I touched the Piper Jet

kmead

kmead

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
675
Display Name
Display name:
kmead
This was a lot more fun than Banjo camp and Octoberfest. Piper showed their new jet at the annual Malibu, Mirage, Meridian Owners and Pilots association convention back in Sept. It's always amazing the ways you can spend your spare change. 4 of the windows are painted on and the aircond. is a box of ice with a fan.

They are making a lot of changes, like trailing link gear and a fixed horiz. stabilizer. Piper is sure making an effort to be more service minded, can things really change? Sorry it took so long to post this, I had to wait for my kids to come home to help.

Regards, Kevin

http://pictures.aol.com/ap/singleImage.do?pid=42400k0mKJ-A5Y8i2-o2zVopuBSmFZdKUozN

http://pictures.aol.com/ap/singleImage.do?pid=42400k0mKJ-A5Y8i2-o2zVopuGnL-K80aL59

http://pictures.aol.com/ap/singleImage.do?pid=42400k0mKJ-A5Y8i2-o2zVopuFpft6WgAO1W

http://pictures.aol.com/ap/singleImage.do?pid=42400k0mKJ-A5Y8i2-o2zVopuLq9SZtH608c

http://pictures.aol.com/ap/singleImage.do?pid=42400k0mKJ-A5Y8i2-o2zVopuE8BoWII7GtM
 
Fixed horiz stabilizer now? Have they abandoned the throttle interconnect or will it connect to the elevator/elevator trim now?
 
shrug - the F-86 is my benchmark for ugly jet airplane.
 
It really does look better in person. It's a rough test project now. They also will have gear doors someday. I was surprised to find out that the fuselage will be only 2" wider than the Malibu

The sales guy tells me that they will do away with the moving horiz. stab because the elevator trim system will do the job. I don't know how they get the inlet plug in, I guess it's another good reason to keep a kid handy.

Regards, Kevin
 
kmead said:
I don't know how they get the inlet plug in, I guess it's another good reason to keep a kid handy.
Click to expand...
I've seen people use a pole-like arrangement to get the engine plug in the center engine of a Falcon 50. It would work for the Piper too.
 
mikea said:
Something about it looks weird. Long thin nose and wide bulbous tail. It looks like it's got a big backside. :p
Click to expand...
Maybe that's it. The taper of the aft fuselage looks ungraceful, and the window lines look out of kilter. The cabin window spacing, together with the wing root fairing and oversized vertical tail, emphasize that big backside.

What is the gadget on the aft fuselage, at the aft end of the dark blue trim stripe? (circled in photo below)
 

Attachments

  • piperjet.jpg
    piperjet.jpg
    32.9 KB · Views: 52
I'll do some checking on what that is on the rear fuselage. They probably wont tell, after all of the years with Piper I still get treated like the red haired step-child.

Kevin
 
Desn't much matter. This is no time to be pouring capital into a new design. Even odds that the company fails this winter. The credit markets are responsible.
 
kmead said:
I'll do some checking on what that is on the rear fuselage. They probably wont tell, after all of the years with Piper I still get treated like the red haired step-child.

Kevin
Click to expand...

Cabin ram ventilation scoop? Or a cooling inlet of some sort (where's the accessory gear box or starter/generator on that thing)?
 
Pilawt said:
Am I the only one who thinks that's an ugly airplane ... ?
Click to expand...

Nope. That is one uuuuuuuugly duckling. :vomit: If I owned one, I'd have to buy a Shorts for a buddy to fly around everywhere with me so I could park next to that. That'd make it look better. :eek: It's not "holy-crap-I-wouldn't-be-caught-dead-in-that" bad, but it's certainly the worst-looking of the PJ's.

I think the huge tail surfaces and tiny little narrow gear track are part of the bad look... And how tall is that thing anyway? It doesn't look like something that's going to fit under the door of a lot of normal-sized hangars. :no: The whole thing looks like it was designed with nothing more in mind than "Look, we got a jet too!"
 
The location of the jet engine gives a disproportional appearance. It looks like it was tacked on as an afterthought.

Maybe they'll bring back ***** Galore to fly a formation of them in the next Bond film.
 
I sat in the mock-up at OSH. That plane feels HUGE on the inside. The cabin is not tall and you have to lean down to walk to the back. Once you're there, it is a long way to the front - feels like you're sitting in the back of a limo. Also, the star-light thing they did in the ceiling (I assume fiber optics) really was neat and the color contrast between cabin walls and the ceiling made the space feel very large once seated. With the solid door bathroom and the open airy feeling of the cabin, I'll bet it is a hit with the passengers if/when they get it to production.

flyingcheesehead said:
Nope. That is one uuuuuuuugly duckling. :vomit: I think the huge tail surfaces and tiny little narrow gear track are part of the bad look... And how tall is that thing anyway? It doesn't look like something that's going to fit under the door of a lot of normal-sized hangars. :no: The whole thing looks like it was designed with nothing more in mind than "Look, we got a jet too!"
Click to expand...
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Nope. That is one uuuuuuuugly duckling. :vomit: If I owned one, I'd have to buy a Shorts for a buddy to fly around everywhere with me so I could park next to that. That'd make it look better. :eek: It's not "holy-crap-I-wouldn't-be-caught-dead-in-that" bad, but it's certainly the worst-looking of the PJ's.

I think the huge tail surfaces and tiny little narrow gear track are part of the bad look... And how tall is that thing anyway? It doesn't look like something that's going to fit under the door of a lot of normal-sized hangars. :no: The whole thing looks like it was designed with nothing more in mind than "Look, we got a jet too!"
Click to expand...


Define "Normal Sized", It's in a league with a 421 and it looks like it'll fit into any hangar a 421 will, look how short the thing is compared to the guy.

singleImage.do


I don't think it's all that ugly, I think the Cirrus Jet is uglier.
 
Henning said:
I don't think it's all that ugly, I think the Cirrus Jet is uglier.
Click to expand...

Form follows function, and "ugly" is something that does not contribute to that function.

IMHO, The Piper SET (Single Engine turbine) looks like a personal jet.

A wider, heftier gear set would give certainly give it more ramp presence (the same way a C172 with wheel pants looks more substantial then one without).

Cessna_172SP.jpg


Cessna%20172%20Skyhawk.jpg
 
dmccormack said:
Form follows function, and "ugly" is something that does not contribute to that function.

A wider, heftier gear set would give certainly give it more ramp presence
Click to expand...


Well, that's a bit contradictory there. Figure the plane has wet wings, wider, more substantial gear would eat into fuel tankage. Now, which do I want, better ramp presence, or another 200 miles? I'll take the range.
 
Henning said:
Well, that's a bit contradictory there. Figure the plane has wet wings, wider, more substantial gear would eat into fuel tankage. Now, which do I want, better ramp presence, or another 200 miles? I'll take the range.
Click to expand...

I agree 100% -- but "style" and "function" are often contradictory.

rkd2.jpg


15style.slide2.jpg
 
Bob Noel said:
shrug - the F-86 is my benchmark for ugly jet airplane.
Click to expand...

GASP - Sacrilege!!!! What are you, a commie??!!!!!!

I've always thought the F86 was the most beautiful jet ever. Go figure.

Ugliest? The Victor. Godawful weird looking. 2nd place A3 Skywarrior.
 
kmead said:
It really does look better in person. It's a rough test project now. They also will have gear doors someday. I was surprised to find out that the fuselage will be only 2" wider than the Malibu

The sales guy tells me that they will do away with the moving horiz. stab because the elevator trim system will do the job. I don't know how they get the inlet plug in, I guess it's another good reason to keep a kid handy.

Regards, Kevin
Click to expand...

The paint scheme does it no favors.

I thought it was a Malibu airframe on which they stuck a jet engine. It sure looks that way.

Thanks for the pix.

BTW - I can't believe they don't treat you well. They should get down on their knees and praise Allah for the work you do. When you retire the Malibu market will collapse.
 
flyersfan31 said:
GASP - Sacrilege!!!! What are you, a commie??!!!!!!

I've always thought the F86 was the most beautiful jet ever. Go figure.
Click to expand...

Me too. Love the F-86. Here's one in formation with an A-10.
 

Attachments

  • F-86.jpg
    F-86.jpg
    72.6 KB · Views: 4
Anthony said:
Me too. Love the F-86. Here's one in formation with an A-10.
Click to expand...

+1. A great looking aircraft and a great performer, as well!

Although, the F-86D and F-86L that my dad flew could be considered a little aesthetically challenged with the added radome...

Assign14.gif



Trapper John
 
Just saw another photo of the PiperJet in the new AOPA Pilot. I've no doubt it's a superbly comfortable, nice-flying, efficient airplane. But in terms of aesthetics alone it's not just ugly ... it is coyote ugly. No part of it looks like it belongs with any other part. Bill Lear sold a lot of airplanes on looks alone. Piper won't have that benefit.
 
Marcel Daussalt said, "For an airplane to fly well it must look good." The F-86 does, the Piperjet does not.

Doug Rozendaal
 
Pilawt said:
Just saw another photo of the PiperJet in the new AOPA Pilot. I've no doubt it's a superbly comfortable, nice-flying, efficient airplane. But in terms of aesthetics alone it's not just ugly ... it is coyote ugly. No part of it looks like it belongs with any other part. Bill Lear sold a lot of airplanes on looks alone. Piper won't have that benefit.
Click to expand...

I wonder if the purchase price includes a spare Shorts to park it next to so it'll look good? :rofl:
 
Call me wack (everyone else does), but I think the PiperJet has an oddly-comforting functional look to it. If it performs well, and sells for a soundly competitive price, it will sell well.

As for it looking like a previous Piper airframe, modified to be a jet, I say: "Bravo!" You have something that works well, use it again. Every dollar legitimately saved in development expense, is a dollar which need not be recovered in purchase price.

Piper does need to be soundly mindful of one important thing, though: Just because they want to move upmarket, they should *not* abandon effective support of their prior products without ensuring there is a viable alternative for owners of those aircraft. They may not realize it, but we talk amongst ourselves!
 
I think it looks odd because it has a single engine nacelle in the middle of the vertical stabilizer. If you added two more, one each side, it would look like a smaller version of a Falcon 50.

Obviously, it has to have the thrust on center. It might look more appealing if the intake was just above the fuselage and the exhaust port located in place of the tail cone; just like the 50's center engine. But, I'm sure that would add substantial construction costs.

There are much uglier airplanes out there. But, I like Brent Johnson just the same. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top