Talk:Piper PiperJet Altaire

	Aviation portal This redirect is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles
	This redirect is supported by the aircraft project.
	This redirect has been marked as needing immediate attention.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this redirect.

Possible Merge

As it Stands this article would be best served being merged with Piper PA-47 PiperJet, probably under this title eventually, If production is carried out, or the other if it isn't produced commercially!Petebutt (talk) 23:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would have agreed with you, and wouldn't have started an article here, except an IP editor started changing the PiperJet artcile into an Altaire article, in BilCat's words, "one word at a time" - changing, not adding on. And the PiperJet and PiperJet Altaire are rather different aircraft, it appears (regardless of what Piper wants to call them). - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 00:00, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"What Piper wants to call them" isn't clear yet. Some sources are referring to the original Piperjet as a "proof of concept" prototype. It amounts to an implicit denial that there ever was any intention of putting that design into production even though we know for a fact that they accepted orders for it and have converted those orders into orders for the Altaire. It's not even known yet if the Altaire has the same model number (PA-47). I'm afraid we have to practice more "wait and see" for new developments that will hopefully bring clarity to the whole issue. Roger (talk) 07:33, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is clear that Piper's previous ownership fully intended to put it into "production", but the new ownership now considers it a "proof-of-concept" model. The two terms aren't mutually exclusive, and not really relevant to the issue of coverage in separate articles. While we do have to "wait and see" what model number Piper actually calls the new design, we don't have to wait to find out if they are significantly different from each other. It is quite clear already that the are significantly different, no matter what they are called. The basic question then is should both aircraft be covered on the same page, or on different articles, as we often do with variants of a particular aircraft type. The main issue for me is if the differences between the two are significant enough to warrant coverage in separate article. Including the Altaire with the original model would mean we'd probably have to remove its specs from the article, which would limit comparisions between the two variants. Overall, I do believe this limits the usefulness of covering them on the same page. - BilCat (talk) 16:56, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Now that it appreas to be dead again...

It might be best to consider merging the articles. - BilCat (talk) 23:47, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not pinin' - it's passed on! This project is no more! It has ceased to be! It's expired and gone to meet its maker! It's a stiff! Bereft of life, it rests in peace! If Piper hadn't nailed it to the perch it'd be pushing up the daisies! It's metabolic processes are now 'istory! It's off the twig! It's kicked the bucket, shuffled off its mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!! THIS IS AN EX-PIPER!! In other words: I agree completely, and have boldly gone and done so. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:00, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Facepalm "Yup, it's dead" would have sufficed! :) Agree with the bold merge. If it's resserrected again, it might well be under another "new" name - perhaps the "PiperJet Phase III Altaire Mk.2 Phoenix"?? - in which case we just create an new article. - BilCat (talk) 00:36, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]