rpcc

There has to be some reason the Chinese bought this company. The only thing that makes any sense to me is that the purchase supports some larger goal in their economic strategy. I can't imagine their goal is making 700-800k airplanes without a key market feature with projected sales of 10 units. It's my hope that the owners will make a marketable plane one day. To do this they will need to solve the UL problems and shoe horn an optional chute in there somehow. They need more lift, lighter weight, either a larger chute or some airframe airbags (google mars landing) to deal with the small landing gear. I hope it works out that there is a path forward for this company and I hope they sell all 10 of these planes.

Yes - but there was big money spent on purchasing Mooney - and they doubled down on restarting production with marginal changes. Why not hire some hot shot engineers to solve these problems. I'd like to see these planes have a future - planning for business that sells 7-10 units is not a business.

The current mooney production wing is 36.6 ft. A stock 182 wing is about the same. This guy, with basically no capital made it happen with the 182 - how come it can't work with a mooney - http://www.katmai-kenai.com/aircraft/pre-owned.php

Yeah, not sure I get the Mooney new product or feature plan from a marketing perspective. I can't believe they restarted production without a chute as an option. Not an engineer, but you can add a couple feet onto a 182 wing to gain some lift, why not do the same on the super strong mooney wing. That would gain some UL and allow you to get a chute in there at least as an option. How many wives say, sure the mooney looks great, but I'm not flying with you without a second engine or a chute, and now there's a cirrus in the hanger. Honestly - as the owner of the Mooney company, you have a competitor kicking your ass with basically one issue - a parachute as an option - and you chose to add a second door. How can you build a new model and not offer a chute. How much investment did you make in these new models and production restart - 3-5 mill , to sell 7-10 planes this year. Why not wait and do it correctly so the new mooney's would be marketable in today's market. You need a plan with features and pricing designed to sell 100-200 planes minimum not 7-10. If mooney had the chute option they could argue all of its virtues - speed, efficiency, safety and start beating up Cirrus on all of its shortcomings - lots of stall spin pattern fatalities and fires. Adding a door, some nice leather and some fancy electronics aren't going to make a viable business against the cirrus product. I'll be buying a non-g1000 ovation in the near future because it's just a much cooler plane. Don't all of you wish Mooney would have taken a good punch at Cirrus so they could again be a viable company. Very frustrated that such a great mark chose not to aggressively compete.

Looks to be worth some professional investigation - it bought the farm to save something much more expensive from the same fate.

How is the Cirrus going ?

There are a number of j's on controller that could work - most seem like nice options.

yes of course. I was hoping to hear some about some recent buying experiences that outlined what the actual selling price depends on.

Yes I read the findings, and I thought there would be more about why this happened and how to avoid it. Why do we accept that engines should fail like this. Broken main bearings, fractured cam shaft.... Is it really that complicated to make an engine that won't eat itself alive when it's most needed? How much more weight added to the cam or bearings would it take to eliminate this risk.

How much is the markup of a posted sales price vs what it actually sells for? What's the average price actually paid for a M20S,M,R? I realize these are not hershey bars and there many complicating factors that establish a price - engine/airframe time, tank reseal, electronics, paint and interior, but what are people actually paying for planes these days?

Sorry to revive an old thread - but it seems important. Has any additional information come to light on why this engine failed? This guy seemed to be a highly qualified and attentive to maintenance.

I'm a flatlander from the east coast and have never experience this. Does the sink rate decrease as you approach the surface? I can see that you would lose lots of altitude when the airmass is descending beyond your airplane's ability to climb, but what happens when as you approach the ground - does the decent rait continue or does it slow down as get closer to the ground? I would think the airmass would need to spread out as the ground stops its descent.

BOOM!!! That is amazing work. The wheel wells are amazing as well as the detailed photos of the control surfaces, not to mention the overall paint scheme and interior. Exceptional job sir.

Very funny!

Thank you all for your feedback.

I don't believe personal attacks have a place in this forum - the quality of information here is too good for this. You guys have to stop this. Again, I'm not asking about a specific situation, I'm asking about owners real world experiences with their specific issues related to a prop strike and their actions to repair and the cost associated.

Thank you all for your advice. I'm really looking for someone to say - yup, I'm that person that dinged their nice Ovation prop and here's what I did to fix the issue this is what I - or my insurance paid for the work.

I'm looking for actual costs for a prop strike repair in a later model Ovation. Anyone have any experience with this repair? I'm sure the costs can vary widely - looking forward to hearing about your experiences.

He's asking 14.5k for it in the title of the post.

Seems like selling it is best - perhaps a used engine would help complete the project and still be under market value. Money is cheap now, how about calling the bank and getting another 30k to put into the plane - in 5 years done right you'll be happy with it.

Why get tangled up... The content is exceptional on this site and and is rare from what I've read that threads are hijacked for political reasons. From my read the comment was 12 words with a smiley face - just seems like an overreaction and one that will drive people away - and it was funny. Anyhow - this corrosion issue just scares the crap out of me. I hope to buy a long body in the near future and there are lots of issues to lose sleep over, but I didn't think wing spar corrosion under tank sealant was one of them. As I've sad, the content here is excellent - thanks to gsxrpilot for sharing this.

Andy95w and aviatoreb - read his comment again, you can see his it was said with humor. Perhaps you two need a special politically correct forum so you are not offended.