Indeed. It was more from a manufacturing / support ‘ experience qc perspective from Dahler that I was interested in.
On this topic though, when one looks at a European profile for moving around, the flexibility of the K100 and the ability to land on super small trips overall journey time door to door is closer than one might think. In fact the only real drawback for me is the inability to climb over weather. But I’m sure that’s for a different thread. J
The Kodiak was developed by and for MAF and was acquired by Daher.
The TBM and Kodiak have in common that both are owned by Daher, that’s it.
Pig wrote:
On this topic though, when one looks at a European profile for moving around, the flexibility of the K100 and the ability to land on super small trips overall journey time door to door is closer than one might think. In fact the only real drawback for me is the inability to climb over weather.
That is why Pilatus created the PC12.
Even if you get a Kodiak it’s very possible that your local 450m airstrip doesn’t want you to be there. You’ll be noisy and disturb the already fragile relationships with the landowners around that airstrip. At least that’s my experience on the few smaller grass strips I’ve been in Europe.
The Kodiak was made for hot and high bush flying. Most users will be happier with a C208 or C208B as it’s a little roomier. The Kodiak had a very specific design philosophy.
The PC12 shouldn’t be compared to a Kodiak or C208. It doesn’t handle rough airstrips well and combined with the long distance between prop and nose wheel it’s more likely to hit something. Also it’s has smaller wheels. From what I remember the PC12 is 500kg heavier for the same payload compared to a C208B/EX. If the surface is muddy, you don’t want small wheels. I guess if you fly from well maintained or smooth and dry airstrips it will serve you well.
0fficer wrote:
The PC12 shouldn’t be compared to a Kodiak or C208. It doesn’t handle rough airstrips well and combined with the long distance between prop and nose wheel it’s more likely to hit something.
Interesting. Pilatus definitly appear to think otherwise and some users of the PC12 use it on airstrips which also quite suit both the Kodiak and Cessnas. Actually, one of the prominent users of the PC12 on a grass strip used to have a Kodiak first and changed to a PC12 by the looks of it.
Nice to see some videos from my home area :)
The Locher airfield is nothing for me, very steep approach and very short “field”
Don’t get me wrong. It’s a very capable aircraft, but if we’re talking specific (rough/muddy) airstrips or which were not possible because of the low wing, we never send the PC12 there.
After some departures I can only be scared what would happen if the C208 had a retractable landing gear. All the mud that would end up in the wheel well. And what about stone damage? We had a PC12 in Kenya, but our use was limited to the better airstrips. In the end the limitations were hurting us and now it’s flying in DRC.
Perhaps 99% of the European unimproved airstrips will be suitable for a PC12. I can only speak for the strips I’ve seen in Africa. In Europe I can’t remember landing on airstrips that would classify as rough to me, so maybe from that perspective the PC12 would be suitable to fly to/from any unimproved airstrip in Europe.
I’ve seen the vids, yes very impressive airstrip. Is that the same strip where they fly the pocket rocket from?
