Biz Jets, Ag Flying, GA etc. The place for discussion of issues related to corporate, Ag and GA aviation. If you're a professional pilot and don't fly for the airlines then try here.

Cessna Denali V PC12

Old 31st May 2018, 14:01
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Oz
Posts: 822
Cessna Denali V PC12

Are Cessna being deliberately conservative with the performance specs of the up comming Denali.
It has an engine claimed to use 30% less than the "nearest competitor", yet the Denali has less range with the same fuel as the PC12.
Speeds, weights, dimensions etc all seem very close to identical as the PC12.
So what's the supposed advantage, why would somone put up money for an aircraft that they wont get for a couple more years when the PC12 can do it now.
nomorecatering is offline  
Old 31st May 2018, 15:02
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: ask me tomorrow
Posts: 119
Originally Posted by nomorecatering View Post
Are Cessna being deliberately conservative with the performance specs of the up comming Denali.
It has an engine claimed to use 30% less than the "nearest competitor", yet the Denali has less range with the same fuel as the PC12.
Speeds, weights, dimensions etc all seem very close to identical as the PC12.
So what's the supposed advantage, why would somone put up money for an aircraft that they wont get for a couple more years when the PC12 can do it now.
The most logical theory I've heard is that Cessna wants to keep customers their product family. - Initial training in a C-172/182, maybe Caravan time, and then into the Denali and onto a Mustang.

As it is now, after training in a Cessna, the wealthy owner/pilot hops into a TBM or PC-12 and Cessna becomes a mere after thought.
Geosync is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2018, 20:13
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ormond Beach
Age: 44
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by nomorecatering View Post
So what's the supposed advantage, why would somone put up money for an aircraft that they wont get for a couple more years when the PC12 can do it now.
FWIW, It's not so easy to get a PC-12 now, they have a backlog.
flyboyike is offline  
Old 6th Jun 2018, 01:36
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: California
Posts: 344
flyboy
"FWIW, It's not so easy to get a PC-12 now, they have a backlog. "
There are 47 for sale on Controller right now.
f
fleigle is offline  
Old 6th Jun 2018, 08:35
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Delsey
Posts: 746
The most logical theory I've heard is that Cessna wants to keep customers their product family. - Initial training in a C-172/182, maybe Caravan time, and then into the Denali and onto a Mustang.
Cessna ended Mustang production last year. The Denali will likely be the end game in single pilot transports for a while.
500 above is offline  
Old 6th Jun 2018, 21:52
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ormond Beach
Age: 44
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by fleigle View Post
flyboy
"FWIW, It's not so easy to get a PC-12 now, they have a backlog. "
There are 47 for sale on Controller right now.
f
I thought the word backlog would make it clear I meant new ones, but clearly I thought wrong.
flyboyike is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2018, 15:56
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: California
Posts: 344
flyboyike
Aaah, therein lies the confusion.... new!
f
fleigle is offline  
Old 11th Jun 2018, 02:23
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1
I believe the figure of 30% is the longer TBO of GE engine of the Denali (vs PT-6) and not the fuel burn. What is missed in comparison was the plentiful TBM's of variety of sizes, horse-powers,speed, and weight category. which are another family of working single engine Turbo Props.

I am not quite sure if these category of aircraft (S.E.Turbo Props) are allowed to operate as in Part-135 in USA and specially IFR at night as they maybe allowed in Europe, and would like to know for sure. If not, then their use will be limited to private and corporate owners only and not as charter service. Just curious. Thanks.
TurboPropFan is offline  
Old 11th Jun 2018, 08:59
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Hinckley
Age: 56
Posts: 50
Originally Posted by TurboPropFan View Post
I believe the figure of 30% is the longer TBO of GE engine of the Denali (vs PT-6) and not the fuel burn. What is missed in comparison was the plentiful TBM's of variety of sizes, horse-powers,speed, and weight category. which are another family of working single engine Turbo Props.

I am not quite sure if these category of aircraft (S.E.Turbo Props) are allowed to operate as in Part-135 in USA and specially IFR at night as they maybe allowed in Europe, and would like to know for sure. If not, then their use will be limited to private and corporate owners only and not as charter service. Just curious. Thanks.
In Europe at least the new GE engine and the airframe combination will have to clock up a fair few hours to prove reliability before EASA would mandate approval for SET commercial ops. To an extent, the anticipated in-flight failiure rate can be extrapolated from the DNA of the engine core design, but that only goes so far. You definately won't be able to buy a new Denali off the production line and put it to work commercially in Europe from day one, might be several years later. Not sure about the FAA and US Part-135 ops, they might take a more accomodating view.
sellbydate is offline  
Old 11th Jun 2018, 21:39
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ormond Beach
Age: 44
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by TurboPropFan View Post
I am not quite sure if these category of aircraft (S.E.Turbo Props) are allowed to operate as in Part-135 in USA and specially IFR at night as they maybe allowed in Europe, and would like to know for sure.
They are indeed, and now you know for sure.
flyboyike is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.