this must make sense to them from an ROI perspective…probably they can use existing 3D model and have the SDK coding worked out to the point that it will be less expensive for them to generate this one than the Arrow III…Maybe they will offer it at a lower price point too.
I’m sure they’ll let us know in their own time
I’d be very careful with using the sim for this part of your initial training, there’s a significant risk that you’ll pick up some bad habits subconsciously and spend money on extra lessons because of it.
I’ve seen quite a few student pilots having to unlearn stuff they “learned” at home before having a solid foundation of real life flight training to evolve from.
Cockpit familiarity and IFR procedures can be good practice in the sim, but for the aerodynamic and performence part, watch out!
3 Likes
Thank you for the advice, I agree about the risk and have heard of similar situations. However, IMHO the benefits outweigh the negatives. At least that’s been my experience so far (15h into real training with around 150 in the home sim beforehand). I was able to show up at most lessons with a good foundation of how to do something (example: flying the pattern => memorizing the procedures I have to do at each step, feeling comfortable / less nervous etc.).
Risk is still there to start doing stuff in the sim that doesn’t apply and I have to un-learn, we’ll see how it goes. Hopefully none of this will compromise my safety as a pilot and it’s just about money. If that’s the case, worst case I spend more money, best case I spend less money. The way I look at it, if I do nothing I will for sure spend more money than national average on training because I can only fly one extended lesson every 2-ish weeks, so learning is not continuous. What I hope to do with the sim is reduce the amount I forget in-between the lessons.
I guess ask me again in 6-12 months 
Really? 
I’ve briefly flown the C172 in real life and in the sim (default one in MSFS, using VR and a shaker under the chair) and found the overall experience similar enough - for my own internal metrics, of course - to use it for extra training at home.
But then again, people in my home country - we are notorious for over-using the saying “ah, it’s good enough”, so I might be guilty of that
As an anecdote about differences in performance: I’ve used 2 Warriors in training so far (both are the same model, similar year and were flown in comparable conditions, weight etc.) and they are very different as well: completely different power settings when configuring for a stabilized approach.
I have about 600 hours total time mostly in C 152 and C172, and maybe 25 hours in Warriors. Flying in a desktop sim is good for somethings like Navigation, but if you think doing a spin or accelrated stall in a desktop, compared to doing one in real life, you are in for a big surprise.
1 Like
Hi guys,
Justflight has just announced the Warrior on their website in case someone is interested.
Happy flying
3 Likes
I wonder if this is sufficiently different from the Arrow to consider getting.
I‘m sure it is sufficiently slower and it’s not complex (no retractable gear, no constant speed prop). It’s more a basic trainer. So I guess the answer would be yes in my opinion.
1 Like
It makes more sense to go for the Warrior than the Piper Turbo if you already have the non-turbo version in my opinion. There won‘t be a huge difference performance wise between the regular and the turbo piper in the altitudes people usually fly the piper. If I need to go higher up, I might take another aircraft alltogether.
I‘m looking really forward to the Warrior.
My impression is that they are now going for very specific variants of the Piper because this product is a huge success.
That means they can easily create versions and some people will want a specific one.
For example I came from the X-Plane Arrow Turbo but prefer the Arrow because I did not like the sounds the turbo engine makes. Also the Arrow is a bit more oldschool.
But imo there is not really a reason you must own all 3 of them, and in the end there will probably be a bundle too. They had a bundle for X-Plane for example thatn included Arrow III and IV Turbo versions.
That, and they are planes they have already released for other platforms. Eventually the third party companies are going to exhaust these, and that will be an interesting time.
1 Like
There will be 66% (or something like that) off for Turbo Arrow for current Arrow owners. The question is whether Arrow owners would get the discount for Warrior. Yes, they are different planes in theory, but the models share most of the airframe and interior. It would make sense. I would consider getting Warrior with a discount, otherwise I do think it is worth it for the current Arrow owners.
1 Like
I’ll certainly be getting the Turbo arrow at the 66% discount, but I’m not certain about this one.
There are many variants of the PA-28, Piper PA-28 Cherokee - Wikipedia, and I’m not sure I would be interested in buying a very similar plane over, and over again, except perhaps a seaplane variant.
3 Likes
It depends. If you enjoy flying really slow and low, with a wing in the way of the scenery, then the Warrior II is a really nice aircraft. I’ve probably got forty-plus hours in one (we owned one in our flight club) but always found myself in the club C172. Same speed, better for VFR if you like looking down, and landed without floating for half the runway. 
I will, however, be getting the Turbo Arrow for the IV model. I know the T-tail can be a polarizing subject, but I soloed in a “Traumahawk.” I kinda like the way the T-tail feels… more elevator authority.
2 Likes
Of course, it is a great aircraft IRL and will be amazing in the sim just like the Arrow is, but “low and slow” in Arrow or Warrior does not make much difference I suppose. Arrow will probably cruise 10-15 knots faster than Warrior. I have no idea whether the behavior is much different though.
1 Like
The first thing I noticed when starting with the JF Arrow was how heavy the nose felt. I’m used to it now, with about 120+ hours in it. Would the T-tail make the Arrow IV feel less nose heavy in that case?
I’ve not flown the T-tail Arrow IV in real life. However, I can tell you that the Tomahawk (which uses a different wing) had very good elevator authority compared to either the PA28-140 “Cruiser” or the PA28-161 Warrior II. In my opinion, the Pipers (including the Tomahawk) all start to feel somewhat heavy and “sluggish” as you reduce airspeed. The Pipers like to carry more power down to the threshold compared to a Cessna. The T-tailed Tomahawk maintained better elevator response and authority at slower airspeed, which leads me to believe the Arrow IV may behave in similar fashion.
3 Likes
Good comments. I had the Just Flight Tomahawk for FSX long long ago. I would certainly like to see this one developed for MSFS too … many fond memories and real world hours in these back in the day. Not everyone’s favourite … but I was very fond of her!
I have the Arrow; will certainly be acquiring the Warrior too.
1 Like
I’d have that one in my hangar in a New York Minute, just for those times when I feel like cruising around at 3500 or 4500 feet, taking in the sights.
2 Likes
Not sure if this has been posted already. I apologize if it dif.
JustFlight released a development update for a Piper PA-28 warrior II, along with beautiful shots.
The JF PA-28 Arrow is already very accurate and pleasing to fly, and improving steadily, so I’m confident this one will be on par.
This is my learning PPL aircraft, I’ll try to evaluate its behaviour and performances compared to the real one. Hoping to get my hands on it soon !
2 Likes