The New PC-24 Is Here: More Range, More Payload, and Even More Possibilities 

In my opinion this is a bucket list aircraft for a single pilot operator! Love it!

Pilatus is the best! ✈️😍👍Detail work, top quality, excellent performance, great spirit, Swiss made... Congrats on this new PC-24 🎉👏

Only 118kg left to the MTOW permitted by CS-23 (EASA) and FAR Part 23 (FAA). The HondaJet 2600 will potentially beat it someday, but considering the HJ-420's nasty tendency for going up in smoke via runway excursion I don't have faith in their ability to make a jet nearly twice the weight stop consistently. At this point, the only real competition for the PC-24 is Phenom 300E which is almost exactly the same in terms of range and tanks-full payload but has a bit more speed; however, I doubt Pilatus can improve that as M0.74 is probably the upper limit for the relatively straight wing on the PC-24 and the time difference between M0.73 and M0.79 on a typical mission for a light jet is negligible. The 300E also has no cargo door, a smaller cabin, no autothrottles, and is confined to paved strips. I think Pilatus has achieved the peak of what a "light" single-pilot certified jet can be.

One of the best small cabin Jets available.

God bless the Swiss, God bless Pilatus. This is just too awesome, my love for you is everlasting.

I can’t wait to hear who this mystery contributor is and what changes are coming for the PC-24.

Pilatus, like everything Swiss, is synonymous with craftsmanship and quality. Nothing else comes close! The old saying is true' you get what you pay for... Bravo! Former airline EVP (Technics)

Congratulations Pilatus, great promo featuring New Zealand's, only private operational PC-24 with registration ZK - JFL operating in and around the Southern Alps, Aoraki/Mount Cook area of the South Island, New Zealand, against the backdrop of Aoraki/Mount Cook airport during the Southern Hemisphere's 2023 Winter season here in New Zealand.

Wowzers. what a plane, truely amazing job. Now I if I only had the millions to get one, I'd probably struggle to afford an MSFS one let alone a real one. As an aging ex-ppl pilot I'll never fly in something like this now, I wish I had my life over again to become a pilot and fly business jets. Swiss perfection, Pilatus are great aircraft indeed ❤❤

Thank you for sharing this aircraft!!☺

It will be much better to increase range (+-2900 nm to beat Honda jet echelon), make convenient toilet, autolanding, increase speed, add winglets, evs and finally add side-stick

Can‘t wait to see it! Pilatus - best aircraft manufacturer in the world.❤

Wow what a thing of beauty, the swiss do make quality aircraft.

Just when I was about to go to sleep. Guess I’m staying up 32 more minutes.

PILATUS - eine eigene Klasse von Flugzeugbau.

The Pilates PC-24 has always been pitted against the Phenom 300. While the traditional crowd are used to an aft lav & get their panties all bunched up over fwd aft (but really, how often is the lav used in such jets of these ranges. Plus does being aft means it won't smell. The lav is in the same pressurized cabin anyway), but one oft cited reason for the Phenom 300 over the Pilates PC-24 is the lower (and thus more comfortable cabin pressure). Why doesn't Pilates match or even beat Phenom 300 on this passenger comfort metric?

Excellent video! Congratulations for the new PC-24, looks like a piece of artwork.

Pilatus. Always evolving, fine tuning that next step. This however is a well considered large leap. To achieve so much more flexibility and capability. Yes some of the improvements will also be used to enrich the PC12. To save weight and improve cabin noise levels. That is the ethos of Pilatus. Design and build the best aircraft possible. To the best of standards. Always looking how to improve. Looking forwards to what the future holds. Be that an XL variant with possible trans Atlantic range. Or a new model overall larger with greater range and capacity while maintaining the Pilatus flexibility of function. We can only wait and see.

I was really hoping they move that avionics closet and enclose the bathroom. Toilet behind the co-pilot and sink on the opposite wall.

If PC-24 would only add a safe return for an incapacitated single pilot… This would be the absolute perfect aircraft!

Honest and hard working Swiss company with Swiss values : underestimate their new product performance and increase them later on as they discover their assessments were too restrictive vs U.S. company overselling their product and never achieve what they used to promise. (McDonell Douglas with their MD-11 on the subject on range/payload)

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 This is Pilatus!

sounds great!

When I design an aircraft, I incorporate a range for the most distant of the airports that it's expected to fly into, with reduced passengers, but with still enough fuel to divert to nearby airports in the event of inclement weather. I know this hasn't been designed for the LA to Hawaii hop, for which I think I'd need close to 2,600 n.m., unless there were numerous islands on the way where I could refuel or divert. The London to NYC distance is around 3,000 n.m., but one would still need around 3,500 n.m to divert to other airports in the event of inclement weather. This most likely could still do the transatlantic hop with a refueling stop in Greenland, provided it has enough fuel to divert in the event of inclement weather. Finally, unless a private jet was more comfortable than a commercial airliner, I'd only use it for hops where I didn't have frequent commercial connectivity, so I would prefer slightly larger and more comfortable seats ( on which I don't have to sit upright, but can lean and twist my body towards the sides, recline my back, and vary the leg room (large seats that move on a rail and swivel around). I would also want a single divan or two opposing divans that can be joined together into a bed for a VIP configuration. A fridge, a microwave, a lavatory, tables, cup-holders, laptop and cellular phone holders, reading lights, air vents, and charging docks are also an absolute must. You should be able to work on your laptop and to also watch movies on it without bending your neck. The idea is, for the jet to be economical with the max number of passenger for short hops, but for it to have the capacity to fly across larger distances with fewer passenger, and to provide a more luxurious cabin in the VIP mode, where passengers would very rarely exceed 6 or 7. . The trapezoidal wing, the landing gear(right-triangular struts), the fat tire, and the APU seem based on my concept for another aircraft, but I would prefer an aircraft with a high-mounted, anhedral wing(a high-mounted anhedral wing generates more lift during take-off(WiG effect) and might even be more stable in cross-wind), like that on the Bae 146, for unpaved airstrips. An air-brake also helps when operating from difficult air strips. A low wing on unpaved airstrips could be fatal. I would prefer forward canards to improve take-off and vertical object clearing performance, but I think even a slightly larger horizontal stabilizer could achieve it, if the ailerons could significantly disrupt the flow over the horizontal stabilizer to make the nose lift. Even a raised nose-wheel for a higher angle-of-attack would improve take-off distance, but limit visibility. Now, the larger the wing, the broader the wing, and the straighter the wing, the shorter the take-off distance, the lower the stall-speed, the shorter the landing distance, the higher the glide-ratio, and the more economical the aircraft, but the harder it is to maneuver the aircraft in a storm and in cross-winds, and the higher the drag at high speeds, Short and broad wings provide higher lift for the same drag. Long wings are economical, but unsafe, so the best combination would be to spread the lift over multiple lift surface so no surface is unsafely large. One could have a small canard, a somewhat larger horizontal stabilizer, and a large main wing. The size of the canard and horizontal stabilizer would depend upon whether the main wing is placed fore or aft. In this arrangement, you'll have the main wing serving as the fulcrum around which the horizontal stabilizer pushes the nose down, whereas the canard pushes it up. By controlling the airflow over each surface via a fly-by-wire control surface, one could fly through storms and better handle cross winds. The ability to push the nose up and down via the fore canard or the aft horizontal stabilizer would also help raise the angle of attack for short take-off; lower it for steep descent; and use all the three surfaces in combination to lower the stall speed for smaller landing speed and a much shorter landing distance. Since the ailerons on these surfaces could also serve as spoilers, you might not even need thrust reversers during landing. Swept back anhedral wings could also push the vortices below and behind the aircraft to improve both lift and thrust. I think swept wings not only reduce drag, but also push all vortices behind the tail of the aircraft, especially with winglets, for added forward thrust. I know low-mounted wings have shorter take-off runs because of the ground-effect, and dihedral wings have better natural anti-roll abilities. With regards to engines, tail-mounted engines provide the best laminar flow, wing-mounted engines provide the best control at high altitude airports, whereas fuselage-mounted engines provide lift close to the center of gravity for better take-off performance(but these can be noisy in the cabin). Finally, the fuselage can be shaped as an airfoil to improve laminar efficiency and to provide extra lift with a proportionately more comfortable cabin. This would mean a fuselage taller and wider in the middle and narrower and shorter towards the edges to seat the owners in great comfort. Considering the congestion that the major cities are facing, I'll also favor a VTOL aircraft that swivels the wing or the engines for vertical or very short take-off and landing. Thrust vectoring requires very expensive engines and recurring replacement expenses, but swiveling wings and engines isn't as costly. These days, nobody operates aircraft from unpaved airstrips, but an aircraft designed for unpaved airstrips will land better on a road in an emergency, whereas the passengers might even survive a crash landing on flat ground. With modern leveling equipment and heavy machinery, it is also quite easy to hurriedly prepare an unpaved airstrip in an absolute emergency. VSTOL aircraft are even more useful. An aircraft that can float will provide the passengers with a higher probability of surviving a crash over the ocean or another body of water. However, all of these have to be specialized aircraft because with pervasive global wealth, proper airstrips are cropping up everywhere, so the market share of such aircraft is diminishing, unless congestion on roads makes VSTOL a necessity. I personally think that the ability to VSTOL, the ability to operate from roads and the ability to operate on snow is far more important than unpaved operation, whereas the ability to not immediately sink in water is also useful. For an amphibious variant of the aircraft, the airfoil fuselage, with multiple surfaces to raise and lower the nose, and with multiple surfaces for lift along the entire length aircraft would greatly improve the take-off and landing distances in stormy weather, even without thrust-vectoring or the use of compressed air along the the length of the aircraft for added lift. A boat hull would enable it to take off and land in large waves, where the airfoil fuselage would again help. One could provide small floats at the tips of the main wing to prevent the wings from dipping into waves. The floats could then retract and add to the length of the wing in flight. An air brake at the back of the fuselage could even serve as a rudder in heavy seas, which can be complimented with floats at the tips of the wing. A large tail would help turn the aircraft into the wind over water, to position it to face the wind during take-off. Turbo-props would provide better diffuse lift in stormy seas, reduced water-ingestion, better drying, and reduced rusting. Finally the choice of an aircraft is primarily that of affordability, and that pertains to the recurring operating costs, not the one-time capital expense. I would love to design, manufacture and sell these to earn myself trillions, but if I could afford it, I would still prefer an aircraft, at least, as large as the Falcon 900 LX(it's spacious and comfortable, can operate from 3,000ft airstrips on short hops, and isn't too uneconomical on fuel), and, preferably, as large as the ACJ 319 or the BBJ 737(which has multiple, large, wide-open living, working, social, and recreational spaces that you can walk around, and also has an on-board shower. Its fuel consumption is significantly higher, but since it is primarily an airliner, it can leverage scale to provide cheaper services, training, and parts, so the operating cost though higher, isn't really prohibitive. But, then, it can't operate from 3,000ft airstrips, so there are always trade-offs).

Excellent video, becoming a fan! Plane Sense is close by and I’m seeing what they saw a long time ago in Pilatus! Congratulations!

Awsome. Tobias is so handsome 😍

I am looking forward to owing a PC-12 or PC-24 soon. I need that custom Brabus interior

I'm just a poor lad and will never be able to afford one of these beautiful jets ! The only thing i don't like about it is , i'm 6' 2" tall but i still would love to have one , what a beautiful aircraft !

Good job

Let’s go! 💪🏼

compliment. Beautiful jet

If I ever win the lottery I'll take two!

Thank you for the unbelievable improvement. Thank you, the pilatus family. Looking forward to be part of the forward thinking family. Please advise on what to do, to have a pc-24 slot in 2024.

Was kann man an der PC-24 noch verbessern? Morgen sind wir schlauer! Ich bin sehr gespannt! 🙃👍

Bring it on! I would love to Command this tool! Sharp knife! Multi purpose build. Beautiful engineering.

Depended on Pilatus in Vietnam -- more than a half-century ago! Jungle landings and takeoffs were amazing. Way to go, Pilatus. Salute from a retired U.S. Navy chief petty officer.

You mean more fuel consumption ! There's nothing like a PC12 a true Swiss Rolex of an aircraft

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!

Awesome bird! Igor Medici and Flavia Vianna, are you Brazilians?

Wow!

I missed the part about the new Thrust Reversers... Such a cool airplane, just keeps getting better.

Is this a new "model number" like "NGX"? Or still just PC-24?

I’m in love, if i could afford any plane i would buy this, i would literally fly it myself instead of hiring a pilot 👌🏻

Pilatus ❤🇨🇭💪

WOW! 😍

cool

LETSSSSS GOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

IT WOULD LOOK GREAT IN DIGITAL CAMO.

I receive one NOW. Refine the cost to optimize the VALUE. Carry on smartly. Everyone. Good morning.

Perdeu a porta de carga???

Was hopping for a neo with more power and reverser, but it's a good start 😅🤷‍♂ Hopfully, one day my local 800m runway will get some pc24 traffic

The perfect private jet! I'd still like to see a further increase in range to fly from Los Angeles to Honolulu w/8 pax (2221 nm).

Nice🇸🇦

Interesting that they didn’t change the lav?

Pilatus, how about a composite 4 seater twin jet with empty weight of 300kg? engines that small with about 100kg thrust each do not exist so make them. Hill helicopters are making their own engine, it's easy. Especially that small. Where is the freedom of a PC-24 when you have to book the pilots two weeks in advance and they have to stay where you stay and each trip costs a quarter of a million dollars. Imagine if your car worked that way.

When will it be less money ?

I want one....

Why no real range improving winglets ?

Awesome airplane,just only one detail,the rest room it's very complicate👎👎

I love Pilatus so much. I want the PC 12 NGX so bad. If I got the lottery I'm getting that and possibly this haha. Def the PC 12 NGX though and maybe the Piaggio Avanti Evo instead of jet, turbo props are just a lot more efficient. I love Pilatus and it's hardcore suspension and landing gear allowing it to land almost anywhere

Не знаю как выдержать до презентации!

Can this be made to carry a motorized wheel chair for a paralyzed person?

Why are there so many PC - 12 crashes and of course deaths ????

The PC-24 is officially better than the Phenom 300E and Citation in every possible way.

1- If I had the money to operate it, I'd buy this ACJ-319: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ZtGzEUbwtcI.html 2- If I didn't have the money to operate the ACJ-319, I'll buy the Falcon 900 LX: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Dan_qQSDwJk.html 3- If I didn't have the money to operate the Falcon 900 LX, I'd buy the Pilatus PC-24: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-H2CrKUc47rQ.html&lc=UgxeZl-P_QTiaLR_E7Z4AaABAg 4- If I didn't even have the money to operate the Pilatus PC-24, I'd buy the King Air 350, the Piaggio P180, or even the DHC-6(twin otter):ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-3i9HOJ0hFBg.html

No synthetic vision heads up display yet, and larger wings with more sweep angle to help deal with adverse conditions ._____.

Cabin height should be increased to 6' at next upgrade as it's if you are 5' 10" you have to look at your heels when you walk.

ONE

When Pilatus moves the lav to the BACK of the plane we'll give up our Phenom 300E and get a PC-24. The current PC-24 lav (configuration and setup) seems like an after-thought - and more appropriate for a plane costing half as much. Even HondaJet has a decent rear nav! I love everything else.

Пора бы уже выкинуть такой анохронизм как штурвал и поставить сайдстик

In my opinion, the access curtain in the luggage compartment does not give it any luxury aspect. At the same time, the big problem of this plane is the lavatory area. I don't think it's ok to be in front. Especially how many manipulations do you have to do to use this area, how isolated is it? It raises many question marks. I don't think you feel comfortable using this area the way it is exposed in this design. The classic version with the location of this area in the back was much better. Otherwise, the interior design is beautiful and has a modern look.

2K miles isn't even coast to coast? Hard ...NO

These are things that the aircraft should have been able to do from day one. I’m also confused is to why Pilatus hasn’t reduced the max cabin altitude / increased the dif. Everyone in the market is doing exactly that and they are leaving themselves short. Same thing with the PC12…

I just wish they still concentrated on turboprops. This PC-24 could also be a turboprop instead... That would be true advancement, it saves so much fuel and therefore saves costs.

Whats so new ? Looks like a jet to me people acting like they reinvented the wheel, ain’t got nothing on big G

Not even winglets...

Big big fan of PC24 really, …but please dont market it as a NEW PC24: no new avionics , no auto safety return, no winglet, no COM on SAF, still no convenient toilet, no passionate interior design, no better exterior painting design.

Phenom 300E is still better!!!