Originally Posted by
morno
Precisely Leady.
I’ve got a few thousand jet and a few thousand turboprop. Each have their own peculiarities, but jets aren’t really that much harder than turboprops. Most of the guys I fly with have never flown anything with props outside of their flying training.
The Pilatus jet will have been designed for ultimate simplicity. Maybe the type rating and 40-50hrs ICUS. End of discussion.
Morno,
That reminds me of years ago, the then head of training at China Southern, the airline (CSWAFC having been instructed by CASA that their cadets could not do an initial twin endorsement on their Citations, only an old C-310) ask very very senior CASA bloke:" Why do my cadets have to fly a twin engine aircraft with Otto Cycle engines, when they will never again, in their career, fly other than a turbine??".
Does it surprise you that CASA had no answer, not even a bulldust answer.
That chap from China Southern eventually became Minister for Civil Aviation in China, the CASA chap ---- well, that is another story, and China Southern moved their major training investment to Canada.
Back to the thread --- I have no doubt the PC-24 will be a highly successful aircraft, it can virtually go anywhere the PC-12 can go, and will undoubtedly be as nice to fly as all other Pilatus aircraft --- I have only flown the PC-6, both piston and turbine versions.
Tootle pip!!