Leaderboard

Hello all! At the request of the community we have added two brand new forums to Mooneyspace! Vendor Forums - This is for businesses to interact/help owners and to advertise their services. Vacation Experiences - this forum is for users to share their Mooney trips and experiences with airports, hotels, etc. Thank you all for your support!

Man, someone needs to introduce you to American craft beer. You are drinking crap!

I believe that this is an announcement about an investment in Mooney. I don't believe the company has been sold. From my understanding, the company needed capital to begin producing again. Mooney will be marketing the Ovation and Acclaim in China. Production is going to remain in Kerrville, which I believe is good news for us vintage owners. If the machines are up and running, then we will have better access to parts. Perhaps the MSC at Mooney will re-open again. Perhaps they will start refurbing older birds. I, for one, don't care where the airplanes are sold. I am just happy that our workers, or at least 100 of them, can get back to the factory.

Sounds official now! NEWS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: John Nohe October 11th, 2013 Mooney Public Relations jnohe@jnaadv.com o: 913.327.0055 m: 816.304.6717 Mooney Announces Its Comeback With New Funding, Mooney Sets Itself to Re-enter the Single Engine Market Kerrville, Texas – After a five-year hiatus from manufacturing single-engine airplanes Mooney is pleased to announce that it will restart manufacturing at the beginning of January 2014 at its headquarters in Kerrville, TX. New funding from Soaring America Corporation, a California based Company will provide necessary capital to re-launch and sustain the legendary brand. Details of the financial arrangements will remain confidential. The company will continue to manufacture the Acclaim Type S, and the Ovation series. “It’s a new day for Mooney. And with a new investment group that is committed to the future, we’re expecting to make a strong move in the industry,” noted Barry Hodkin, Chief Financial Officer for the company. It’s been a long time coming and we couldn’t be more excited about our return to manufacturing one of the finest and most trusted airplane fleets in the industry.” The first order of business will be to hire and train a new workforce and reestablish the supply chain. The company is projected to recruit up to 100 people within the first year of operation. The company has a large variety of personnel needs that includes technicians, engineers, line workers, accounting and sales people. Within two years, the company is anticipating employing significantly more people depending on the demand for its products. “While we expect to be reunited with some of our previous employees, we are confident we’ll attract new talent as we re-enter this aviation space. We’re looking for the best and brightest people to help meet our vision for the future,” said Hodkin. (more) The Acclaim Type S is recognized as the world’s fastest single engine airplane. The turbo-normalized airplane is home to over 130 speed records with a normal cruise speed of 230 ktas and a service ceiling of 25,000 feet. The Ovation series has cruising speeds up to 190 ktas and a service ceiling of up to 20,000 feet. “It’s too early to provide the details, but we’ll have some very exciting announcements in the near future about the technological advances that will accompany the Acclaim Type S and Ovation series,” said Hodkin. During the difficult economic times starting in 2008, when single engine sales dropped by over 30 percent compared to the year prior, Mooney ceased production. Over the last five years, the Company that was started by Al Mooney more than 80 years ago has remained in business, focusing on customer support for the Mooney planes still in service. Given more positive economic indicators and the unique market niche for Mooney airplanes, the company feels confident about a sustaining future in the industry. About Mooney Since its inception, the company has manufactured and delivered more than 11,000 aircraft worldwide. Today, more than 7,800 customers in the United States and 1,000 more overseas fly these proven, high-performance airplanes. For more information, visit www.mooney.com. ####

The first order of business should not be restarting production. If they do that, they will go tango uniform all over again. They should hire an engineer, I mean a real one instead of occasionally bringing out the ouija board and calling for Al, and get their landing gear redesigned to support 3600lb in order to compete with Cirrus. There might be about 5 guys a year willing to drop $700K on an airplane with 4 seats and a 850lb useful load.

Alright - I'm a LOP fan now. This thread is not meant to stir arguments, though I'm sure it will, but after operating ROP for my first 900 hours, after just 5 hours using LOP, I'm a fan (and yes, I'm right about 905 hours). As noted in a separate thread, during a recent partial under warranty top overhaul, my injectors were put back in the wrong order causing a hot and lean #2 cylinder. That was recently corrected and on a flight down to South Carolina for a wedding this weekend, I finally got the fuel flow that the Mooney Missile can perform with it's speed. Due to the lean #2 cylinder, I have had to run rather Rich. Now, I'm have all my cylinders peaking at once which means I can run a full 1 GPH leaner ROP, but my engine now really runs LOP smoothly. So, I dropped from doing 185 knots at 18GPH to 175 knots at 11.6-12.0 GPH. That is significant. 6 GPH for about 10 knots. If I ran at 182 knots at 16.7 GPH ROP then it's still a 4-5 GPH savings for 7 knots. It increases the range of my aircraft I'm running well LOP (30-70 degrees LOP). For instance, for my trip this weekend, I matched the MPG of my former F model if not besting it. At one point over NC and VA, I hit 188 knots on 11.8 GPH. That was only with a tailwind of about 10-15 knots. As long as no cylinder has an EGT too close to peak so I don't burn up the valves, I'll continue to be a big fan of LOP. Lower fuel burn, small speed drop off, cooler CHTs, it's a winner. If you have an engine monitor and have the ability to try LOP. Try it. I wish I had earlier. That lowers my cost by 5-6 GPH or $30-$40 per hour. For 100 hours per year, that's right now $3000 to $4000 per year which is significant to the overall flying budget (1/3 less in fuel costs which are about half the budget or 1/6 less per year in costs). I'm only comfortable running LOP right now at higher altitude cruise, but as I practice and get more comfortable, I'll learn to LOP at lower altitudes as well as during decent. -Seth

I can't stand sitting on the sidelines for the Chinese Mooney purchase.... Really? There are thousands of Mooney airframes in the U.S. Why should I as a vintage Mooney owner get excited about a Chinese purchase of a Texas U.S of A airframe.....?....... Come on, vintage airframe owners are not the focus of the Chinese Mooney. I don't aspire to a diesel/turbine Mooney....I have all the parts I need from the fleet in the U.S. via salvage. This purchase does NOTHING for me and just shows that GA in the US is in decline. If it were not, a US investor would purchase Mooney and be profitable. We legacy Mooney owners have a solid well built airframe. Parts are there through thousands of birds that are in the US fleet. Mooney purchased by China....Great news for legacy owners why? They are not making vintage Mooney's....Get real. It is all about avionics upgrades. We already have a great plane for our mission. All the hype is just that. Who cares? Get excited about the Chinese purchasing an American brand...I say spend your American money on the Mooney pit..... If I bend an elevator...I can get a replacement from the existing fleet. The yawn factor is 10 here.... As a vintage owner I could care less about this purchase and just shake my head at the decision to make only long body Mooney's....Whatever.

Learning to land FA-18's on aircraft carriers.... Strollers were in my nightmares... Not my dreams back then!!!

I would hit like on all the comments, but there is a daily limit on them...Yes, the world and Texas-China are a better place with Mooney open and in it. All is right with my world...almost.

How was this announced? I can't find any info about it online.

Hi Scott, I hear you - and it was me pining over diesel/turbine - and I am not buying either anytime soon even if they produce them tomorrow simply because I cannot afford a new airplane. I am pleased simply because Mooney has been hanging on a string and I was really worried if they could continue indefinitely, or just disappear entirely. I think this investor is good news because it insures the future health of the company, and it is still a company that will stay in Kerryville and employ folks right there.

It seems to me the resale value of our existing planes have to be helped if the company is a viable business instead of a shell even if it isn't making our model any longer.

Well....It looks like they're going to still be built in Kerrville, so that is good in general. Parts from the factory, while technically still available, take a long time now, so will probably be quicker once the factory is back running (Although like you said, you can get salvage for yours). Besides, building new Mooneys means more Mooneys, and that is something to get excited about. Right? Right!

Bob, sorry to hear about this. You may not be aware, but Larry did the same thing to N9249M - your previous plane. It got a new prop and a teardown at the time. I hope it all works out well - these sort of things are a real pain. Tom

Here's an idea for you guys- Someday when the traffic pattern is totally dead, go out and walk the runway with a can of that florescent orange spray paint for asphalt, and mark all the pot holes, bumps and depressions. Maybe if you could see the hazards, you would feel better about using the runway until the other one is fixed. I'm sure it's illegal by some FAA reasoning, but maybe just sneak out and do it anyhow.

Robert......suggest you 'invest' all that spread sheet estimation time into flying the planes you've already narrowed it down to. Go with the one you enjoy most and can handle best. In the end it will be a much better use of your time and effort. Good luck.

My 2 cents...the differences in the operating costs between any high performance four place single piston are probably negligible. They have the same engines (the Conti 550) so fuel burn will be about the same, oil consumption, etc. Maintenance will depend on age, shop and shop rate, and skill of the mechanic. You can go cheap or go to the best (and pay more). Your choice. All parts are expensive no matter which brand... Your real decision should be which plane you like the best for your mission. I wouldn't rely on published cost data to make the decision.

Not all prop strikes are created equal! Sounds like yours was "significant", but your A&P will have to decide on the degree of inspection/teardown. Here's the AD that defines a prop strike and directs you to the Lycoming service bulletin: http://www.caa.si/fileadmin/user_upload/pageuploads/AD-NOTE/AD-2004/038_FAA_AD_2004-10-14.pdf The Lycoming bulletin is at: http://www.lycoming.com/Portals/0/techpublications/servicebulletins/SB%20475C%20(01-30-2003)/Crankshaft%20Gear%20Modification%20and%20Assembly%20Procedures.pdf Notice that while there is virtually no "wiggle room" on what constitutes a prop strike, other than the replacement of the crank bolt and lockplate, the AD doesn't address much else. Changing out the crank bolt does not entail splitting the case, just removing the accessory section and sump of the O-360. I have two acquaintances that had engine failure directly attributable to previous, un-reported "minor" prop strike damage. It is something to be taken very seriously. Think about that while flying over W. Virginia on a dark night.

If you lean it really well for taxi, if you should forget, it won't matter, as it will falter when you advance the throttle.