Looks to be going after Pilatus. FADEC GE engine. 9 seats.
http://aviationweek.com/ebace-2016/textron-s-new-turboprop-emerges
I stopped reading the Aviation Week article after this sentence: " Both Cessna and Beechcraft had long wanted to enter the single-engine turboprop market. " What??? Cessna has built and sold more single-engine turboprops than all the others together, over 2000 Caravans over the last 35 years…
@ what_next: Because you stopped reading you did not get to the last sentence saying
Now Textron Aviation would like a part of that action in addition to its ubiquitous workhorse Cessna Caravan.
ubiquitous = allgegenwärtig (sorry) 
The Caravan is a workhorse for a specialised market.
There have been rumours for years that Cessna will do a “TBM/PC12 eater” e.g. here
These two planes address two markets which have little overlap (most TBMs are owner flown, most PC12s are crew flown, etc) and they have very little competition in there, which everybody finds pretty amazing, after all these years.
Well, I don’t find their success amazing (they are very good at what they do) but what is amazing is that nobody else big has gone after that business.
The Epic/Farnborough/Kestrel/whatever claims amazing specs but is still stuck, despite having consumed a load of investor $$$. Epic has been selling a TP as a “homebuilt” but they have had huge issues, with customers reportedly suing them for non-delivered parts, etc.
The Lancair Evolution would take a chunk of the TBM business if it ever got certified. Currently it is virtually useless in Europe, with the two known specimens doing all they can to stay below the radar.
With its speed and load, it is certainly more after the passenger side of things ie PC12 rather than fast and small eg TBM. Which fits the jet product range as well.
Here’s the thing though: a brand new Hondajet is $4.5mill. The new TBM and PC12’s are as much. Hondajet has 5000hr TBO, none of the PT6’s have more than 3600hr. So, it’s a very inflated market for profits – they’re milking the last drop out of it. I think they’ll find that their competition will not be from the other SETP’s, it will be from the VLJ’s. Wouldn’t you want to fly faster, higher, with a potty, if it costs the same?
AdamFrisch wrote:
… if it costs the same?
It may cost the same to buy, but almost twice as much to operate. And for commercial operations in this part of the world (when it will be allowed) a jet needs to be flown by two pilots whereas a SETP requires only one. Halves the crew cost for the operator. Another reason: Some airports, e.g. my homebase, have a night flying ban for jets but allow prop driven aircraft 24hours. This is a basic requirement for hauling express freight, a typical role for the PC-12 and Caravan.
Personally, I would always prefer a twin jet over a single turboprop, but I see good reasons why some people go for the latter.
And the jet and turboprop markets are not comparable as we have discussed here many times. For a variety of reasons they are somewhat dissociated.
I’m not sure it will cost twice as much to operate. They burn the same at their max altitude, about 500pph. And big bore PT6’s are the most expensive turboprops to overhaul there are. They’re easily in the $500K+ region. I wouldn’t be surprised if the HA engine is about that for both, but I have not seen any figures yet.
AdamFrisch wrote:
Hondajet has 5000hr TBO, none of the PT6’s have more than 3600hr.
Not true. Small PT6As can have up to 4000 hours TBO, medium – up to 5000, and large ones – up to 6000 hours, all in the stock version.
