Just before this article was written, Epic Aircraft unveiled its newest model, the E1000 AX with some significant improvements. These include Garmin’s autothrottle, Autoland, automatic yaw damper, GDL 60 PlaneSync for database updates, and GWX 8000 StormOptix weather radar; Lee Aerospace CoolView windows, True Blue Power lithium-ion batteries, and Starlink airborne connectivity. Pilatus also upgraded the PC-12 with the Pro model, now Garmin-equipped and with Autoland. The following was written before these announcements were made.
When prospective buyers consider high-performance single-engine turboprops, they might at first think about Daher’s TBM 960, the Pilatus PC-12 NGX, Piper M700 Fury, or Textron Aviation Beechcraft Denali, which isn’t yet available but is set to be certified and enter service this year. There is another airplane they should consider, however—one that outperforms all of the others in many aspects, is the only one with an all-composite airframe, and is relatively easy to fly. That airplane is the Epic E1000 GX, manufactured in Bend, Oregon.
Having started as an amateur-built experimental airplane, the E1000 GX took a different road to entering the certified market. The original Bend factory helped buyers assemble their airplanes while meeting FAA requirements for the owner-builder’s participation in manufacturing the airplane. There weren’t many built this way, but one such buyer-builder was Doug King, who still owns his kit-built Epic and now runs the company that makes the FAA-certified E1000 GX.
When Epic started on the certification program for the E1000 almost a decade ago, the goal then was to produce one airplane per month, King recalled. In 2024, the build time was down to only nine days with work underway to whittle that down to just seven days. Now, the company is building more than two airplanes per month.
How To Make an E1000
An E1000 GX airframe consists of 587 composite parts, each of which has to be made to tight tolerances. All of the materials such as carbon fiber, fiberglass, and resin that make up the composite airframe must be constantly tested. Unlike aluminum, which is manufactured to a well-established standard that is not hard to replicate, composite materials are not so simple. A misalignment of fibers, too much or little resin, improper storage, resin deterioration, and other issues can compromise the end product.
Thus, regular testing is necessary, and Epic has its own composites testing lab with sophisticated equipment that assures the quality of every process. Testing is ongoing because there are so many variables involved, and this explains some of the high expenses involved in composites manufacturing.
The parts begin as Toray bidirectional carbon fiber stored in freezers that is then thawed indoors to prevent condensation. A roll of fiber is placed on a cutting table, where it is sliced into various shapes by a CNC cutting machine that maximizes the use of material. Some parts are made of fiberglass, where a non-conductive surface is needed.
The carbon fiber outward-facing material is bonded onto the first layer placed onto a mold, which is copper mesh infused with resin to provide lightning strike protection. Other materials are added in certain areas, whether it’s more layers of carbon fiber to strengthen a part, honeycomb core to give shape and stiffness, tapes to make joints, or fiberglass inserts to add material to areas where hardware attaches. All of this material layup must be done precisely for consistency and to meet structural design requirements, and laser alignment is the way everything is positioned.
Each part, once built up on its mold, is fitted with thermocouples that help gather data—another important step in composites construction—when the vacuum-bagged parts are cured in an oven.
Epic has developed its own software for managing the manufacturing process, aided by King’s background in software development. Each part carries detailed step-by-step instructions and drawings with the layup schedule, trim and drill instructions, and dimensions that must be checked during the quality control process. The instructions live in the computer system but are also duplicated in a paper package that travels with the part in case of computer failure so work can continue.
Inspections are a continual part of the manufacturing process, not just done at the end. “It’s always layup-inspect, layup-inspect,” King said. A team of inspectors roams the manufacturing floor and checks the parts at each necessary stage, paving the way for assembly technicians to continue adding layers and preparing the parts for the oven treatment.
Another building is where interior parts are made, and this is where new technicians start out. All parts are assigned scales of difficulty, starting with training parts where new hires learn composite construction and make components that aren’t used on the airplane. “They graduate from the training room into interiors where they make less critical parts and then they move up the food chain from there,” said King.
A complex part like a fuselage half is built on a carbon fiber mold made in-house. Most of the fuselage consists of six plies of carbon fiber, then a layer of honeycomb, then another six plies with a layer of resin-infused copper mesh on the outside. The mesh-infused parts are all tied together electrically and to the metal engine mount.
After oven curing, parts require trimming, hole drilling, and in some cases surface preparation. For composite parts, that means bead blasting to roughen up the surface where other parts will be bonded. Unlike a metal aircraft factory with the constant loud sound of rivets being hammered into place, composites manufacturing is a quiet affair. Bead blasting is the only place where workers need hearing protection. “This is as loud as it gets,” King said.
More inspections follow before the two fuselage halves are bonded together, but first bulkheads are bonded using a special epoxy resin.
The wing spars are a good example of how layering carbon fiber adds strength where required while minimizing the use of material. The wing is built as one piece, and the forward and rear spars start out thin at the tips and become thicker toward the center. “The good thing about the composites—you can just layer it like you need to,” he said.
After the layers are all done, “we bring in a second doubler on the front to turn this C-beam into an I-beam and put a doubler over the top of that so it’s really strong in the center.”
Wing assembly begins with the bottom skin, then the forward spar is placed, followed by all the ribs, and then the aft spar. Once everything is properly in place, the top skin is attached, then the entire assembly is cured in place, covered by a giant tarp acting as a temporary oven that is lowered over the wing.
Flight control surfaces are all mounted on the wing for proper fitting. The wing and fuselage are match-drilled for the four giant bolts that mate the two assemblies. But before final assembly, everything goes to the paint shop, which is much more efficient than painting the entire airplane after putting it together.
Of course, there are many more steps involved, including equipment that needs to be installed on large components. Sound-dampening and absorption products are placed in the fuselage, and these are designed to mitigate the noise frequencies generated in flight. Flight testing a bare airplane revealed how to minimize interior noise, aided by 3M engineers who helped design the products for the E1000.
Equipment added at this stage comes from pre-assembled kits that are staged and ready for the assembly technicians. Each step is carefully plotted and visually apparent on the computer and paper system. If an assembler runs into a problem, a red pen included in the kit is used to make a note of the problem. But to keep the process efficient, the assembler doesn’t get involved in fixing the problem. “The idea is these are surgeons,” he said. “So you don’t bother the surgeon with it. You just want to write it down and push it aside and let it be handled by the team that [specializes in fixing the problem]. We're trying to constantly improve the process.”
The Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-67A engine is built up as a complete assembly and then installed onto the nearly complete fuselage.
Instrument panels are also populated before being installed, and Epic has a test bench where the assembled panel is completely tested, acting like it’s in the airplane, to ensure all the hardware and software is operating optimally.
Wiring harnesses for the entire airplane and the avionics are all manufactured in-house, in a unique fashion that Epic developed to maximize efficiency. The Epic-designed manufacturing software manages the harness layup process, which starts with a technician making up a wire using a machine that laser-prints identification information and laser-strips the ends of the wire.
After crimping connectors onto the ends of the wire using the specified tool, the technician brings it to the layout board, where other technicians assemble the harness. The board is actually a computer display showing exactly where each wire goes, making it easy to incorporate changes or accommodate different optional equipment. Once all the correct wires are placed, that section of the board turns green to indicate it is done.
“We wrote all this software,” King said, “and built these tables with the screens. It tells them which pin to put in which thing, and the tester is built into the board. It will test that harness as it’s being assembled.”
The entire harness is thoroughly tested after completion, and then after anti-chafe material is added to the wiring bundles, it is tested again. “This brought our costs down and quality up,” he said.
Before the first ground run, everything is tested again, and then the completed airplane is rolled out to the production flight test hangar. Technicians add a data acquisition system for the necessary five to 10 hours of flight testing. The final step is to install the interior.
Innovations Abound
Evidence of King’s enormous influence is everywhere at the Bend facility, from the software that runs manufacturing to the flying side of the operation. Pilot training is another one of the areas where he has focused his attention.
Although more than 70 E1000s are flying, that isn’t enough to attract the traditional training companies to build a multimillion-dollar full-flight simulator, so Epic had Frasca (now owned by FlightSafety International) build an E1000 GX flight training device that replicates the airplane’s cockpit and performance but without a motion base.
Equipped with real Garmin G1000 NXi avionics and GFC 700 autopilot, the simulator features a 220- by 58-degree visual system, instructor operating station, and custom visual databases. While FAA regulations do not require pilots to obtain training to fly the E1000 GX—as long as they have complex and high-performance airplane and high-altitude endorsements—insurance underwriters are unlikely to cover a pilot who isn’t trained.
According to Epic, “[The] E1000 GX flight training curriculum is modeled after turbojet type rating programs, providing a level of training that in many cases exceeds industry norms for single-engine turboprop aircraft.”
The typical training program involves 15 to 25 hours in both the simulator and airplane. But King doesn’t want to throw an unprepared pilot into the training program without making sure they are ready for what might be a much faster airplane than they’ve ever flown. The pilot’s IFR skills need to be sharp too, and King has devised a way to measure that quickly before wasting money on training.
What King did is so simple that it seems amazing that other training operations are not using the same process. King developed an app called the Epic ATC Test, billed as an “air traffic control command speed test.”
“Now we can measure them,” he explained. A pilot may say that his or her IFR skills are up to par but that the E1000 cockpit is unfamiliar. The app is designed not only to test whether a pilot is familiar with the avionics but also to help them learn that particular design’s pilot interface.
The Epic ATC Test app simply calls out audible air traffic controller instructions, and the pilot, sitting in a simulator or Epic’s Garmin-built avionics panel, completes the instructed task. This isn’t about inputting a complex flight plan but more about knowing exactly where to look and which knob or button to use for heading, altitude, transponder, and frequency changes. “You’re getting your muscle memory used to where to look and what to turn before you get them in the airplane,” King said. “If you can do this in under two minutes [then you’re ready]. It’s all common stuff. You better have those down.”
All the test does is tell the pilot something like, “N123AB, squawk 4342, altimeter 29.89” or “N123AB, radar contact, turn left heading 180, climb and maintain 4,000.” After completing each task, for example, by setting the transponder code and altimeter, the pilot presses the “next” button in the app and then does the next task. “You've got to be able to reach right forward and not get confused over which button to go for,” King said. He demonstrated the app and got all the tasks done in 1 minute 36 seconds. Anyone is welcome to download the free app and try it in their aircraft or when learning how to fly a new type.
Epic also has a Frasca RTD simulator that is used as a procedures trainer and is available for free employee use. The RTD is available for new Epic pilots who want to hone their IFR skills.
“A simulator gives you the ability to change the way you teach instrument flying,” King said, “and it’s super effective. We're going to practice holds and remove all the mystery of holds right up front. It doesn't have to be a sophisticated simulator, just a basic procedures trainer.”
King has taken the benefits of simulation a step further with Epic’s non-flying partner program, called “One Day for $1K.” Using the E1000 GX simulator, an instructor will teach a non-pilot flying partner how to talk on the radio and land the airplane safely.
This isn’t a typical “pinch hitter course,” however, because of the way the non-pilot partner is taught to land. In most such courses, an instructor will use either an airplane or simulator and give instruction that starts at the point of the pilot incapacitation event, repeating the process until the candidate can achieve a safe landing.
King upended the traditional pinch hitter curriculum by starting the person in the simulator but positioned on the ground. “We teach them to stop the airplane first,” he explained, “then we teach them to touch down and stop the airplane, and we teach them to come in and flare and touch down and stop.”
The idea is to build up the person’s capabilities by starting with a simple maneuver, stopping the airplane on the ground, then backing that up to a position just before touchdown and letting the airplane land, then stopping it, and repeating as necessary until moving to the next step where they’ll learn to flare, touch down, and land.
“You know what this does?” he asked. “It removes the anxiety because the first thing you learn is how to stop. So when you teach them [each step], then you take them to a stabilized approach, and they just flare and land, and then they know how to stop it because they have that expectation built in. And when you back up a little bit further in the sky, well, ‘now I know how to flare, land, and stop.’
“I came up with that because I was trying to figure out a different way to teach it, and we can’t do that in an airplane. We learn to fly, and everything ahead of us is a mystery, right? So you learn to the point of being confused and not until you land the first time do you think, ‘I can really do this.’ And instead [you learn] the piece and then reusing that and a little more and going a little more. The other thing is, you get more landings that way.
“In the simulator, you have a program, you have it paused, and then you say, ‘Now just step on the brakes and stop.’ Or you’re just above the runway, ‘just hold it like that, and then step on the brakes and stop.’ Because you can’t pause a real airplane.”
To test the One Day for $1K program, King tapped director of sales and marketing Amy Foster Trenz, who is not a pilot. Although her husband is a flight instructor, they had never done any training together. “That husband-wife thing sometimes is real understandable,” King said, referring to the difficulty of an instructor teaching their spouse to fly.
After running Trenz through the program, King set up a live demonstration for attendees at the annual Epic fly-in. With video cameras running in the simulator and the fly-in crowd watching, Trenz was in the E1000 simulator’s right seat with an Epic instructor in the left seat, who promptly keeled over. Her first move was to hit the autopilot’s blue level button and then she pulled out the checklist and put an oxygen mask on the “unconscious” instructor.
“It takes them through the steps of setting the airplane up for and asking for help,” like a script, King said. “Give me the frequencies, then give me a heading, altitude, what to say to ATC.”
Trenz demonstrated a successful save of the airplane and her instructor to the assembled audience after only about two hours of training.
Big Order for a Fractional Operator
When Rogério Andrade, CEO and founder of Brazilian charter and fractional share operator Avantto, started looking for a single-engine turboprop to supplement the company’s Embraer jet fleet, he looked at the Pilatus PC-12 NGX, Daher TBM 900 series, and Piper M600/SLS before selecting the E1000 GX. The company now operates four E1000s of a total order for 34, scheduled for delivery in the coming years. Its fleet includes Embraer Phenom 100s and 300s and Legacy 500s as well as Airbus H125 and H130 and Leonardo A109S helicopters.
Brazil added regulations—RBAC 91K—to accommodate interest in fractional share operations in 2023. “Avantto was the first operator to receive certification under this regulation, which has been highly beneficial to the industry,” according to Andrade. “It clearly defines the roles and responsibilities of all participants in the fractional ownership model while establishing robust safety and operational standards for service providers.”
Andrade said he selected the E1000 GX for its “jet-like performance with turboprop efficiency while maintaining lower operating costs than comparable aircraft. Its sleek design, spacious cabin, and versatility make it an ideal choice for both business and personal use, setting a new benchmark in its category.”
The typical Avantto customer is an agribusiness entrepreneur, he said, “a market segment that has shown strong demand, with many customers using the aircraft for flights between cities in Brazil’s interior or to their rural properties.” Another market developed for buyers who wanted to fly from major cities to their beach or country homes. The typical flight duration for fractional share trips is between one hour to one and a half hours.
Buyers can purchase an E1000 share in increments ranging from 1/12 to 1/16 or 1/3. All E1000 flights are flown with two pilots who train with Epic regularly. “Avantto is the only company in South America with an IS-BAO Level II safety [registration],” Andrade said.
In many respects, the E1000 GX outperforms the available single-engine turboprops and also the Beechcraft Denali, for which all the specifications are not yet published. Where pilots and passengers will notice a key difference is the cabin interior. The PC-12 and Denali are wider than the TBM 960 and M700, but the E1000 is wider than the latter two and the legroom between the club seating in the cabin is roomy enough so that passengers’ knees will never touch.
Only the TBM 960 comes close (330 knots) to the E1000’s maximum cruising speed of 333 knots. The M700’s 301-knot speed is still faster than the PC-12 (290 knots) and Denali (285 knots).
Mtow of the E1000 is just 8,000 pounds, which seems to indicate that careful composite design and construction can result in a more efficient airplane. With full fuel, the E1000 can carry 1,100 pounds, the same as the Denali (we don’t know its mtow yet), and much more than the TBM’s 888 pounds, the PC-12’s 988 pounds, or the M700’s 565 pounds.
The lightest of the bunch is the M700 at 6,000 pounds, but it carries nearly the same amount of fuel as the E1000—260 versus 264 gallons—and thus boasts a longer range figure at 1,852 nm. At 1,560 nm, the E1000’s range is the lowest of these airplanes, but it still delivers a decent 260 knots at long-range cruise speed.
With a maximum altitude of FL340, the E1000 is the highest flying; the TBM 960 and Denali can go to FL310, while the PC-12 and M700 top out at FL300.
Flying the E1000 GX
What impressed me about the E1000 GX is that, despite its capability and performance, it is easy to fly. Perhaps that stems from its experimental roots, but this is an airplane with no surprises, simple systems, and a clean pilot interface. The most complex part of the interface is the Garmin keyboard panel, which is an alphanumeric rather than a qwerty key layout. For a brain trained on qwerty, alphanumeric takes additional time to locate the right key, but ultimately it’s not that much of an impediment.
“Honestly, the amount of time that you’re typing letters is pretty limited,” King said. “Normally, people make their initial flight plan with their iPad and then send it to [the avionics]. You could say we’re preparing for international customers who are more used to that [alphanumeric keyboard].”
One item that pilots will quickly notice—because, like me, they’ll be looking all over the cockpit to find it—is the parking brake. The E1000 GX has no parking brake because it isn’t necessary. Holding the brakes during the start and when needed during taxi isn’t an added burden, and eliminating the parking brake prevents accidents that have happened in business jets, where the pilot stopped near or on the runway, forgot that the parking brake had been set, then tried to force the airplane into the air as it struggled to accelerate.
The E1000 GX is approved for flight into known icing with deicing boots on the wings, horizontal stabilizer, engine inlet, heated propeller, air data probes, and angle-of-attack sensors. A helpful feature is automatic fuel tank switching.
Starting the big PT6 is the normal way without any automation: turn on batteries 1 and 2, then the top row of switches (left and right fuel pump, igniter, starter-generator), then the next row of switches (standby alternator, fuel auto select, door seal, pressurization, and oxygen), hit the starter button, at 13% NG move the red condition lever over its gate. Once the engine is done starting, turn on pitot heat, strobes, and nav lights, and that’s it.
King explained that takeoff happens quickly and to be ready for the three steps after liftoff: gear up, yaw damper, flaps up. The engine’s torque limiter allows for pushing the power lever all the way forward so there is no fiddling necessary during the takeoff run. We were loaded with about half tanks of fuel and with four people onboard, so fairly light at about 6,400 pounds, 1,600 pounds fewer than mtow.
With the flaps set to the takeoff setting, I taxied the E1000 GX onto Bend’s Runway 16 and, once lined up, moved the power lever forward and felt a strong push as we quickly accelerated to the 90-knot rotation speed. I pulled the nose up to King’s recommended 12.5 degrees, then ran through the takeoff mantra and brought the gear up, switched on the yaw damper, and raised the flaps, then climbed out at 150 knots.
We didn’t climb too high because we hadn’t filed an IFR flight plan, and we leveled off at 17,500 feet. At more efficient altitudes in the high 20s and low 30s, the PT6 burns about 57 gph. King’s rule of thumb for cruise is “300 knots true airspeed at 300 pph.”
With torque set to 83%, I flew a steep high-speed 180-degree turn to the left and then back to the right. The E1000 GX stayed smoothly on the rails without much heaviness on the controls.
After descending a few thousand feet, I tried some slow flight and, with the gear and flaps down, decelerated until the stick shaker activated in case I didn’t notice that the angle-of-attack indicator was turning red. At slow speeds, the ailerons and elevator lightened up, and I tested the feel while simulating a turn from base to final at 95 knots to prepare for the upcoming landing.
Returning to Bend Airport, I flew over the runway on a midfield crosswind, then turned downwind for Runway 16. The E1000 GX likes to stay in the air and I came in a little high and had to pull the power to idle to get it to descend. On final, still a bit high, I managed to capture the PAPI glide path while keeping the final approach speed at 95 knots and then adding a little power. Flying to the runway, I held the nose up slightly and didn’t need to flare to touch down smoothly. It felt like the landing gear met the runway sooner than I expected, but this is probably because the E1000 GX stands a little tall on its trailing-link main gear.
Overall, my impression from the flight is that the E1000 GX is easier to fly than most other single-engine turboprops and is more comparable to the Piper M-series. Obviously, this is a high-performance machine and requires that pilots are proficient and able to think ahead of an airplane that can fly at high speeds and altitudes, but it also gave the impression that learning its characteristics and capabilities would be a relatively straightforward hurdle.