PC-12 or King Air 200
06-26-2007, 08:46 PM
#1
On Reserve
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Posts: 19
PC-12 or King Air 200
I have been tasked with helping pick out an airplane that I will be flying for a company that will be purchasing its first aircraft. The Owner has been making noise about wanting either a King Air 200, PC-12 or somthing around this size. I am looking for some help from people that have flown either or both and could give the good and bad of both airframes. Any help would be much appreciated
06-26-2007, 10:15 PM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: Fifth floor, window
Posts: 290
Sorry if this is a repeat...I posted once already but it vanished (and may reappear?)
I've B200 experience and was in on a company deciding to acquire a PC12 (but didn't fly it).
Briefly some pros and cons.
Check out insurance. Many insurance companies let 700 hour pilots fly these (with some initial safety pilot time, no way would they let a 700 hour pilot loose in a B200)
There are more Beech service centers and more people familar with working on the plane.
If its a turbo-prop twin might as well use the balanced field length performance...which puts you at at least 1500 ft more runway required at STD ISA.
People have been shocked with the initial depreciation of a new B200 or 350 is. (Plenty of used B200's out there...maybe you can find a gem with low time engines and save them some money and get yourself a raise)
Research SE flying engine shut-down rates and where you'll be flying it. And what the owner thinks of that, and you too.
The B200 is a really sweet flying plane. Its faster too, by about 25-30 knots. But this makes no real difference at all on a typical 300-500 NM trip, except you've burned 25% more fuel on that that trip with the B200. But the PC12, (earlier ones) traded a lot of payload for full fuel. Newer ones have higher gross weights. All but the latest PC-12 had heavy airlerons (I heard) but what does the owner care about that? Easier to carry a variety of stuff in the PC-12 - by far. (I wanted one so I could carry a bicycle on it for the lay-overs)
Nearly all twins cost more than twice as much to maintain and for engine reserves than a SE.
Here's the kicker: Another company I know of (and am very familiar with) sold their B200 and got a PC-12. Two years later got they got another PC-12. That pretty much says it all - except the pilot missed the B200. He said the engine out climb was always better.
Hope that's a start.
I've B200 experience and was in on a company deciding to acquire a PC12 (but didn't fly it).
Briefly some pros and cons.
Check out insurance. Many insurance companies let 700 hour pilots fly these (with some initial safety pilot time, no way would they let a 700 hour pilot loose in a B200)
There are more Beech service centers and more people familar with working on the plane.
If its a turbo-prop twin might as well use the balanced field length performance...which puts you at at least 1500 ft more runway required at STD ISA.
People have been shocked with the initial depreciation of a new B200 or 350 is. (Plenty of used B200's out there...maybe you can find a gem with low time engines and save them some money and get yourself a raise)
Research SE flying engine shut-down rates and where you'll be flying it. And what the owner thinks of that, and you too.
The B200 is a really sweet flying plane. Its faster too, by about 25-30 knots. But this makes no real difference at all on a typical 300-500 NM trip, except you've burned 25% more fuel on that that trip with the B200. But the PC12, (earlier ones) traded a lot of payload for full fuel. Newer ones have higher gross weights. All but the latest PC-12 had heavy airlerons (I heard) but what does the owner care about that? Easier to carry a variety of stuff in the PC-12 - by far. (I wanted one so I could carry a bicycle on it for the lay-overs)
Nearly all twins cost more than twice as much to maintain and for engine reserves than a SE.
Here's the kicker: Another company I know of (and am very familiar with) sold their B200 and got a PC-12. Two years later got they got another PC-12. That pretty much says it all - except the pilot missed the B200. He said the engine out climb was always better.
Hope that's a start.
06-26-2007, 10:27 PM
#6
Chief Jeppesen Updater
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: Executive Transport Driver
Posts: 3,080
It's easy to say one or the other for various reasons, but make sure that you seriously do some sitting down with the owner and good research.
Owning an aircraft isn't cheap- and justifying one on paper can be very difficult, particularly for a company that is used to having tangible numbers to work with. You want to make sure that before you commit yourself and your livelyhood, you CLEARLY spell out some expectations for the new owner- otherwise you might find yourself out of a job with little or no notice.
Some things to consider beyond purchase price and the ability of each aircraft to meet the operational goals and needs of the mission:
Crew staffing and training: Is the aircraft going to be a single pilot aircraft? How often are you going to send each crewmember to training? What is the cost of each training event (initial/recurrent)? Will you be flying enough to meet landing and instrument proficiency requirements? Will training be conducted in the aircraft? Do you have provisions for an IPC if you don't maintain instrument currency?
Maintenance: Are you buying new or used? What warranty coverage do you have? Will you enroll in a maintenance management or parts coverage plan if outside of the initial factory coverage? Do you have realistic expectations for unexpected maintenance? What is the cost of inspecting or overhauling the engine(s)? If you're purchasing something used- how much time until overhaul or hot section inspection? Does the reduced purchase price reap benefits, or will you lose money in the long term due to heavy maintenance?
Insurance: What type of coverage does the company need? Can you be insured? How much is it going to cost?
Fuel: Do you have realistic numbers for fuel and other "unfixed expenditures"? With fuel going the way that it is, single engine may be a benefit here (depending on stage lengths, aircraft performance, inflight speeds, etc). How about other costs- has your employer considered the costs of landing/handling fees, GPUs, hotels, rental cars, meals, etc that the crew will need?
What fixed costs come into play? Hangar fees, tiedowns, chart subscriptions, professional services (flight planning, tracking, maintenance planning, etc) are all things to consider.
I can't share specific numbers, but here are some rough numbers to play with from last year at my company. We operate a Citation Encore, but I imagine that most companies follow similar breakdowns of finances:
Percentage of Annual Departmental Costs
*Aircraft acquisition/financing costs not included
Crew Salaries & Benefits: 32.0%
Fuel: 27.7%
Planned Maintenance: 14.25%
Real estate, hangars, associated taxes/fees: 8.0%
Unplanned MX: 6.3%
Training: 5.2%
Data, Communications, Charts, & Other Subscriptions: 2.25%
Lodging, Meals, Entertainment: 2.0%
Travel (Airline): 1.5%
Misc: 0.8%
Owning an aircraft isn't cheap- and justifying one on paper can be very difficult, particularly for a company that is used to having tangible numbers to work with. You want to make sure that before you commit yourself and your livelyhood, you CLEARLY spell out some expectations for the new owner- otherwise you might find yourself out of a job with little or no notice.
Some things to consider beyond purchase price and the ability of each aircraft to meet the operational goals and needs of the mission:
Crew staffing and training: Is the aircraft going to be a single pilot aircraft? How often are you going to send each crewmember to training? What is the cost of each training event (initial/recurrent)? Will you be flying enough to meet landing and instrument proficiency requirements? Will training be conducted in the aircraft? Do you have provisions for an IPC if you don't maintain instrument currency?
Maintenance: Are you buying new or used? What warranty coverage do you have? Will you enroll in a maintenance management or parts coverage plan if outside of the initial factory coverage? Do you have realistic expectations for unexpected maintenance? What is the cost of inspecting or overhauling the engine(s)? If you're purchasing something used- how much time until overhaul or hot section inspection? Does the reduced purchase price reap benefits, or will you lose money in the long term due to heavy maintenance?
Insurance: What type of coverage does the company need? Can you be insured? How much is it going to cost?
Fuel: Do you have realistic numbers for fuel and other "unfixed expenditures"? With fuel going the way that it is, single engine may be a benefit here (depending on stage lengths, aircraft performance, inflight speeds, etc). How about other costs- has your employer considered the costs of landing/handling fees, GPUs, hotels, rental cars, meals, etc that the crew will need?
What fixed costs come into play? Hangar fees, tiedowns, chart subscriptions, professional services (flight planning, tracking, maintenance planning, etc) are all things to consider.
I can't share specific numbers, but here are some rough numbers to play with from last year at my company. We operate a Citation Encore, but I imagine that most companies follow similar breakdowns of finances:
Percentage of Annual Departmental Costs
*Aircraft acquisition/financing costs not included
Crew Salaries & Benefits: 32.0%
Fuel: 27.7%
Planned Maintenance: 14.25%
Real estate, hangars, associated taxes/fees: 8.0%
Unplanned MX: 6.3%
Training: 5.2%
Data, Communications, Charts, & Other Subscriptions: 2.25%
Lodging, Meals, Entertainment: 2.0%
Travel (Airline): 1.5%
Misc: 0.8%
06-27-2007, 02:37 AM
#7
Moderator
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: ATP, CFI etc.
Posts: 6,056
NBAA sells books on how to set up corporate flight departments. I would try
https://secure.nbaa.org/public/ops/adm/fde/order.php
Always go for the airplane with the most knobs and dials in it (there I saved ya $250 bucks!)
Flight Department Essentials
Helping Your Business Take Flight
Helping Your Business Take Flight
https://secure.nbaa.org/public/ops/adm/fde/order.php
Always go for the airplane with the most knobs and dials in it (there I saved ya $250 bucks!)
Last edited by Cubdriver; 06-27-2007 at 12:34 PM.
06-27-2007, 06:16 AM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Corporate
Posts: 225
If they are considering buying new then look into the KingAir B200GT. Same plane, new engines... a derivative of the PT6-42 and the PT6-60A. 20 knots faster than the B200, 850hp up to 25,000'. Certification scheduled for later this year, deliveries soon after.
06-27-2007, 07:32 PM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: Left
Posts: 393
King Air 200. If an engine goes quiet in the 200 you still have one left. In the pc-12 when your engine goes quiet its really quiet. Its happened to them in the past. Fuel controller problems. Go two engines or pass on the deal.
If you are looking in the used market, why not try for a 300 and get the bigger engines for better speed.
In any event you cant really go wrong with a beech.
If you are looking in the used market, why not try for a 300 and get the bigger engines for better speed.
In any event you cant really go wrong with a beech.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
