Sounds Air and the Pilatus PC-12

[Peter Lewis]

Back in early April, after the Omaka air show, I was able to photograph the then newly-arrived Sounds Air PC-12 ZK-PLS when it was parked at Woodbourne



Last weekend I was in Wellington, and was able to capture the other two Pilatus now in the fleet

ZK-PLT which arrived in August





ZK-PLZ registered as such in May

[Dave Homewood]

Very nice. Sounds Air's colours look good on any aeroplane, even the ugly but awesome Pilatus.

[isc]

Very nice Peter, here's a dumb question; In the past many large companies, and Governments would not allow senior staff, important people fly on single engine aircraft. I think it was because of the insurance companies, has that changed? isc

[baronbeeza]

Over twice the chance of an engine failure on a twin. These PT-6 powered machines are a world apart from a piston powered jobby.
What would you feel safer flying in, a 402 or a Caravan or Pilatus ?
The days of the piston twin are almost over, at least for air transport type ops.

I suspect the Islander is going to be hard to phase out all the same. Access to Avgas is getting difficult in some areas now also.

[isc]

that's my thoughts also, I was wondering about the insurance companies view on single versus multi engine aircraft. isc

[Peter Lewis]

The general informed opinion is that a light twin (of the Miles Gemini/Aztec/C402 variety) is the most dangerous aircraft of all to fly.

The reality is that such aircraft, loaded, cannot maintain height on one engine.
So in the event of an engine failure, particularly on take-off, you have all the problems of a single engined aircraft plus additional asymetric problems.

Back when I was considering doing a twin rating, I worked out that in order to be up with the play I'd need to fly the thing no less than an hour a week.

Thanks but no thanks. Singles are safer.

(Obviously the above does not apply to airline-type twins like the DHC8 etc.)

[FlyingKiwi]

My two centrs, a twin that isn't able to maintain a good rate of climb (or any rate of climb) on one engine is still safer if ('if' being the key word!) it is being flown accurately and correctly. At the very least you'll get further if an engine lets go than you would otherwise, and if you aren't operating at MAUW or conditions are favourable or the aeroplane is of the better performing variety you may well get back to an airport. Loss of control will NOT happen if the aeroplane is being operated in accordance with the book even with relatively "average" handling technique. However, where the basic light twin acquires its bad reputation, and where that reputation is justified, is when flown by a pilot who isn't up to speed with engine-out handling or worse assumes that having a second engine automatically makes them safer!

Same reason that the Bonanza got a bad reputation - nothing wrong with the plane, it was just unfortunately purchased by a lot of people who assumed that because it was a relatively low power piston single they could treat it the same as a trainer.

So in your case Peter it would certainly make more sense to fly singles, and for the same reason I've only recently started flying twins again after a prolonged absence - currency is the key!

Bit of thread drift I guess.

[isc]

My main reason for asking is the perception of international tourists who may or may not be deterred by the number of bits going round.
One thing that got me thinking was when we visited Woodbourne last year, and some of use were looking at the(non operational} Mitsubishis, and hearing the stories of their engine out performance. It's doubtful if any other twin has problems like that. isc

[haughtney1]

Give me a PC12 any day over ANY light twin.

[isc]

I'm quite happy in a C-185,  given someone like Don Erceg for a pilot, you should be safe even if the engine falls out.  isc

[baronbeeza]

I have heard Goose tell his story there... he did make it sound more like luck than skill though. He did hurt his finger though so wasn't completely unscathed.

[isc]

near enough. isc

[nuuumannn]

Pee Ell Tee at En Pee Eee