Actually, something is not right here. Why is the max cruise of Epic only 330 kts if it has 300 more hp than the TBM900 which also does 330kts??
it has 300 more hp than the TBM900
That is rated power on the ground. For the top speed the high altitude power matters and both planes will have similar high altitude performance. All PT6 engines have nearly unlimited power on the ground and it is only limited by how much the the airframe, prop etc. can handle. At altitude on the other side the smaller engines will “temp out” much lower and deliver less cruise power.
Looks great! Now where do I find about $ 3.5 mio…..
They have set the price quite high.
The problem is they cannot match Swiss build quality (PC12) even though the PC12 is a different market. And they cannot match French catering and smooth welcome (TBM) even though matching TBM build quality should not be too hard. And they obviously cannot match the proven track record of either of these.
They will need to deliver a very slick standard of finish, in and out.
OTOH they may be going for the reassuringly expensive approach
They should easily outperform a TBM. A ferry pilot I was in contact with years ago flew one of the Epic prototypes from the US to Europe and said it totally outclasses the TBM which he also flew. And that was an unpressurised prototype…
I wish them well. Somebody ought to succeed in this market, after so many failures. And I’ve had a photo of the Epic on the wall in my office for what must be 10 years, as one of the best looking planes
It’s just a little unfortunate that they didn’t change the engine game up a bit. The Kestrel – a dead ringer for the Epic – had the TPE331-10 engine and it would have slashed operational costs and fuel costs. Even the new Cessna SETP chose something else and it will be very interesting to see how that performs.
But the Epic sure is a nice looking plane. Looks fast just sitting there.