Flying the Pilatus PC-12: does it live up to the hype?

Pilots are judgmental. We judge landings at the pancake breakfast, we judge paint jobs at Oshkosh, and we definitely judge airplane types. That much is clear from our occasional series on the topic, which has generated some of the most lively debates at Air Facts: see previous articles by me on the Cirrus SR22 and the Cessna 210, or Mac McClellan on the Mooney and Beech Starship, or classics from Richard Collins on the V-tail Bonanza and Bede-5.

Today we tackle a unique and well-regarded airplane: the Pilatus PC-12. Does it live up to the hype as the “turbine Suburban?” Is a single engine turboprop safe? Can it really take off from short and soft runways? My short answer is yes, yes, and yes, but please read on for a much longer answer.

I may not come to the PC-12 from a place of objectivity, but I can at least claim familiarity. I’ve had the privilege of flying the airplane for over 20 years, from coastal Nova Scotia to coastal Oregon, and from Southern California to the Southern Caribbean. Here’s what I’ve learned.

I’ve had the privilege of flying the airplane for over 20 years.

Pros

Versatility. This is the defining characteristic of Pilatus aircraft in general and the PC-12 in particular. It really can serve equally well as a corporate airplane with a luxurious cabin or as a bush plane that hauls a thousand pounds of cargo off gravel runways. In fact, this happens every day: fractional operators like Plane Sense fly discriminating customers in style, while medical operators like the Royal Flying Doctor Service fly patients from remote Australian roads.

That huge cargo door really is useful for everyday flights.

Notably, you don’t have to choose one or the other—with the flat floor (a surprisingly great feature) and removable seats, you can stack gear in the back of the airplane and still have four executive seats for carrying passengers. I keep finding new applications for this flexibility, whether flying six adult men, a dog crate, and 10 shotguns on a hunting trip, or hauling patio furniture, a photographer, and 200 lbs. of camera gear to a photo shoot. And of course with the huge back door, loading all those unique items is easy—just drive the car up behind the wing and toss it in. 

Versatility goes beyond the cabin; it also gives the pilot plenty of options in flight. The PC-12 is happy cruising along at FL280 to take advantage of a tailwind or at 14,000 feet to avoid the worst of a headwind (without the outrageous fuel burns of a pure jet down low). Likewise, the airplane can be comfortably flown in the terminal area at 200 knots or 100 knots. This makes it easy to fit in with traffic at busy airports, as I did one day going into Long Beach, California. Over a series of four different clearances from two different controllers, I was given a crossing restriction, then max forward speed, then minimum forward speed, then a land and hold short clearance on the runway. It was busy to the point of being comical, but it was all in a day’s work for the Pilatus.

Excellent range/payload options. This is often one of the most painful tradeoffs with GA airplanes: you can either carry a lot of passengers and luggage or you can go far, but never both. Not the PC-12, which comes close to defeating this iron law of airplane ownership. Sure, it can haul plenty of people, with room for up to 10 passengers in the rare Commuter configuration, seven in more typical configurations, and a full fuel payload of more than 1000 lbs. It can also fly 1500 miles if you go up to the high 20s—I can confirm that Phoenix to Cincinnati is a non-stop trip for the airplane. 

But the magic of the PC-12 is that it can also split the difference quite well. Because full fuel is over six hours of flying, even modest reductions in fuel load can yield huge payloads while retaining impressive range. For example, with a pilot, five adults, two kids, and plenty of baggage, the PC-12 can still fly over four hours with comfortable reserves. That means you can take the whole family (including the grandparents) from Chicago to Miami with ease.

Passengers quickly get spoiled by this, and more than once I’ve heard them quote the old ad campaign when packing for a trip: “If it fits, it ships.” They tend to bring baby strollers, bikes, and shopping bags in a way they would not in a TBM, Meridian, or CJ. But pilots get spoiled too, because it’s easy to tanker cheap fuel and avoid expensive FBO fill-ups, or to make huge weather deviations knowing that fuel reserves are almost never a limitation.

Impressive runway performance. Another tradeoff, especially with turbine airplanes, is load vs. runway performance. Many light jets can haul a solid load, but only with a 5000-foot runway. That’s fine for commuting between big cities like New York or Atlanta, but most GA pilots buy an airplane precisely because they want to go other places, and the PC-12 thrives in that environment.

Landing on the 2100-foot runway at St. Barts is no problem for a well-trained PC-12 pilot.

Pilatus tends to play up this feature in its marketing, but I can confirm it is both true and convenient. The performance specs are pretty simple: I rarely have a ground roll over 1000 feet on landing or over 1500 feet on takeoff, even at higher weights. Accelerate/stop distance, a more conservative number but also a more realistic one for airport planning, is rarely over 3000 feet. The reality is that any runway over 2500 feet is probably doable, and anything over 3500 feet is easy unless you’re in the mountains. Just look up PC-12s on FlightAware and you’ll see the huge variety of airports they operate from: Class B airline airports but also grass runways in the Mountain West and gravel strips in Arctic Canada.

Not everyone needs this flexibility, but I’ve found it useful in two ways. First is to avoid the busiest (and most expensive) airports near large cities. For example, we’ve frequently used Palm Beach County (LNA), whose longest runway is less than 3500 feet, to avoid the eye-watering fees and frustrating delays at larger airports in South Florida. Second is flying right to your destination when there are no other options nearby. Airports like Deerfield, Tennessee (TN44), Nemacolin, Pennsylvania (PA88), and Fishers Island, New York (0B8), have short runways—less than 2400 feet for Fishers—but allow you to park within sight of your bed for the night, a classic mission for GA. And yet even with this impressive runway performance, once in the air the PC-12 behaves like a high performance turbine airplane, so you can take off from a 3000-foot runway and still fly 700 miles.

Rugged construction. If you’re going to operate from remote airports, the airplane can’t break, and this is where the stereotypes about the Swiss design philosophy come into play. When you open up all the inspection panels and look around the PC-12, you realize it’s overbuilt for the class of airplane. Fuel or hydraulic lines that would be rubber hoses on other turboprops are carefully organized stainless steel tubes on the Pilatus, and the beefy landing gear looks like something off a Gulfstream.

This isn’t just for looks. Many PC-12s are hardworking machines that fly almost daily, so dispatch reliability is critical. In my experience, it is exceptional: over the 20+ years I’ve flown the airplane, I can count on one hand the number of canceled trips due to mechanical issues (and most of those were avionics boxes, not Pilatus parts). When there are AOG problems, support is responsive and backed by a first-rate network of service centers. Pilatus isn’t perfect, but the company stands behind the airplane, even 25-year old models. 

Easy to fly. This feature surprised me when I first checked out in the airplane, because I assumed a 10,000-lb. turbine airplane would be complicated and difficult to fly. But compared to a traditional turboprop there’s far less to do, and not just because there’s only one engine. Since the airplane was designed in the 1990s instead of the 1960s, the systems are simple and intuitive. For example, there is no prop lever (the propeller turns at 1700 RPM the whole time), so there’s just one lever to push when managing power, almost like a jet. Likewise, the fuel system is just about dummy-proof: it’s either on or off, with no complicated tank layout or cross-feed options. Starting the engine is also simple, with a mostly automated start procedure (fully automated on the newest models, which have a full FADEC) that turns on fuel pumps and igniters when needed.

The huge flaps can bring approach speed down below 80 knots.

The PC-12 is also forgiving to hand-fly, more like a Bonanza than a King Air. Older models can be quite heavy in roll, but newer ones are responsive and all are stable in IMC. The large flaps, which can go to 40 degrees, lead to remarkably low approach speeds—at light weights, Vref in the PC-12 can actually be lower than a Cirrus SR22 (less than 75 knots is not unheard of). And when you do touch down, the trailing link landing gear can hide a lot of poor technique. It’s hard to go back to straight legs once you’ve greased a landing in the Pilatus.

Besides making it fun to fly, the simplicity and slow approach speeds have a major safety benefit. In my opinion (hot take alert) the PC-12 is about the biggest and fastest airplane an owner/pilot should fly single pilot. When things get hectic, you can pull the single power lever back to 15 PSI and fly around at 150 knots all day while you catch up.

Cons

Expensive. Having praised the PC-12, it’s now time to admit the one significant con: it is flat out expensive. You might say you get what you pay for, but with new versions selling for close to $7 million, you should get an awful lot. The airplane has never been inexpensive, but in the first decade after certification Pilatus positioned the PC-12 as an affordable option compared to established choices like the King Air 200. At roughly $2.5 million in 2000, the average Pilatus was easily $1 million less than its Beechcraft competitor. While that’s still generally true, the PC-12’s price increases have outpaced inflation by almost 20% since that time. This has moved the airplane into a slightly different market, competing with light jets as often as other turboprops, and as a result the majority of new PC-12s are now flown by a pro pilot with the owner in the back. Older ones can be found for around $3 million, and these tend to skew towards owner-flown operations.

The expensive label doesn’t stop at the purchase price, for PC-12s also require a serious investment to maintain. All pilots like to complain about part prices, but a few examples from recent maintenance events show how quickly bills can hit five digits with a Pilatus: a new tire was $1600, a new fuel drain valve was $2500, a new deice boot (just one) was $6000, and a starter-generator overhaul exchange was over $10,000. There are also a few major inspections required on fixed calendar schedules, including a 10-year wing de-mate and a 5-year pitch trim actuator overhaul, which can lead to heartstopping conversations with your mechanic (or financial advisor).

It’s not all doom and gloom. Recent models (the NGX and PRO) extend the engine TBO to 5000 hours, and Pilatus made significant updates to the maintenance schedule a few years ago that increased inspection intervals, both of which make a major impact on ownership cost. And of course that expensive maintenance contributes to both the high dispatch reliability mentioned above and the impressive value retention for used models, which owners love. But still, the reality is unavoidable: this is a big airplane with big airplane part prices and inspection costs. Don’t buy one without running some honest math.

A few tradeoffs. There are some minor downsides to the pros listed above. For example, it’s easy to flat spot a tire on landing, since the straight, fat wings like to fly at low airspeeds. A new pilot who jumps on the brakes right after landing may find an expensive surprise on their post-flight inspection. Also, because any asymmetry in the large flaps could quickly cause a loss of control, the airplane is hypersensitive about any difference between left and right wing flap deployment. This can cause the flaps to freeze in position right after takeoff if they sense a fault, which can only be cleared after landing. This is rare, but it does happen, usually at the least convenient time (bad weather, busy airport, passengers on board).

That thick, straight wing is great for short takeoffs, but it does mean 300 knots is off the table.

Another downside to the superb runway performance is that high altitude performance, while hardly weak, doesn’t measure up to the some smaller turboprops. PC-12 cruise speeds vary from about 255 knots for earlier models to about 270 knots for newer ones, which is solid but 30-50 knots slower than a TBM 850/910/940. The service ceiling for the Pilatus is FL300, but climb performance in the high 20s can be leisurely on a hot day with a heavy load. The old saw about every airplane, even a Learjet, needing another 2000 feet of altitude and 25 knots of speed probably applies here, but at least you’ll be comfortable in the PC-12’s large cabin. 

The Apex panel isn’t great. The only other con is a personal opinion on my part, and one that some PC-12 pilots will probably disagree with violently. It relates to the NG and NGX models, which were produced between 2008 and 2025. These featured the Honeywell Apex glass cockpit, an avionics suite found in very few other airplanes and a notable difference compared to Meridians and TBMs with their Garmin panels. The Apex is quite capable, but its cursor control device is clunky and the menu structure is not very friendly for single-pilot operations. It is derived from Honeywell’s Epic panels, found on Falcon and Gulfstream jets, and it retains much of that system’s heavy iron operating logic—it sometimes feels like a first officer should be loading the FMS while the captain flies the airplane, an unrealistic option for a 1000-hour Private Pilot with an empty right seat. To take just one example, loading a semi-complicated flight plan into a Garmin GTN 750 can be completed in half the time of the Honeywell system.

Perhaps the ultimate vote of no confidence came from Pilatus, who switched to Garmin for its new PRO model last year. The market for pre-2008 PC-12s is also dominated by Garmin, in that case mostly with retrofit systems like the G600 TXi, leaving Apex-equipped airplanes squeezed in the middle. The hardware is starting to get old, especially the first few model years, but upgrades are expensive or non-existent, making the future more than a little uncertain.

Neutral

One topic that is neither a pro nor a con is the single engine. I flew a Cheyenne IIXL before transitioning to the Pilatus, so this felt like a major issue or possibly even a step backwards. Real pilots fly twins, right? After 20 years I can honestly say it’s not even a topic of conversation. 

The PT6A is incredibly reliable.

Pratt and Whitney’s PT6A engine has a well-deserved reputation for being bulletproof, especially if they are well-maintained and given enough fuel. According to manufacturer data from a few years ago, the versions on the PC-12 (the 67B and 67P) have a total in-flight shutdown rate—for any reason—of less than 0.003 per 1000 flight hours. That is close to statistical noise. At the end of the day, the goal is safety, and the PC-12 boasts an outstanding safety record. The few accidents that do occur are mostly due to pilot error, often associated with autopilot or avionics mistakes.

The verdict

If this article sounds like a glowing endorsement, that’s because it is. I have no commercial relationship with Pilatus other than as a customer, so this endorsement is exclusively as an operator of the airplane, but I know many other pilots who share my positive opinion. The company deserves credit for taking a chance when they set out to create the PC-12 in the early 1990s. The Swiss engineers had a different approach than most other OEMs at the time, and although it took a few years to get the airplane perfected, the result is one of the most distinctive airplanes of the last 30 years. It’s probably not a coincidence that Cessna is essentially replacing the legendary King Air line with the Denali, an airplane with a striking resemblance to the PC-12.

It’s worth restating the first commandment of airplane ownership: there is no perfect airplane, only the perfect airplane for your mission. For many pilots a single engine turboprop is too expensive or simply more airplane than they need. But for anyone looking for the ultimate do-anything, go-anywhere GA airplane, the PC-12 is hard to beat.

• Author
• Recent Posts

John Zimmerman

Coming from an aviation family, John grew up in the back of small airplanes and learned to fly as a teenager. Ever since, he has been hooked on anything with wings and regularly flies a Citabria, a Pilatus PC-12, and a Cirrus SR22. He is an ATP and also holds ratings for multiengine, seaplanes, gliders, and helicopters. In addition to being Editor-in-Chief of Air Facts, John is the President & CEO of Sporty’s.

Latest posts by John Zimmerman (see all)

• Flying the Pilatus PC-12: does it live up to the hype? - July 17, 2026
• Is your flight school training you for the wrong job? - April 22, 2026
• Use it or lose it: the instrument rating is not an insurance policy - February 18, 2026