Don't want to hijack the thread, which is an important one and we need to keep it on topic, and whilst generally agreeing with LeadSled I cannot let his statement about the 208 being a non-starter in the hard world go by. That's completely wrong, my friend - even with the lousy exchange rate the low operating costs of the 208 mean it is very much a contender - around 1000 hours per year at a charge-out rate of $1000 per hour (and that should really be higher for what you're getting) means you can consider a new aircraft. That is not by any means impossible, and is far preferable to any third world solution involving rebuilding old piston twins. We're supposed to be an advanced economy, for heavens sake. BTW, I don't recall any detailed cost benefit analysis being presented at the RAAA convention, just some opinions being thrown around, unless this occurred at one of the breakout fora. Have a look at what was on offer at the Singapore airshow - no piston twins, plenty of turbine singles with more in the pipeline, piston twins are dead on the world scene except for small selling specialist aircraft like the Islander and a few Barons for rich American doctors, and that is the real hard reality. Now, let's get back on topic!