Piper to stop Saratoga and Arrow production

TangoWhiskey

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
14,210
Location
Midlothian, TX
Display Name

Display name:
3Green
The trickle of Warriors, Archers and Seminoles is all that's left of the Cherokee family. :(

Can you remember which was the first PA-28 version to fly? And which was the first to be certified and be delivered?
 
Last edited:
Aren't Arrows used a complex trainers as much these days? I always thought this was the primary reason Arrows existed.
 
Aren't Arrows used a complex trainers as much these days? I always thought this was the primary reason Arrows existed.

Two, here. Both are Arrow IIIs.

My college switched from the 182RG to the Socata TB-20 Trinidad during my time there. The 250-HP Trinidad is a bit more of a handful than some complex trainers, but I loved it. There aren't many choices out there. Near here, one school uses a Cardinal RG.
 
They barely have a trickle of Arrows coming out of the factory anyway. I think they were making maybe 3/yr the last few years, all of which probably went to UND. Saratogas were killed by the Matrix. I would think they'll try to kill the Archer next and leave the Warrior as basic trainer, if they even stay in the 4 seat single market, which I tend to doubt. They're moving up the value chain, since their old airframes can't compete with the Cirrus and Diamond, or the installed base of 172s.
 
They barely have a trickle of Arrows coming out of the factory anyway. I think they were making maybe 3/yr the last few years, all of which probably went to UND. Saratogas were killed by the Matrix. I would think they'll try to kill the Archer next and leave the Warrior as basic trainer, if they even stay in the 4 seat single market, which I tend to doubt. They're moving up the value chain, since their old airframes can't compete with the Cirrus and Diamond, or the installed base of 172s.
The PA-28 and its derivatives are dead. It doesn't make sense for Piper to retain the tooling and stock the parts for such low volume, especially given the relative hot sales of the PA-46 and its derivatives. I suspect a smaller, 4-seat PA-46 variant has been looked at, but rejected because it would not compare well to the Cirrus and Columbia/Cessna on the price/performance curve.
 
The PA-28 and its derivatives are dead. It doesn't make sense for Piper to retain the tooling and stock the parts for such low volume


So the Warrior, Archer and Arrow are no longer being used as trainers by flight schools in large numbers? Is the training fleet owned by Cessna and Diamond now?
 
Hmm... Does this mean that the Saratoga and Arrow will be (like the Warrior) - "You buy one, we'll build one"? Or does it mean that they won't build them any more, period?
 
So the Warrior, Archer and Arrow are no longer being used as trainers by flight schools in large numbers? Is the training fleet owned by Cessna and Diamond now?
They're not being BOUGHT by flight schools in large numbers any more. In the last 6 months, Piper has delivered 6 Warriors, 5 Archers and 0 Arrows. That's not worth a production line. In the same period, Diamond has delivered 39 DA-20s, which is primarily a flight school product. Add in another 400 C-172s, DA-40s and Cirrus SR-20s and it's clear the low-end 4-seat fixed gear buyers ain't going to Piper either.
 
They're not being BOUGHT by flight schools in large numbers any more. In the last 6 months, Piper has delivered 6 Warriors, 5 Archers and 0 Arrows. That's not worth a production line. In the same period, Diamond has delivered 39 DA-20s, which is primarily a flight school product. Add in another 400 C-172s, DA-40s and Cirrus SR-20s and it's clear the low-end 4-seat fixed gear buyers ain't going to Piper either.

And the training market will probably transition mostly to LSAs, because the economics are too good to pass up. There was no way for Piper to compete against that. With limited financial resources, and a successful product lineup at the high end of the market, I think the decision makes sense.
 
They barely have a trickle of Arrows coming out of the factory anyway. I think they were making maybe 3/yr the last few years, all of which probably went to UND. Saratogas were killed by the Matrix. I would think they'll try to kill the Archer next and leave the Warrior as basic trainer, if they even stay in the 4 seat single market, which I tend to doubt. They're moving up the value chain, since their old airframes can't compete with the Cirrus and Diamond, or the installed base of 172s.

Piper shipments for the last 4 years:

[row][cell]Piper[/cell][cell]2004[/cell][cell]2005[/cell][cell]2006[/cell][cell]2007[/cell][/row][row][cell]Warrior[/cell][cell]18[/cell][cell]37[/cell][cell]19[/cell][cell]27[/cell][/row][row][cell]Archer[/cell][cell]19[/cell][cell]16[/cell][cell]29[/cell][cell]16[/cell][/row][row][cell]Arrow[/cell][cell]12[/cell][cell]9[/cell][cell]5[/cell][cell]8[/cell][/row][row][cell]Saratoga[/cell][cell]9[/cell][cell]8[/cell][cell]10[/cell][cell]0[/cell][/row][row][cell]Turbo Saratoga[/cell][cell]31[/cell][cell]37[/cell][cell]37[/cell][cell]39[/cell][/row]

Looks like they effectively killed the normally aspirated Saratoga last year. And yes, there were very few Arrows being sold. Because of Piper's neglect of the four-seater market, they got run over. The Arrow used to be a plane that many private non-flight-school owners bought as a cheaper alternative to the higher-performance birds, and many used Arrows are owned by individual pilots. Now, the Arrow is pretty much a flight-school airplane.

I would bet the Seminole goes next. It shares a lot of parts with the Arrow and the sales figures for the last 4 years are 11, 29 (15 in one quarter), 11, and 14. It's a flight-school-only type of airplane.

The 6X and 6XT have not been selling particularly well, either. In fact, Piper didn't sell any 6XT's last year, and only 12 6X's. These share a lot of parts with the Saratogas, so why keep them around?

Finally, the Seneca, while it has sold better the past couple of years than it did in the previous two, may be on thin ice as well - Once the above models are phased out, it'd be the odd duck of the bunch. As the last Hershey-bar plane Piper makes, it already kind of is!

That'd leave Piper with only two significantly different airframes - The PA-46 in three variants (turbocharged, turbo&pressurized, pressurized&turbine) and the jet. They have very little competition for the PA46 line, so as long as there continues to be a demand for that mission, they'll do OK as long as they don't sink too much money into the jet, which I think is going to be a flop.

Ugh.
 
Are the Saratogas completely gone? Or just the NAs?
 
Now, the Arrow is pretty much a flight-school airplane.


Or a plane for building complex time "cheaply". We have one in our club and I've got more time in it (64.1 hours) than in our C-182 (54.3 hours), but I'm working on overcoming that while working on my IR. Just got to get back in the air (no time logged since July 8).
 
Are we slowly watching Piper go out of business?

I think so. :( I've said so many times in the last couple of years, and as time goes on their actions only reinforce my belief.

Too bad, they used to make a darn nice airplane.
 
I think so. :( I've said so many times in the last couple of years, and as time goes on their actions only reinforce my belief.

Too bad, they used to make a darn nice airplane.
I think Piper's problems for the past decade or more have been customer service oriented. Look at how they've handled the Meridian inlet corrosion issue. Look at how they've repeatedly said they're in the business of selling new airplanes, not supporting old ones. There seems to be a lot of buck-passing.

They've made some serious business missteps in the last 25 years. But the PA-46 airframe is an excellent piece of work -- and it will be made even better when they put a FADEC engine on it. Every manufacturer has its niche, and if they position the company around the PA-46 derivatives I think they have a shot at surviving for a while. But they will need to restore customer service and avoid the kinds of missteps that have gotten them into trouble. Well, and they should offer other glass than Avidyne.

They certainly are not going to compete with Cessna and Cirrus and Diamond in the 4 seat market. The PA-28 is just too limited.
 
They've made some serious business missteps in the last 25 years. But the PA-46 airframe is an excellent piece of work -- and it will be made even better when they put a FADEC engine on it. Every manufacturer has its niche, and if they position the company around the PA-46 derivatives I think they have a shot at surviving for a while. But they will need to restore customer service and avoid the kinds of missteps that have gotten them into trouble. Well, and they should offer other glass than Avidyne.

Ahhh, you are a wise man.

They certainly are not going to compete with Cessna and Cirrus and Diamond in the 4 seat market. The PA-28 is just too limited.

Maybe because they really haven't done much to it (including SELL it!) in the last 25 years...
 
They certainly are not going to compete with Cessna and Cirrus and Diamond in the 4 seat market. The PA-28 is just too limited.

Maybe because they really haven't done much to it (including SELL it!) in the last 25 years...
Agreed. Through the '60s and '70s the C-172 and PA-28 were about as evenly matched as competitors could be -- Ford or Chevy, Coke or Pepsi, Skyhawk or Cherokee.

Neither design has changed much from the salad days of the late '70s. But Cessna has aggressively marketed the Skyhawk in recent years, while Piper has sat on its light singles like they were trying to hide them (by the looks of those tank slits they call windows on the Archer III, looks like they were trying to hide the world from their pilots, as well :confused:).
 
Last edited:
Piper has thrown in its lot with the high end piston/transition turboprob/jet market. I think they view that as the new "progression" much like single/complex/light twin/cabin class was the old progression.

The VLJ market is turning out like any other. The first mover ends up exiting the market (like, say, Osborne or Commodore computers), follow-up mfrs make the market work. Piper isn't out of the competition yet. Frankly, they have more experience with high performance than does Cirrus.

On customer service, though, they really fall short. Classic finance-driven management. It could end up killing them.
 
[snip]
That'd leave Piper with only two significantly different airframes - The PA-46 in three variants (turbocharged, turbo&pressurized, pressurized&turbine) and the jet. They have very little competition for the PA46 line, so as long as there continues to be a demand for that mission, they'll do OK as long as they don't sink too much money into the jet, which I think is going to be a flop.

Ugh.

Forecast International's report in October 2008 says Diamond DA50 SuperStar (a pressurized five seater powered by a 350-horsepower, turbocharged engine) is aiming at customers of Piper PA46.

Can PA46 owners here give us some comments about the DA50 hyperlinked above?

Sunho
 
Forecast International's report in October 2008 says Diamond DA50 SuperStar (a pressurized five seater powered by a 350-horsepower, turbocharged engine) is aiming at customers of Piper PA46.

Can PA46 owners here give us some comments about the DA50 hyperlinked above?

Sunho

Wow... They weren't originally gonna pressurize it, but now looks like they will!

Super Drool! I want one. :D

(Actually, I want the not-yet-announced DA52 Super Twin Star (or Twin Super Star, whatever it'll be.)

As for DA50 vs. PA46, I think the DA50 is something that'll compete more with the SR22 Turbo and the Columbiessna 400 misspelled-Oregon-city-name. However, it does have a very large cabin for the number of seats, and the pressurization is certainly a nice addition so I would imagine it will nab some PA46 sales as well.
 
Wow... They weren't originally gonna pressurize it, but now looks like they will!

Super Drool! I want one. :D

(Actually, I want the not-yet-announced DA52 Super Twin Star (or Twin Super Star, whatever it'll be.)

As for DA50 vs. PA46, I think the DA50 is something that'll compete more with the SR22 Turbo and the Columbiessna 400 misspelled-Oregon-city-name. However, it does have a very large cabin for the number of seats, and the pressurization is certainly a nice addition so I would imagine it will nab some PA46 sales as well.

Is the build material (metals for PA46 and composites for DA50) a major factor in buying decision?

I believe speed, number of seats (or cabin volume), range and price are the four most important factors.

Sunho
 
I sat in the SuperStar mockup at AOPA Hartford. Pretty swank. At that time it wasn't advertised as pressurized. That changes things. It's a huge cabin, and the appointments are modern (think BMW, not Beech). I think it'll grab some SR22 folks, and will likely prompt Cessna to come up with a NextGen 210 to compete. I think the PA46 wins on cabin space though. THe club seating is very nice, and the cabin is roomy. I know for my family it would be a no-brainer: step up to the Mirage instead of the DA50. They really like the club seating and table, and being able to interact. If I were an SR22 or Corvalis driver, and didn't worry about cabin space, I'd definitely think about the DA50.
 
I sat in the SuperStar mockup at AOPA Hartford. Pretty swank. At that time it wasn't advertised as pressurized. That changes things. It's a huge cabin, and the appointments are modern (think BMW, not Beech). I think it'll grab some SR22 folks, and will likely prompt Cessna to come up with a NextGen 210 to compete. I think the PA46 wins on cabin space though. THe club seating is very nice, and the cabin is roomy. I know for my family it would be a no-brainer: step up to the Mirage instead of the DA50. They really like the club seating and table, and being able to interact. If I were an SR22 or Corvalis driver, and didn't worry about cabin space, I'd definitely think about the DA50.

I made these two charts by using data from GAMA. From 2000 to 2002 the total sales volume of single engine pistons (exclusing minor models and kit planes) decreased, while 310hp 4-seat Cirrus SR22 introduced in 2001 increased its market share from zero to 24%. In the same period, 180hp 4-seat Cessna 172's market share shrank from 32% to 26%.

This means those who might have bought Cessna 172 and other models in 2001 and 2002 turned to the SR22 instead. It's like compact car (Cessna 172, 182, PA28) customers moving upmarket to mid-size cars (SR22). Minivan/SUV (PA46, Bonanza, Cessna 206) customers do not seem to have been affected by the SR22's market entry.

The total sales volume grew significantly from around 1,200 in 2002 to more than 2,200 in 2006, but the SR22's market share has more or less stabilized around 25%.

It would be interesting to see how much market share the DA50 will capture from whom.

Sunho
 

Attachments

  • sales-change.JPG
    sales-change.JPG
    43.5 KB · Views: 10
  • market-share-changes.JPG
    market-share-changes.JPG
    60.5 KB · Views: 10
I want to see that same chart next February.

I made these two charts by using data from GAMA. From 2000 to 2002 the total sales volume of single engine pistons (exclusing minor models and kit planes) decreased, while 310hp 4-seat Cirrus SR22 introduced in 2001 increased its market share from zero to 24%. In the same period, 180hp 4-seat Cessna 172's market share shrank from 32% to 26%.

This means those who might have bought Cessna 172 and other models in 2001 and 2002 turned to the SR22 instead. It's like compact car (Cessna 172, 182, PA28) customers moving upmarket to mid-size cars (SR22). Minivan/SUV (PA46, Bonanza, Cessna 206) customers do not seem to have been affected by the SR22's market entry.

The total sales volume grew significantly from around 1,200 in 2002 to more than 2,200 in 2006, but the SR22's market share has more or less stabilized around 25%.

It would be interesting to see how much market share the DA50 will capture from whom.

Sunho
 
Back
Top