance costs/requirements; operating DOS, and just generally how does it feel in the air :)

Time to start playing Megaball!!! LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
 
N521MA said:
Saw Pilatus on a ramp; read a ton about it; seems like it blows TMB and Mustang out of the water! Looks huge on the ramp. Cant stop thinking about it....

Anyone had any real experience with this bird? I wonder what would be insurance costs/requirements; operating DOS, and just generally how does it feel in the air :)

Time to start playing Megaball!!! LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...


Does towing one off the ramp after a low time pilot locked the brakes and blew a tire count?


I'd like to have one and afford to fuel it...
 
Leslie has a bit of time in one. And I mean "bit" literally. She flew between two airports 5 miles apart! It's her dream plane. Of course, the Kestrel looks like it will be nice too, once it comes out!
 
gprellwitz said:
Leslie has a bit of time in one. And I mean "bit" literally. She flew between two airports 5 miles apart! It's her dream plane. Of course, the Kestrel looks like it will be nice too, once it comes out!
Click to expand...

Just looked at Kestrel - wow! Really cool bird. Probably will be much cheaper too.

But with consideration for 6 pax - Pilatus is too nice and able :))


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
 
A friend had one. Same size as KA B200. My friend's yearly insurance premium on just over $2.5 MM hull value was $50,000 a year. I can do almost all the normal annual maintenance on my KA C90 for that. One can get an old KA 200 and pay higher maintenance for many years before a plane with that hull value would pencil out. Of course, they retain value well, I just didn't want that much tied up in a non-appreciating, none revenue asset. Can make sense for business folks that use it to produce other revenue.

Best,

Dave
 
Dave Siciliano said:
A friend had one. Same size as KA B200. My friend's yearly insurance premium on just over $2.5 MM hull value was $50,000 a year. I can do almost all the normal annual maintenance on my KA C90 for that. One can get an old KA 200 and pay higher maintenance for many years before a plane with that hull value would pencil out. Of course, they retain value well, I just didn't want that much tied up in a non-appreciating, none revenue asset. Can make sense for business folks that use it to produce other revenue.

Best,

Dave
Click to expand...

What are operation costs on C90. I always thought it was insane cost having even a smaller twin...?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
 
N521MA said:
Just looked at Kestrel - wow! Really cool bird. Probably will be much cheaper too.

But with consideration for 6 pax - Pilatus is too nice and able :))
Click to expand...

Kestrel sure looks like the Epic SE turboprop.
 
Based on my research, Pilatus owners should expect $700/hour operating cost. Includes it all and based on 300 hour /year use.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
 
LDJones said:
Kestrel sure looks like the Epic SE turboprop.
Click to expand...

Met A. Klapmeier and sat in his road-show Kestrel mock-up last week. What a sa-weet package that will be (and I have faith that his crew can and will deliver).

Talk to the man, you'll believe!
 
A friend of mine flies one for a corporate client from time to time. He considers it a bit too docile for his tastes.
 
I fly them for a living and really like the airplane. The PC12 and TBM really are not in the same class of airplane. Sure, they are both single engine turbo props, but it really depends how much you usually carry as to which one would better fit your mission.
 
Operating costs can be very subjective. Hours flown is certainly one variable. Fuel burn is another. Hangar and insurance cost. Annual maintenance cost. How does one care for the plane and what are the rates where it's worked on. Charts, training, is there a professional crew. What I see missed a lot is cost of capital or servicing of debt. What's the opportunity cost of tying up $3MM in a plane? What could that be earning elsewhere. Or, the cost of debt service if there's a large note. Loss of capital if/when the plane will sell for less at the end of a holding period.

What's the average fuel burn per hour in Pilatus? Times 5 or 6 dollars per gallon. $300 sounds like 1.5 hours fuel burn. What about the other stuff?

Best,

Dave
 
When you're in town I'll be happy to introduce you to my clients who couldn't wait to buy a KA-350 after the engine on their PC-12 siezed at FL260 on a dark night over the scrub hills in eastern OK.

N521MA said:
Saw Pilatus on a ramp; read a ton about it; seems like it blows TMB and Mustang out of the water! Looks huge on the ramp. Cant stop thinking about it....

Anyone had any real experience with this bird? I wonder what would be insurance costs/requirements; operating DOS, and just generally how does it feel in the air :)

Time to start playing Megaball!!! LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
 
N521MA said:
Based on my research, Pilatus owners should expect $700/hour operating cost. Includes it all and based on 300 hour /year use.
Click to expand...

Well, at 300 hours/year you're looking at a bit under $200/hour for insurance at $50k/year.

Then fuel at $300+/hr, that leaves less than $200/hr for hangar and MX.

Definitely low, especially if you've got an engine reserve occurring.

Plus, Dave makes some excellent points regarding opportunity cost of money invested. If you want to have that new aircraft smell, then that's one thing. But for most people you can spend a small fraction of the money, get a plane that's equally or more capable, and even if it has higher MX come out well ahead. The operating costs definitely don't include depreciation.
 
The $700 is just DOC's for a 300/hr year at $6/gal. The fixed costs are another $700 hour and the other costs run the total up to about $2,000 hour.

Pilots will believe anything.
 
wabower said:
The $700 is just DOC's for a 300/hr year at $6/gal. The fixed costs are another $700 hour and the other costs run the total up to about $2,000 hour.
Click to expand...

That sounds more realistic. On the Cheyenne the owner figured his costs around $1,000/hr, but I'm pretty sure he wasn't keeping track of maintenance and was above that. His insurance was also low (~$10-15k/yr, I think), and he had virtually no depreciation over the almost 4 years he owned it.

Pilots will believe anything.
Click to expand...

I believe I will have some wine.
 
wabower said:
The $700 is just DOC's for a 300/hr year at $6/gal. The fixed costs are another $700 hour and the other costs run the total up to about $2,000 hour.

Pilots will believe anything.
Click to expand...

You have far more experience in the big iron, but a friend that manages his company's Citation XL puts their fully loaded cost (with pilots) at about $2,300 per hour. I'd think the Pilatus would be a bit south of that with one engine (plus a prop)...but maybe I'm missing something.

I'm sure it is still in the "if you gotta ask" range, regardless!

P.S. I think they based that on 200 hrs a year.
 
I worked an XL deal for a good part of last year. I think his numbers are light, but don't know his assumed fuel cost or the amount of non-fuel MX he includes in hourly DOC's. Everything else is dog simple to calculate.

LDJones said:
You have far more experience in the big iron, but a friend that manages his company's Citation XL puts their fully loaded cost (with pilots) at about $2,300 per hour. I'd think the Pilatus would be a bit south of that with one engine (plus a prop)...but maybe I'm missing something.

I'm sure it is still in the "if you gotta ask" range, regardless!

P.S. I think they based that on 200 hrs a year.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
I worked an XL deal for a good part of last year. I think his numbers are light, but don't know his assumed fuel cost or the amount of non-fuel MX he includes in hourly DOC's. Everything else is dog simple to calculate.
Click to expand...

Maybe he's keeping it palatable for the owner! :wink2:
 
wabower said:
That's normally the case and it's usually a SWAG anyway.:D
Click to expand...

He buys fuel contracts in, I think, 10,000 gal chunks at some of the destinations they frequent. Can't remember the savings that yielded. I presume that's not uncommon.
 
Most of the contracts are in the range of 7k gal but significant savings can be achieved. You buy in bulk, take the price risk and pay an into-plane gallonage pumping fee.

LDJones said:
He buys fuel contracts in, I think, 10,000 gal chunks at some of the destinations they frequent. Can't remember the savings that yielded. I presume that's not uncommon.
Click to expand...
 
I've had the same dream for quite a while now. Beautiful, beautiful bird. Everytime I see one at an air show or ramp I walk by her rather sheepishly. Maybe one day she'll recognize me
 
wabower said:
When you're in town I'll be happy to introduce you to my clients who couldn't wait to buy a KA-350 after the engine on their PC-12 siezed at FL260 on a dark night over the scrub hills in eastern OK.
Click to expand...

Bad things can happen in any airplane. The fact that they were still around to buy the King Air seems like a plus to me. Sure, you are playing the odds with any single engine, but when you factor in you've got a reliable PT6, a decent glide ratio, and a 64 knot stall speed, it ain't a bad way to travel.
 
I ferried a Pilatus from South Africa to New Jersey last summer.

I don't recall the specifics on the fuel burn I was getting BUT... it did 1200NM legs LIKE A CHAMP!

I was very impressed that an aircraft of that size, that cruises at 250kts will land close to 70kts!!!
 
Ya it flies like a 172 until you get it in the flight levels, 260kts all day.
 
Take off your pilot hat and put on your non-pilot passenger hat. Pretend that you were one of the cabin-full of women who were returning to Dallas late at night after participating in a charity event. Do you really think that's what they were thinking?

Dave Theisen said:
Bad things can happen in any airplane. The fact that they were still around to buy the King Air seems like a plus to me. Sure, you are playing the odds with any single engine, but when you factor in you've got a reliable PT6, a decent glide ratio, and a 64 knot stall speed, it ain't a bad way to travel.
Click to expand...
 
I heard two more engine failure Pilatus stories at SIMCOM last week. One was about 100 miles off China and had a prop controller failure: prop wouldn't make any power. Even though they were talking to Chinese controllers when it happened; no rescue was dispatched. They floated in their raft four days until they got into a shipping lane.
Another one out of Russia. I didn't ask what caused the failure. I think it was a fuel control unit. It's not that twins have just two engines.

I do agree they are very reliable. I like two over water and mountains, but flew singles for a long time and accepted that. No long distance over water back then.

These may be old stories, but the instructor didn't have any ax to grind. Of course, we also talked of KA accidents.

Best,

Dave
 
Make that 265 knots. Fuel burn is around +\- 400 lbs (60gallons) an hour. Based in Atlanta with a customer that goes to Bozeman, MT. A 1400 nm trip. Usually two 3:15 legs westbound with a fuel stop in KSLN and make it home nonstop in 5:12.
 
Most of the firms that relate operating costs do have a little conflict of interest. I went around a couple years ago with a fella on the board here that held himself out as a real expert. Of course, capital had no cost. See.....that didn't matter to him. Plane residual value seemed a bit aggressive to me. They don't really go down in value you see (so he explained). Wayne and I tend to look at real numbers. They speak for themselves if you know how things work. Unfortunately, a lot of folks don't and rely on other "experts".
Planes don't appreciate: they are a depreciating asset for a reason. Y'all understand it's a big piece of machinery that wears out and needs constant care. In some rare cases, in good markets, one may sell for the original acquisition price when there are shortages or a bubble. That's not normal. Most are like a new car in that when you drive them off the lot, you won't recover your original purchase price (some exceptions noted in good markets.)

Best,

Dave
 
You mean I can't operate this Conquest for $650.00 per hour??:yikes::yikes:

wabower said:
The $700 is just DOC's for a 300/hr year at $6/gal. The fixed costs are another $700 hour and the other costs run the total up to about $2,000 hour.

Pilots will believe anything.
Click to expand...
 
Again, I realize that you are accepting more risk in a single engine anything, but every airplane out the has had it's own problems. In just the past year, there has been a King Air that ditched in the Caribbean and another twin ditch in the Gulf. Wayne, I believe you own a Cessna tail dragger, yet every time a PC12 thread comes up, you make it sound like you have a death wish if you dare get in one.
 
There's absolutely nothing wrong with a PC12 that a second PT-6 wouldn't resolve quite nicely thank you. :nonod:
 
Dave, that's sort of how I look at it, I don't see an airplane as an investment, but a combination tool and toy. It's important to not look through overly rose colored glasses or you will be very disappointed very early in the ownership cycle. :mad2: I don't keep reserves as such, no separate accounts, but I figure the lower selling price is equal to a reserve, providing you don't have a major component failure.:dunno: I've got a pretty good idea what this Conquest is going to cost to operate, but only time will tell how close my estimates are.;)
The good thing, even figuring the cost of funds, is that funds are cheap right now.:D

Dave Siciliano said:
Most of the firms that relate operating costs do have a little conflict of interest. I went around a couple years ago with a fella on the board here that held himself out as a real expert. Of course, capital had no cost. See.....that didn't matter to him. Plane residual value seemed a bit aggressive to me. They don't really go down in value you see (so he explained). Wayne and I tend to look at real numbers. They speak for themselves if you know how things work. Unfortunately, a lot of folks don't and rely on other "experts".
Planes don't appreciate: they are a depreciating asset for a reason. Y'all understand it's a big piece of machinery that wears out and needs constant care. In some rare cases, in good markets, one may sell for the original acquisition price when there are shortages or a bubble. That's not normal. Most are like a new car in that when you drive them off the lot, you won't recover your original purchase price (some exceptions noted in good markets.)

Best,

Dave
Click to expand...
 
Which by the way is currently on their drawing board.

Dead Stick said:
There's absolutely nothing wrong with a PC12 that a second PT-6 wouldn't resolve quite nicely thank you. :nonod:
Click to expand...
 
Dave Theisen said:
Bad things can happen in any airplane. The fact that they were still around to buy the King Air seems like a plus to me. Sure, you are playing the odds with any single engine, but when you factor in you've got a reliable PT6, a decent glide ratio, and a 64 knot stall speed, it ain't a bad way to travel.
Click to expand...
I've got a few hours in PT-6 powered aircraft. They are not as bullet-proof as the SE turboprop manufacturers would lead you to believe. Are they more reliable than a piston engine? No question about that. But sooner or later, they will all back it in. When that happens it's a minor inconvenience in a King Air and a potentially "life altering event" event in a single. I've had two PT-6 precautionary shutdowns, one in a Piper Cheyenne III and one in a King Air 200. Like I said, they were non-events in the twins. In a single they would have involved off-airport landings. But, like they say, you pays your money and you makes your choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top