Who keeps prices a secret? You can get ballpark prices in everything from a Cirrus to a Gulfstream these days. Exact pricing varies based on options. A new PC-12 NGX will give you pressurization, retractable gear, and far higher speeds and range but will cost ~$6.8MM, to step up to a Swiss jet with the PC-24 you're looking at ~$13.5MM. If you prefer yours jets 'merican made, you can save some cash and pick up a CJ4 Gen 2 for ~$11.5MM; or you go South American with an Embraer Phenom 300E for about the same price but the best speed and range of the FAR23 jets. Stepping down to pistons, Cirrus publishes a price list and starts at $844,900 and goes up with options (e.g. $39,000 for air conditioning). Then there's the big iron, a G700 will set you back $81MM.
I loved my time flying the caravan for Fedex and now I’m flying the PC 12 as a contract pilot but I really wanna fly this airplane and see how good it is in the cruise. I feel like I’m gonna get PC 12 performance but being able to fly to even shorter runways and carry even more stuff just maybe not as fast. I really wanna fly this plane!!
The main accomplishment with this design is that the PC and TBM don't have to put flaps out to allow it to keep up. 😁 It would be nice in some moderate backcountry ops, but it does still take 900 hp to get 200 kts. at altitude.
I see a lot of exposed delicate parts/wires/hoses inside RV Storage Bays and think to myself, "Why are these parts exposed? They need to be protected or they are going to get smashed."
Bad ass,I grew up on Kodiak Island Alaska,dad Jim North was lead mech that opened Kodiak airport for western airlines airport in 1967 for the connies,dad had plenty of aircraft after that so Kodiak is definatley a hearty brand,props for the brand.
yeah definitely a byproduct of the purchase of Kodiak by Daher lol. It's essentially for the wealthy enthusiast who isn't going out into the actual back country.
@@GLEX234 A retractable gear would increase the speed of the airplane, but it would significantly increase the cost and complexity (a crazy number of people land with gear up). If they added retractable gear they might as well pressurize the plane and make it a PG-12 competitor.
It's another 500k for the computer and certification. Pratt will do it if a manufacturer will buy it, they might even be working on it. The FAA certification program will take months to a year, even though they already have fadec on another engine model.
Can the 900 be equipped with Floats? I realize the 900 is designed for speed and hauling people, so floats would pretty much cancel out it's designed purpose, but just curious if there were plans for a float equipped model.
@@fjb4932 go sit for the written exam to become a pilot and tell me how it goes. People who say things like you don't have either. You gotta have brains to make enough money to buy a plane so again, you're at a loss either way you decide to stop talking and start doing
@@waholoopesorry74 hardly, it's 2/3 of a caravan, slotted in nicely between the 206 and 208. If Mahindra hadn't been so stupid, the GA10 would have been the poor man's competition, but even the 100 wasn't really a competitor to the caravan. Making a 200 kt executive version is probably more a competitor with the PC12, but with a bit more utility. The caravan is a slow barge in comparison, 150 kts at best, really a 10 seat 172.
@@jppalm3944 cessna is owned by Textron, a Connecticut based company, and all current aircraft are built in the US. You might be thinking of Cirrus, which is Chinese owned but US built.
What operator’s really want to know is, say useful load with say, two pilots and 900 pounds of fuel?. Is the ramp weight the same as landing weight? ECT ect
It's an entry turbo prop designed to carry the whole family and cargo no issues and be reliable much like a suburban. If you had a pressurized cabin that essentially defeats the purpose of the long term reliability this plane is aiming for and adds significant cost.
@@joshuapatrick682 Pressurization, auto throttle, and autoland would be great for an aircraft like this. simple to operate, super safe and even a low-time pilot could handle.
And if it were a piston engine it would cause enough power loss to be a safety concern . Also the converter wouldn’t last since most piston aircraft use leaded fuel .
A typical salesman. A guy who never worked on a plane in his life. Putting those cover on the wheels cost you when you have to put on a new tire. The engine is a pain to work on being high off the ground. Almost anything up front you need a step ladder or platform. And that will cost you more. And how many times did he say Kodiak 900 once was enough go back to Ford and sell cars and trucks.
It has the same wing that the 100 and more power. What mekes you think that is not STOL. The only difference as I understand is the tires that affect the type of surface that you can operate but not the take off and landing distances
@@edwinchandeck7231 I guess I think that because you still need 1000 ft of runway to takeoff and land. I have heard an interview from an Alaska bush pilot who flies the turbine beaver he said the Kodiak is a good plane but the takeoff distance is too long for the kind of flying they do. That is the basis of my thought process. It's a good plane but doesn't have the stol capability for a professional Alaskan bush pilot's mission
Ahh ok, make sense now. I guess it depends with what yo compare it to. But I don't know of another turbo prop that have better STOL performance except for the Pilatus PC6 and is comparable to the Tween Otter which is considered a good Stol airplane
@@edwinchandeck7231 check out the turbine Sherpa. It's not in production because they ran out of money but the Sherpa 650T has incredible STOL capability. But I guess it doesnt really count because it's not in production as of yet
Very much needed, seeing the aging out of these older planes, and cracks developing in the elevator & Jackscrew areas. Beautiful looking plane.
Looks great, and thanks for happily saying the price. So many products they treat it as a big secret.
Who keeps prices a secret? You can get ballpark prices in everything from a Cirrus to a Gulfstream these days. Exact pricing varies based on options. A new PC-12 NGX will give you pressurization, retractable gear, and far higher speeds and range but will cost ~$6.8MM, to step up to a Swiss jet with the PC-24 you're looking at ~$13.5MM. If you prefer yours jets 'merican made, you can save some cash and pick up a CJ4 Gen 2 for ~$11.5MM; or you go South American with an Embraer Phenom 300E for about the same price but the best speed and range of the FAR23 jets. Stepping down to pistons, Cirrus publishes a price list and starts at $844,900 and goes up with options (e.g. $39,000 for air conditioning). Then there's the big iron, a G700 will set you back $81MM.
I loved my time flying the caravan for Fedex and now I’m flying the PC 12 as a contract pilot but I really wanna fly this airplane and see how good it is in the cruise. I feel like I’m gonna get PC 12 performance but being able to fly to even shorter runways and carry even more stuff just maybe not as fast. I really wanna fly this plane!!
@gae if you want to do that, you need to look into the Fedex feeders, Baron Aviation and mountain air.
@gae no, there are not a lot of Pilatus PC 12 use for cargo, most are personal corporate aircraft, and medevac aircraft.
The main accomplishment with this design is that the PC and TBM don't have to put flaps out to allow it to keep up. 😁 It would be nice in some moderate backcountry ops, but it does still take 900 hp to get 200 kts. at altitude.
The exposed hoses in the cargo pods are going to get wrecked by cargo, box them up!
I see a lot of exposed delicate parts/wires/hoses inside RV Storage Bays and think to myself, "Why are these parts exposed? They need to be protected or they are going to get smashed."
Excellent presentation of an outstanding aircraft.
I'm leaving a thumbs up and commenting to help the channel.
Good job.
That's a tough aircraft. Looks like a heck of a workhorse as the dhc 2 beaver now with turbo props.
Loved the presentation and detailed info! Amazing bird!
Beautiful modern aircraft. Thanks for mentioning my country, Papua New Guinean..
Beautiful plane.
That is a gorgeous aircraft.
You nailed it, Mark
OMG pressure fueling, the line guys love you.
My first thought was, “that’s a lot of airplane”.
I messed up in life. I would love to own one of those planes!
I love it! I would be concerned with the nose strut stroke length.
"I Love the new features and smooth airflow design of the aircraft. It is fit for the work. Good presentation." 👍
Bad ass,I grew up on Kodiak Island Alaska,dad Jim North was lead mech that opened Kodiak airport for western airlines airport in 1967 for the connies,dad had plenty of aircraft after that so Kodiak is definatley a hearty brand,props for the brand.
I miss my Sn #13 but this one is on my list to buy!
just started flight school at Brainard !
حلمي ان يكون عندي مثل هذه الطائرة ... إنها طائرة رائعة ...
Count on Daher to make a Bush plane with a sports car version.
I wonder how the numbers stack up vs a PC12?
yeah definitely a byproduct of the purchase of Kodiak by Daher lol. It's essentially for the wealthy enthusiast who isn't going out into the actual back country.
I'd love to see one of these with retractable gear like a Cessna 210.
Retracting the gear wouldn’t improve anything and make it more expensive to maintain and insure.
@@GLEX234 A retractable gear would increase the speed of the airplane, but it would significantly increase the cost and complexity (a crazy number of people land with gear up). If they added retractable gear they might as well pressurize the plane and make it a PG-12 competitor.
Are these being used to fly Skydivers to 13,000 or do they prefer the Caravan, Twin Otter, King Air...?
Idk how I got from watching death metal music videos, to this? But, it's definitely interesting.
Nice plane, wish I could afford one. = )
Can you fuel it up regularly from a small local municipal airport?
Wow! C'mon winning lottery ticket :)
Tough decision, do i get the Kodiac 900 for 3.5M, or do I get a Nordhavn 63’ for 2M ? Hmmm😊
for me it would be the nordhavn
Buy both.
How does the 900 compare to a Cessna caravan .
Essa aeronave é equipada com fadec?
And reasonably priced.
LOL, your NUTS.
Why couldn’t they put a fadec control in this plane if the TBM planes have it?
Thats more on Pratt than Daher
$$$
It's another 500k for the computer and certification. Pratt will do it if a manufacturer will buy it, they might even be working on it.
The FAA certification program will take months to a year, even though they already have fadec on another engine model.
Take my money already! Wow!
Can the 900 be equipped with Floats? I realize the 900 is designed for speed and hauling people, so floats would pretty much cancel out it's designed purpose, but just curious if there were plans for a float equipped model.
negative
Fantástic 👍
SUV of aeroplanes get a luxury version… nice
I have a feeling Harrison Ford already owns one of these.
then he can land on grass instead of taxi ways lol
Not much to look at on the outside but absolutely beautiful interior
Pressurized?
@david collins - came here to ask this question. Good lookin' aircraft.
Non-pressurized
@@aviationconsumermagazine450 - Thank you.
Very Sweet Plane for that Price there better be some Carbon Fiber in Her.
Countless hours, and years? That's funny.
When you buy one do you get a hat ?
So it’s a Lamborghini SUV
Except much quicker and faster. And range, range, range.
Estarialindoparainventarunsistemadeinverorenlaeliseodetrasdelaeliseparavajarenpistacorta
10 of them. Wasn't 1944.
needs fadec :))
You lost me at 3d printed parts😢
Never feel sorry for anyone that owns an airplane.
What's that supposed to mean? Like complaining and saying woe-is-me better than making more of yourself I take it?
Anyone who Owns a plane or boat, in my opinion, has more money, than brains.
The only ones who may object, are those that Own a plane or boat. . . .
@@fjb4932 go sit for the written exam to become a pilot and tell me how it goes. People who say things like you don't have either. You gotta have brains to make enough money to buy a plane so again, you're at a loss either way you decide to stop talking and start doing
Podriatenerunsisenlasalasparafrenajeencuviertomaselinversorparafrenarenpocosmetrosinotenerkuecarreteartantopuedeserkuelasalaspuedaninvertirlaposisionparafrenajeeslindoavionpara cargaitransportedecargasdelicadasitanvienparaparacaidistas
I got to do the initial power plant installation for the original airplane. What a great bunch of guys. Looks great.
LOVE THIS PLANE...
Why? It’s a knock off caravan that is inferior
@@waholoopesorry74 opinions are like assholes, thanks for providing yours...
Not red Chinese like cessna
@@waholoopesorry74 hardly, it's 2/3 of a caravan, slotted in nicely between the 206 and 208.
If Mahindra hadn't been so stupid, the GA10 would have been the poor man's competition, but even the 100 wasn't really a competitor to the caravan.
Making a 200 kt executive version is probably more a competitor with the PC12, but with a bit more utility.
The caravan is a slow barge in comparison, 150 kts at best, really a 10 seat 172.
@@jppalm3944 cessna is owned by Textron, a Connecticut based company, and all current aircraft are built in the US.
You might be thinking of Cirrus, which is Chinese owned but US built.
Thank you for sharing great aircraft to see and to use.
What operator’s really want to know is, say useful load with say, two pilots and 900 pounds of fuel?. Is the ramp weight the same as landing weight? ECT ect
Sweet!, I want one:).
What about compatibility with your float setup? I didn’t hear or see any info on this.
Could someone learn to fly in the Kodiak? Someone nee who has flown maybe 20/30 hrs ...
Qual seria a Razão de Planeio ?
E qual seria o Stool deste Avião' ?
E muito triste pois ninguém fornece esta informação
Midget Caravan
love that color scheme
Can I put the 900 on my Visa?
If it was pressurized it would be beyond awesome.
It's an entry turbo prop designed to carry the whole family and cargo no issues and be reliable much like a suburban. If you had a pressurized cabin that essentially defeats the purpose of the long term reliability this plane is aiming for and adds significant cost.
not ideal for this platform though is it?
@@joshuapatrick682 Pressurization, auto throttle, and autoland would be great for an aircraft like this. simple to operate, super safe and even a low-time pilot could handle.
@@joshuapatrick682 Why not?
@@mikeabc5355 Don't forget FADEC ;-)
Are those heater hoses in the cargo bays? If one gets pinched does it get warm enough to catch fire?
Do you know anything about airplanes?
Me want
Intake looks amazing similar to the Tucano T-27/A-29
Was this design of these planes based off the Cessna grand caravan? Beautiful plane tho
Está bonito amo megusta el dejaviles viverperoesesevepotente
If I was a multi millionaire this is the land I would own
What’s the pod for on right wing??
Weather radar
Thank you!👍🇺🇸
Kodiac ideal para o mercado Brasil
Like Formula 1 aero eh!
Number one on my list of planes to fly.
I thought so too
Nice paint job!
excellent!!!!1
very nice aircraft!
Where did they put the catallactic converter? Cars have to have them why not airplanes?
It’s a turboprop for one thing .
It’s a turbine engine
And if it were a piston engine it would cause enough power loss to be a safety concern . Also the converter wouldn’t last since most piston aircraft use leaded fuel .
So people can't steal them!.😆
where did you put your brain--when you find it you will understand
A typical salesman. A guy who never worked on a plane in his life. Putting those cover on the wheels cost you when you have to put on a new tire. The engine is a pain to work on being high off the ground. Almost anything up front you need a step ladder or platform. And that will cost you more. And how many times did he say Kodiak 900 once was enough go back to Ford and sell cars and trucks.
Still a beautiful aircraft, but it looks goofy AF with those wheel pants on.
Goofy looking? Goofy looking is that piece of junk tiltrotor Osprey with propellers too large in diameter .
@@davidhoffman1278 that too. 😆
Single engine= death trap
yeah... at least you wont die broke
you have a better chance of getting laid than a PT-6 failing
It's not a real bush plane. Zero STOL capability
It has the same wing that the 100 and more power. What mekes you think that is not STOL. The only difference as I understand is the tires that affect the type of surface that you can operate but not the take off and landing distances
@@edwinchandeck7231 I guess I think that because you still need 1000 ft of runway to takeoff and land. I have heard an interview from an Alaska bush pilot who flies the turbine beaver he said the Kodiak is a good plane but the takeoff distance is too long for the kind of flying they do. That is the basis of my thought process. It's a good plane but doesn't have the stol capability for a professional Alaskan bush pilot's mission
Ahh ok, make sense now. I guess it depends with what yo compare it to. But I don't know of another turbo prop that have better STOL performance except for the Pilatus PC6 and is comparable to the Tween Otter which is considered a good Stol airplane
@@edwinchandeck7231 check out the turbine Sherpa. It's not in production because they ran out of money but the Sherpa 650T has incredible STOL capability. But I guess it doesnt really count because it's not in production as of yet
@@edwinchandeck7231 Oh and I was talking about the DHC-3 turbine single engine otter