Less Gloom

"Jay Masino" wrote in message
. ..
Jay Honeck wrote:
Piper's "solutions" in the piston market have been so bloody obvious
to long-term Piper owners that we ALL wonder what their problem is.
They needed to do two things ten years ago:

- Add a pilot's-side door to the Cherokee line.

Since the current design is integral to the structural integrity of the
cockpit, adding a door would not be a trivial change. In fact, it
might not be possible at all, and retain the current type certificate.
Personally, I've never found myself wanting a door on that side.

- Build an O-540-powered Arrow

They have done neither, and have thus been getting their asses waxed
by Cirrus and Cessna.

Ah, but note that Cirrus uses a fixed gear design. Maybe there just
wasn't enough of a demand for a big engined Arrow.


Additionally, they could have made simple changes (like flush-rivets
and wing filets) to the airframe that would have at least given the
appearance of keeping up. Again, they have done precisely nothing,
beyond adding glass panels and upgrading interiors.

Again, I don't think switching to flush-rivets would be a "simple
change". There's definitely a difference in strength. Note that even
companies like Laminar Flow utilize fairings and... basically... Bondo
for their wing smoothing. If it was trivial to switch to flush rivets,
I suspect some enterprising company would already hold the STC for it.

Unfortunately, there are FAA imposed limitations to what you can change
and still comply with the existing type certificate. Or else you're
opening yourself up to certifying an entirely new airframe, and all the
associated engineering costs.

I agree that many little complanies will probably pop up to support our
Cherokees if Piper does stop producing parts.

--- Jay


I, for one, an not so sure about either the door or the flush rivets--which
I have been tole are actually stronger, although they are also more labor
intensive.

However, I believe that Jay Honeck's original gloom was correct, as was the
subsequent contributor who suggested that Piper might cease to manufacture
slow selling parts and simply sell the existing stocks as orders come in.
Automobile manufacturers do that all the time and the parts involved are
technically not safety related, although the case could be argued for some
parts like seat back positioning locks; but some really mundane things like
air conditioning thermostats and interior door handles can make it
difficult, or even impossible, to maintain a classic car in original
condition. OTOH, the automobile manufacturers continue to offer new
products which (sort of) fit the old market system.

Therefore, despite my preference for an American company, I am currently
betting on one of the foreign companies, such as Diamond, who include
trainers and entry level aircraft in their product mix, to take over Piper's
old place opposite Cessna.

Peter