Pilatus PC 24 - new GA aircraft
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: flying by night
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sure, there's a lot of small jets, and Pilatus doesn't know much about the business jet market, but they know their existing customers.
Some people like to buy an SUV even if they only drive in big cities, and never off-road. Part of Pilatus' owner-operator customer base may be "vanity-driven" to some degree...why not, it will be a very nice aircraft even if you don't plan to use it on grass strips every day, or if a turboprop could have done the same job (some people may still want a jet). I'm sure Pilatus have done extensive market research, and based this design on feedback from existing customers. They have a loyal customer base, and many may simply want to upgrade to the newest model, or to an even bigger cabin - the "deluxe" option (as opposed to the "economy" single turboprob pc-12). From a product line perspective, the PC-24 complements the PC-12, rather than cannibalizing it.
There's the obvious customers, like emergency services/govt agencies in remote areas in countries like Canada and Australia (should be an almost perfect fit), and there's probably a market for freight, things like shipping replacement parts in remote areas all over the world. The PC-24 could be interesting for charterers, not only for freight, but for business trips. I'm thinking about Indonesia, Russia, China, India. Brazil, and other countries where infrastructure hasn't kept up with economic development, for oil/mining etc. Possibly (?) there could also be military uses, Pilatus has good contacts.
The PC-12 was far more successful than anticipated. The PC-24 is a risk for Pilatus, but I assume a calculated one, and if I was a competitor, I'd be cautious about simply discarding it and assuming "no one needs this" and "few will buy it" - which might not be an optimal strategy, better prepare for competition. It's an offering which doesn't exist yet - a short field capable, "rugged" light jet with with a large cabin, an in-flight accessible, large, pressurized cargo compartment, and a barn door. Hard to say how many will need it, but it's a different, and flexible aircraft, there may be uses others haven't thought of. Entrepreneurial operators can carve out new market niches for it (I'm not very creative, all that comes to my mind right now is the South American...ahem...premium coffee trade, the PC-24 must be a good choice for smugglers; but others will certainly find better uses for it). Seriously, specs and price seem competitive, and it isn't a "me too" product, it has some unique selling points. Sales to various different market segments may just add up.
Finally, there were more than thousand (2500?) orders for the Grob 180 SP, if I remember correctly; before the prototype crashed, and they went bust. Pilatus is a bit more conventional, and conservative in their approach to design and engineering, I doubt they'll make the same mistakes Grob did. But I think the interest In Grob demonstrated that there could be a demand for this kind of aircraft.
Some people like to buy an SUV even if they only drive in big cities, and never off-road. Part of Pilatus' owner-operator customer base may be "vanity-driven" to some degree...why not, it will be a very nice aircraft even if you don't plan to use it on grass strips every day, or if a turboprop could have done the same job (some people may still want a jet). I'm sure Pilatus have done extensive market research, and based this design on feedback from existing customers. They have a loyal customer base, and many may simply want to upgrade to the newest model, or to an even bigger cabin - the "deluxe" option (as opposed to the "economy" single turboprob pc-12). From a product line perspective, the PC-24 complements the PC-12, rather than cannibalizing it.
There's the obvious customers, like emergency services/govt agencies in remote areas in countries like Canada and Australia (should be an almost perfect fit), and there's probably a market for freight, things like shipping replacement parts in remote areas all over the world. The PC-24 could be interesting for charterers, not only for freight, but for business trips. I'm thinking about Indonesia, Russia, China, India. Brazil, and other countries where infrastructure hasn't kept up with economic development, for oil/mining etc. Possibly (?) there could also be military uses, Pilatus has good contacts.
The PC-12 was far more successful than anticipated. The PC-24 is a risk for Pilatus, but I assume a calculated one, and if I was a competitor, I'd be cautious about simply discarding it and assuming "no one needs this" and "few will buy it" - which might not be an optimal strategy, better prepare for competition. It's an offering which doesn't exist yet - a short field capable, "rugged" light jet with with a large cabin, an in-flight accessible, large, pressurized cargo compartment, and a barn door. Hard to say how many will need it, but it's a different, and flexible aircraft, there may be uses others haven't thought of. Entrepreneurial operators can carve out new market niches for it (I'm not very creative, all that comes to my mind right now is the South American...ahem...premium coffee trade, the PC-24 must be a good choice for smugglers; but others will certainly find better uses for it). Seriously, specs and price seem competitive, and it isn't a "me too" product, it has some unique selling points. Sales to various different market segments may just add up.
Finally, there were more than thousand (2500?) orders for the Grob 180 SP, if I remember correctly; before the prototype crashed, and they went bust. Pilatus is a bit more conventional, and conservative in their approach to design and engineering, I doubt they'll make the same mistakes Grob did. But I think the interest In Grob demonstrated that there could be a demand for this kind of aircraft.
Last edited by deptrai; 23rd May 2013 at 05:20.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Timbuktu
Posts: 962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well put, deptrai.
Also at EBACE there was always a long line waiting to get inside the fuselage mockup to have a look... such a line didn't seem to exist outside the CL350
Also at EBACE there was always a long line waiting to get inside the fuselage mockup to have a look... such a line didn't seem to exist outside the CL350
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This aircraft will be a winner becuase:
1) Pilatus has a very loyal customer base and the only reason people looking to upgrade from a PC-12 to a jet have been going to Embraer has been because Pilatus had nothing to offer them.
2) The cost of developing an STC for a large cargo door so close to the tail assembly on a similar sized aircraft (when combined with the purchase price) makes the PC-24 a no-brainer if you are in the MEDEVAC business (for example). The purchase price is sub 10m USD all in.
3) Combine the above with sturdy trailing link gear, 80ktas stall speed, advanced avionics (it has a very nice office - I sat in it
), all metal construction, electrical spoilers ,etc.
Well done Pilatus
BF
The performance numbers may not look outstanding but this is a niche aircraft. The beauty is in the all-round functionality with the right trade off with performance.
1) Pilatus has a very loyal customer base and the only reason people looking to upgrade from a PC-12 to a jet have been going to Embraer has been because Pilatus had nothing to offer them.
2) The cost of developing an STC for a large cargo door so close to the tail assembly on a similar sized aircraft (when combined with the purchase price) makes the PC-24 a no-brainer if you are in the MEDEVAC business (for example). The purchase price is sub 10m USD all in.
3) Combine the above with sturdy trailing link gear, 80ktas stall speed, advanced avionics (it has a very nice office - I sat in it
), all metal construction, electrical spoilers ,etc.Well done Pilatus
BF
The performance numbers may not look outstanding but this is a niche aircraft. The beauty is in the all-round functionality with the right trade off with performance.
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Earth
Age: 49
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The PC12 was a sleeper because the sort of people with credit but no cash flow saw a way into an aircraft and a way to not go broke feeding it, as it only has one engine and sips fuel and can be flown single pilot.
I remember talking to biz owners that were wowed by the instrument panel, not being worried about overhauls, and ecstatic about only needing one pilot, and what a great cabin (lol)
Turns out it became popular with the air ambulance guys (big door) and hence, when rolling out this jet, surprise surprise, a big door for stretchers, two wheels to go into unimproved spots, single pilot.
They are just trying to make a better, faster PC12 and it makes sense.
My guess is that they will try to price it around the CJs as that's the big market.
I remember talking to biz owners that were wowed by the instrument panel, not being worried about overhauls, and ecstatic about only needing one pilot, and what a great cabin (lol)
Turns out it became popular with the air ambulance guys (big door) and hence, when rolling out this jet, surprise surprise, a big door for stretchers, two wheels to go into unimproved spots, single pilot.
They are just trying to make a better, faster PC12 and it makes sense.
My guess is that they will try to price it around the CJs as that's the big market.
Also one of the very few "build from scratch" aircraft that don't have winglets...
The aircraft appears to the be a natural progression from the PC-12 although the 'single is best' mantra won't ring true anymore.
The wing will have to be pretty well designed, short field work, 425Kts (true) and 1900NM+
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: flying by night
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also one of the very few "build from scratch" aircraft that don't have winglets...
the reasons you see more winglets than raked tips is mainly
1) because the aircraft was not built from scratch for a wingtip device - adding a winglet requires much less structural changes/reinforcements than a raked tip (which increases bending force); winglets are therefore much easier to retrofit
2) because some aircraft may be restricted by span/horizontal wing clearance (hangars, gates etc).
Last edited by deptrai; 1st Jun 2013 at 16:10.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now this is an air raft I am really looking forward to seeing.
Pilatus usually get everything just right. And clean sheet design gives them the edge.
Pilatus usually get everything just right. And clean sheet design gives them the edge.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just what the world needs - another light business jet. I hope Pilatus get successful with this thing, but the other makers can't even shift the ones already certified: Cessna has halted much of it's Citation production, Hawker/Beechcraft line will never fly again, the beautiful SJ30 has sold what - 4 units in total, and the rest of them are barely limping by maybe with the exemption of the Embraer Phenom.
The market just isn't there to support up to 10 different makers. And if you ask me - wouldn't you want to go faster than a jet and burn 40% less gas? Meet the Piaggio Avantii - and guess what - that one doesn't sell either. There are fundamental flaws in this segment that can not be overcome just by introducing newer stuff like the Pc-24 and the HondaJet.
The market just isn't there to support up to 10 different makers. And if you ask me - wouldn't you want to go faster than a jet and burn 40% less gas? Meet the Piaggio Avantii - and guess what - that one doesn't sell either. There are fundamental flaws in this segment that can not be overcome just by introducing newer stuff like the Pc-24 and the HondaJet.
Last edited by AdamFrisch; 5th Jun 2013 at 19:47.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: London
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just what the world needs - another light business jet. I hope Pilatus get
successful with this thing, but the other makers can't even shift the ones
already certified: Cessna has halted much of it's Citation production,
Hawker/Beechcraft line will never fly again, the beautiful SJ30 has sold what -
4 units in total, and the rest of them are barely limping by maybe with the
exemption of the Embraer Phenom.
The market just isn't there to support
up to 10 different makers. And if you ask me - wouldn't you want to go faster
than a jet and burn 40% less gas? Meet the Piaggio Avantii - and guess what -
that one doesn't sell either. There are fundamental flaws in this segment that
can not be overcome just by introducing newer stuff like the Pc-24 and the
HondaJet
- new aircraft are "old" designs. Even the avionics are obsolete IMHO (Proline 21, G1000 are overdue for replacement by Fusion and G3000)
- new aircraft compete against the volume of 2000's used jets but have little advantage
All aircraft are a compromise but the incentive to buy new is when designs introduce efficiency and improvement. You can get better range/payload putting new engines on a 1970s Citation that you can buying a new CJ. The Mustang was a delight when introduced but why buy a new one, when the compromises in a $3.5m 2013 aircraft are exactly the same as in a used one at half the price.
I love the King Air, but the brutal truth is that HB spent 30 years allowing the aftermarket industry to do product development instead of them. So you can build your own King Air from a used airframe for half the cost of a new one, with new engines and avionics.
Good clean sheet designs sell, as Embraer are finding. Major product improvements sell, as Cessna found with the CJs in the 2000s. But old products don't sell so well in a tough point of the cycle when they are competing with their identical used fleet only a few years old.
At least Pilatus are offering what could be a breakthrough in the single-pilot ~$9m segment - a midsize cabin and "utility" in terms of short-field and special payloads. Good luck to them. Every other makers' product offerings are frozen in 2007-8, but it's 5-6 years later.
Last edited by 421C; 5th Jun 2013 at 20:50.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: in the pub
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems to me, the biggest selling point apart from the barn door is operation on unimproved surfaces. Nothing has been available in the jet category, bar the original C500/C550 series.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: flying by night
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
for those who doubted whether "yet another biz jet" could be successful: Pilatus announced 84 sales for the PC-24 at EBACE. Customers include owner-operators like Nestle President Brabeck, who is upgrading from a PC 12, for his private pleasure. As I suspected, Pilatus customers are loyal folks, and Pilatus probably knew there was a market for this. All delivery positions until end of 2019 are sold, binding contracts with non-refundable deposits.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: BFS
Posts: 1,177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good for them.
However one would expect the head of a Swiss company with based king airs at Lausanne to back a Swiss jet that may be capable of using Lausanne.
Also 84 sales is hardly earth shattering in the grand scheme. Only a years backlog at most on the competition.
Also a lot of dealer orders there.
Good to see it coming together though.
However one would expect the head of a Swiss company with based king airs at Lausanne to back a Swiss jet that may be capable of using Lausanne.
Also 84 sales is hardly earth shattering in the grand scheme. Only a years backlog at most on the competition.
Also a lot of dealer orders there.
Good to see it coming together though.
Last edited by silverknapper; 21st May 2014 at 17:32.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: flying by night
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
all I thought is...Pilatus will be ok. They seem to have carved a small niche for the PC-24, and that's all they need. Building a business jet was a calculated gamble, but it looks like they got it right. It's hardly earth shattering,. as you said, but let's hope the PC-24 will never be earth shattering (sorry...couldn't resist).
Well there seems to be a lot a (well deserved) curiosity for the PC-24 at EBACE, and some good sales figures. But I really remain skeptical. The Royal Flying Doctor of Australia (4) ok, I see the the point - but it is really very much a niche aircraft. I really wish them the best but ....