Textron SkyCourier
- Thread starter KLB
- Start date
Itchy
Well-Known Member
I can't possibly see how that is true. Just my observation. A lot more to go wrong compared to a van. Gear, hydraulics, pressurization, AOA computers/stick pushers/etc. Electric trim on all three axis, electrical system, flap monitoring system, etc etc. Just a whole bunch more boxes for each of those systems. BTW, a neat synopsis of the 12: http://philip.greenspun.com/flying/pc-12/review
Boris Badenov
Fortis Leader
IMS, the older high time -9s had constant problems with the flaps. We had a "low time" (4000 hrs or so) -10, and it was pretty much bulletproof. But again, dedicated, skilled maintenance and low utilization. I'm pretty sure the guys out on the Rez with the -9s that had 10k plus on them and flew a couple of times a day had a very different experience.
ppragman
FLIPY FLAPS!
I flew both, professionally, at the same time - well, not simultaneously, that'd be damn amazing, but I was checked out in both at the same time. The PC12 has similar reliability to the Van in my experience if you've got a good mechanic and you have several critical parts sitting on the shelf ready to drop in.
For instance, if a display unit goes out on a -10 /47 (like what I flew) it might take several days to get one from the parts supplier. Similarly, we damaged an AoA vane at one point, and it was 48 hours to get it fixed, and we had a great wrench. That said, I saw the caravan go out of service much more often than I saw the PC12 go out of service. The systems are robust and stout. I have heard the NG is more temperamental, but I have a whopping 2hrs in an NG and didn't know what I was doing in the thing.
The problem with the Van was that the parts weren't built very stoutly. Nothing really broke that often, but when it did break it was because of some chinsy design feature. It's not as skookum an airframe as cessna purports. I'd agree with the 99.9% dispatch reliability, but when the airplanes get old, the avionics and autopilots cause them to be as big a MX hog as any Navajo.
The PC12 on the other hand? Freaking bulletproof.
Boris Badenov
Fortis Leader
Watching an NG sit for 10 minutes with the marshaller in front of it while the pilot(s) programmed the FMS a few times was enough to convince me that they reinvented the wheel and made it triangular. If it ain't broke, etc etc.
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
Meh. Nurses call inbound from the hospital, boot up standby power, get clearance, load flight plan. Load patient, turn on the rest of the power, let it boot while doing the walk around and calling dispatch, hop in and you’re ready to light the fires. Not at all the way most GA drivers are used to doing things, but works good lasts long time.
I think part of the witchcraft they use is only routine 100 hour/annual inspections and a lowball estimate of non-routine inspections. Things like the 10 year wing demate and the 20k hour inspection get accounted differently.
Autothrust Blue
Welcome aboard the Washington State Ferries
EPIC load...erm, loading.
deadstick
Well-Known Member
What the hell?!?!!! You let the nurses “boot up standby power, get clearance, load flight plan”.
Which Springfield do you land at?
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
Whoah whoah...I boot the standby power when the nurses call inbound. I also fail at English. Apparently.
deadstick
Well-Known Member
bucksmith
Did you lock the doors?
I'm almost positive he was being sarcastic.
deadpixel
Well-Known Member
Those numbers were DOCs of a new EX, no pilot. I could likely dig up the DOCs on models out of warranty, but what you're looking at there is higher MX cost, reserves etc. Once you factor in pilots and everything else to run a business of course the total cost per hour will be higher.
🦈💜
Well-Known Member
BigZ
Well-Known Member
Ours was 850 wet on 1998 CE208B PT6
ppragman
FLIPY FLAPS!
Hours per year make a big difference on the charter rate to make money. Also, sometimes it's worth "just breaking even" on the charter rate if the bulk of your flying is scheduled stuff and you're looking to expand your business, but I digress.
av8tr1
"Never tell me the odds!"
What do you mean by "employee rate"?
BigZ
Well-Known Member
All are good and valid points
That thing was flying 200-300 hrs a year and I don't think the owner really cared if it made or lost a buck.
Down in these area, at least, CJ2 is helluva lot cheaper to dry lease then Beechjet, due to high cost of Beech parts and needing them more often. Still, plenty of Beechjets flying
ppragman
FLIPY FLAPS!
When you live some place that is remote, and people have family all over the region, it's not uncommon for air taxis to offer their employees the chance to pay "cost" to fly the airplane if they need it.
For instance, when I lived in SE, we had the option of renting the airplanes for cost whenever they weren't flying for work - I could rent the Cherokee for like $150/hr if I wanted to go up to HNS or something. I lived in JNU and didn't have family around, but other people did make use of this. One of the guys had to fly to PSG to get his medical, he ended up renting the 172 because it was cheaper than getting a ticket on Alaska
av8tr1
"Never tell me the odds!"
Ah, I wasn't aware of that. When I was flying helicopters I had an employee rate but it was pretty much our charter rate less my cost as an employee. So instead of $450 it was only $400 an hour.