Is Piper bringing the Warrior back?

My understanding is that Piper will build any recent model that someone will buy, even if it's not stock. Looks like in the article they're buying 20 Warriors. I heard of someone recently buying a new Saratoga. They'll still make it if you're willing to pay for it.
 
Piper stikes me as cottage industry, that is build-to-order. For all I know all aircraft are built that way now.
 
steingar said:
Piper stikes me as cottage industry, that is build-to-order. For all I know all aircraft are built that way now.
Click to expand...

Pretty common practice with high end motorhomes, why should it be different with aircraft?

Newmar builds your coach after you put up 50% of the project costs, and will deliver after the final 50% plus final costs are paid.
The are the only motorhome manufacturer to survived the 07 turn down in the economy.
 
It does seem like kinda a special order given that they are coming with G500's and the GTN 650 as primary gps. All the other models are at least G1000's or higher at this point. Just was unaware Piper would un-mothball a model on demand.
 
drotto said:
It does seem like kinda a special order given that they are coming with G500's and the GTN 650 as primary gps. All the other models are at least G1000's or higher at this point. Just was unaware Piper would un-mothball a model on demand.
Click to expand...

For a fleet order of 20 they'll take you to the strip club to seal the deal.
 
Henning said:
For a fleet order of 20 they'll take you to the strip club to seal the deal.
Click to expand...

True including the Arrows it likely about a $10 million order.
 
Last edited:
drotto said:
It does seem like kinda a special order given that they are coming with G500's and the GTN 650 as primary gps. All the other models are at least G1000's or higher at this point. Just was unaware Piper would un-mothball a model on demand.
Click to expand...

I would think the issue there is that G1000 is airframe specific, and G500 is just an avionics package that can be put in any plane. They probably didn't wanna deal with a whole new type certificate process just for bigger screens.
 
StinkBug said:
I would think the issue there is that G1000 is airframe specific, and G500 is just an avionics package that can be put in any plane. They probably didn't wanna deal with a whole new type certificate process just for bigger screens.
Click to expand...

True the current Archer had to get FAA approval to use the G1000, I am not sure what the avionics package was on the final Warriors, but the G500 has approval as a general retrofit package.
 
drotto said:
True the current Archer had to get FAA approval to use the G1000, I am not sure what the avionics package was on the final Warriors, but the G500 has approval as a general retrofit package.
Click to expand...

Correct, huge saving using the G-500 rather than G-1000, plus they use the GTN radio interface rather than the old 430/530/1000 architecture.
 
DesertNomad said:
So Piper would build a one-off 2015 Dakota if you wanted one?
Click to expand...

I believe so. Like I said before, I have heard they've built one-off Saratoga's, and obviously they're building one-off Warriors. I'm sure if they have the tooling for the aircraft they can build it.

Not to say that they wouldn't price the one-off accordingly.
 
DesertNomad said:
So Piper would build a one-off 2015 Dakota if you wanted one?
Click to expand...

I think at this point, anything you are willing to pay for, they will build. Not sure how else they could survive at this point. The price of that one off Dakota will reflect the time it takes to deal with the extra tanks on a one off basis though. I'm not sure there is anyone who would be willing to pay more for a Dakota than an SR-22, but if someone was willing to pay, at this point I bet they take the money.
 
Would they build me a cub (for price they sold for in '46)?
 
DFH65 said:
Would they build me a cub (for price they sold for in '46)?
Click to expand...

:lol: Price aside, I doubt they have the tooling, so the price would probably be what a WAG Aero kit is and assembly time. Who knows how desperate they are.:lol:
 
Not sure I would want a special order warrior or Saratoga. What kind of dealer support will be around to handle the warranty.
 
Tom-D said:
Pretty common practice with high end motorhomes, why should it be different with aircraft?

Newmar builds your coach after you put up 50% of the project costs, and will deliver after the final 50% plus final costs are paid.
The are the only motorhome manufacturer to survived the 07 turn down in the economy.
Click to expand...

Maybe because Piper is not to aircraft was Newmar is to motorhomes? Piper is the bumper-pull of motorhomes, no reason to custom-build anything. Give 'em a few avionics options and paint schemes for the dealer to choose from and send it out the door. This has become the problem with aircraft manufacturing costs, you have made an aircraft cost (and price) so expensive that you're competing with $300K+ motorhomes!
 
Henning said:
I think at this point, anything you are willing to pay for, they will build. Not sure how else they could survive at this point. The price of that one off Dakota will reflect the time it takes to deal with the extra tanks on a one off basis though. I'm not sure there is anyone who would be willing to pay more for a Dakota than an SR-22, but if someone was willing to pay, at this point I bet they take the money.
Click to expand...

Personally, a Dakota is more desirable than an SR22 for me... But not sure I would pay the same price for one.
 
frfly172 said:
Not sure I would want a special order warrior or Saratoga. What kind of dealer support will be around to handle the warranty.
Click to expand...
A one off Warrior is no big deal. Support should be great as it shares 90% or more of it's parts with the Archer. It is really just an Archer with a 320 as opposed to a 360. Putting the cheaper panal plus the smaller engine means the flight school is likely paying 275000 or so per Warrior.

A Saratoga would again have decent support. They made them through 2009, so there are plenty of parts. I actually wonder what a one off toga would cost, I think it is still an airframe that could have a place on the market.

A Dakota is another case of basically being an over powered Archer, sharing alot of the same parts. With an Archer LX being around 400k, I am betting a Dakota would be around 475k to 500k.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
frfly172 said:
Not sure I would want a special order warrior or Saratoga. What kind of dealer support will be around to handle the warranty.
Click to expand...

No different than the rest of the fleet, plenty of support besides factory. I bet they gave a fair deal on that fleet. I bet they were significantly less than G-1000 172s, plus they got some retracts too.
 
Pilawt said:
CubCrafters just sold the TC for the CC-18 Top Cub to a Chinese company, though they'll continue to build it here under license.
Click to expand...

Is it the same TC that Piper once owned or is an updated one?
 
Pilawt said:
The CC-18 is an updated design based on the PA-18. Here's the article about the sale.

Looks like the current Piper corporate entity still owns the type certificates on the J-3, PA-11 and PA-18, at least as of 2006.
Click to expand...

I would imagine they own them since they aren't really valuable to sell I wouldn't think. Since those designs are all old enough to be in public domain, can't you just copy them to build from and use prior acceptance for the certification data?:dunno:
 
Tom-D said:
The are the only motorhome manufacturer to survived the 07 turn down in the economy.
Click to expand...

I know absolutely zero about motorhomes, but I don't know where you get that. I pass through Nacogdoches frequently, and as far as I know Foretravel hasn't declared bankruptcy. They were still rolling out product as of a few months ago, the last time I was there.
 
Henning said:
I would imagine they own them since they aren't really valuable to sell I wouldn't think. Since those designs are all old enough to be in public domain, can't you just copy them to build from and use prior acceptance for the certification data?:dunno:
Click to expand...

Aren't patents good for 75 years?
 
Does an IO-320 vs 360 really save that much cost wise?
 
cowman said:
Does an IO-320 vs 360 really save that much cost wise?
Click to expand...

2 gallons an hour would be the most significant difference in costs, but there are a couple of others. The only thing 180hp buys over 160hp is the ability to climb with more weight, and a few of knots of speed. Neither of these is really of high value in a training fleet.
 
Henning said:
2 gallons an hour would be the most significant difference in costs, but there are a couple of others. The only thing 180hp buys over 160hp is the ability to climb with more weight, and a few of knots of speed. Neither of these is really of high value in a training fleet.
Click to expand...

To add to this, training planes are rarely flown at gross, weight so the extra power is not needed, and most of the flying is local so speed is not an issue. From the flight schools perspective, 2 GPH is a massive savings when you take that out over 20 planes, and possibly 400 flight hours per week.
 
drotto said:
To add to this, training planes are rarely flown at gross, weight so the extra power is not needed, and most of the flying is local so speed is not an issue. From the flight schools perspective, 2 GPH is a massive savings when you take that out over 20 planes, and possibly 400 flight hours per week.
Click to expand...

Is the 2 GPH really significant with so much time spent in the pattern? The faster climb to pattern altitude will offset some of the fuel burn. Downwind at 75 knots will burn the same in either plane.

For near sea level operations, I agree the 160 hp engine is fine. Above 5,000 msl for ground elevation, that 160 hp engine is not doing so well and ya better plan on a long taxi for departure.

I flew a 150 hp 172 for a flight review the other day. I wanted to get out and push on the runway...
 
I hope not. Would be like Ford bringing back the Maverick !!!!
Piper warriors - I can't stop yawning !
 
drotto said:
A one off Warrior is no big deal. Support should be great as it shares 90% or more of it's parts with the Archer. It is really just an Archer with a 320 as opposed to a 360. Putting the cheaper panal plus the smaller engine means the flight school is likely paying 275000 or so per Warrior.

A Saratoga would again have decent support. They made them through 2009, so there are plenty of parts. I actually wonder what a one off toga would cost, I think it is still an airframe that could have a place on the market.

A Dakota is another case of basically being an over powered Archer, sharing alot of the same parts. With an Archer LX being around 400k, I am betting a Dakota would be around 475k to 500k.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yup...... Piper spitting out Warriors should be a piece of cake...:yes:
 
Art VanDelay said:
I hope not. Would be like Ford bringing back the Maverick !!!!
Piper warriors - I can't stop yawning !
Click to expand...

Is there any harm is brining back a cheap (in relative terms), reliable trainer? Yes, it is a yawn plane for anyone beyond there initial PPL, but it does not diminish the fact that it does what it was designed to very well. Anything to get modernized, safe new planes out there is good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top