The ageing Warrior
 

I spotted an advert today and it got me thinking....

What do you think would be the useful life of a Warrior or similar and is 15,000 hours TTIS at the high end for this aircraft type?

This aircraft PIPER WARRIOR II PA 28 151-161 1977 is having WHITE & BLUE colour TTIS 15034 ETR 373 PTR 1172 SINCE NEW. Basically this aircraft is PA 28 151 but during its last overhaul of engine in 2003 it was converted in to 160 hp. No accident history, NVFR ADF NAV/COM, 4 PLACE INTERCOM, REPAINT IN 2003 REFURBISHED IN 2008.

$24k.

According to CASA, wing fatigue life of the PA-28-235 is 12,500 hours. I guess it was determined by analysis by some-one within CASA (or predecessor) many years ago with perhaps a scatter factor of 8. Maybe, one day some-one will suggest that other PA28s be given a wing safe life too, who knows. If so, this one may be the first to need another wing.

The ageing Warrior
 

I'm thinking around the $30k mark, tops. Expect Piper to impose a 20 year SIDS on this aircraft in a similar manner seemed by Cessna.

As above it was $24k. Looks reasonable until you see the TTIS !

I thought there was a PA28 that used to haunt Lillydale with 20,000+ hours, one of the BZs. There can't be many 1970s Warrior IIs with less than 10,000 hours.

Should be worth it just for the remaining hours plus the paint, prop & refurb, get a LAME to do the elevator spar & wing spar check, my 1970 tinnie has done more hours than that in the salt water and still goes strong :}

BZA at lilydale, I believe, ticked over 30,000 hrs recently!

Which part has done 15,000+ hours? My 172 has nearly 11,000 on the MR but in that time it has had new wings, tail, rudder, several engines, several coats of paint, etc. etc. and it flies and looks like a nearly new aircraft. Some of these old aircraft is like Grandfather's axe, you really need a good look through the maintenance logs before buying any aircraft, "new" ones can be worn out and "old" ones can be like new.

Is there any record of Warrior sudden wing failures at high hours? If so, I'd be greatly concerned about a 15,000 hr Warrior with totally original wings.
If there's no record of numerous sudden, unexplained, possibly-fatigue-related wing failures, then I'd be happy laying out the money.

Many aircraft have 30,000 hrs and more TT. A lot depends on whether there's any part of the design that could be subject to sudden failure, or whether the design gives adequate warning of impending failure, such as cracks appearing in critical components or stressed areas.

I'd be more concerned about how an aircraft has been flown and maintained than TT. It's a piece of delicate machinery and all machinery can be abused and mistreated, and only show symptoms of that abuse, after having been purchased, and after maintenance examinations then show up that abuse.

I recall a document (SB) from piper where they had calculated the service life of the pa28 warrior/archer at something like 62,000 hrs, this was reduced for certain types of operation like aerial survey.
The lower life on the 235 and pa32 cherokee 6 I understand is due to the wing tip fuel tanks.

grandfathers axe principle. Spar and centre section easily replaced.

UNSW is flogging off 3 of theirs, with one nearing 18,000 hours and the engine on condition. Sealed bid sale. I wonder if they'd get upset if I offered $15,000 given old mate is asking $24K with 350+ HTR? :}

Why would operations like aerial survey reduce the service life?

eg. Consider aerial survey like nearmap (fly at x thousand feet in a straight line for 20 minutes, turn around and follow a path 4NM parallel to the original path)

eg. Consider aerial survey like Fugro with their metallurgical testing - at low level but generally in a straight line.

How is that worse than training ops?

How many wing spars have you changed or seen changed on a Warrior Sunfish?

The answer to that remains sealed in the tender .... No reason not to take a punt if you have the $$$
Cheers
A172

Is there any record of Warrior sudden wing failures at high hours? If so, I'd be greatly concerned about a 15,000 hr Warrior with totally original wings.

I saw the immediate aftermath of two Warriors that bumped each other rather hard in the circuit at YCEM. One wing on the lower one was rather spectacularly opened up and the torn metal of the skin of the upper outer surface laying out behind but it still landed safely while the other one continued safely to YLIL.

Both aircraft were training school machines with plenty of hours but I was impressed by the way they hung together and kept on flying despite a fair bit of damage.

The pilots did a great job, too.

Kaz

Regarding the UNSW tender... It certainly does not hurt to put in a low ball offer because someone else might not even put in an offer. I have personally purchased two aircraft by tender and it worked out exceedingly well. Not quite as well as the guy I know that bought a fly away Cirrus SR22 for $20k (no joke) but pretty well.

XXX, seen it done. Corrosion is usually the issue.

Piper SB 978A

Sunfish is correct, corrosion under paint is an issue, and the Piper SB's cover it.

SB's 977, 1081, 1122, 1244 and 1244A also need to be scrutinised.

Technical Publications Documents - Piper