1980Mooney

https://asn.flightsafety.org/wikibase/469542

You should post this in Vintage. This is an ongoing saga with the Dukes actuator. Although the ITT actuator is a direct substitute for the Dukes, I assume the internal design and gear set is different - but could be wrong

Yup - first place to look for answers to obscure Mooney questions like “when he (Lowen) sold the biz”…..

@Mooney810 My J model has a nice dent in the flap right where the "No Step" is located. It was that way 25+ years ago when I bought it. It has been stepped on accidentally in the same place many times in the 25 following years - and yes once or twice by me when tired or entering/exiting in pitch darkness. And the flaps have always worked just fine.

Federal Parks and Monuments with “user fees” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fee_areas_in_the_United_States_National_Park_System#List I think 92 are listed above. You don’t pay - then you don’t enter. Doesn’t matter that Federal funds paid for it. Airport landing fees and ramp fees are perfectly legal.

Hmmmm. "private enterprise both promoting and abbetting aggressive expansion of these fees" That sounds like the mantra of the incoming DOGE cabal. The Reason Foundation and Project 2025 have pushed expansion of user fees to completely user fund the FAA and to privatize ATC. "the Reason Foundation has written an open letter to the incoming leaders of the Department of Government Efficiency to make air traffic control a "user-funded utility." Think Tank Urges DOGE To Make ATC 'User-Funded' - AVweb Open letter on air traffic control to DOGE’s Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy Aviation International News Letters to President-elect Trump debate funding ATC with user fees The use of ADSB data outside flight safety or managing traffic is rather odd… It is probably "music to Musk's/Ramaswamy's ears". Perfectly automated. Easy Peasy.... And for those that think GA pilots pay their "fair" share of FAA and ATC costs through AVGAS fuel tax - it is laughable. The commercial operators have complained that they are subsidizing GA. That measly $38 million is supposed to cover all the thousands of small General Aviation airport FAA grants for capital improvements and ATC along with FAA overhead. Get ready for big increases in costs. And yes it is a slippery slope. The DOGE boys probably already have their fav Private Equity oligarchs lined up to buy the ATC.... @takair expressed a concern about PE buying up airports and screwing us. PE would much prefer to buy the technology at the top - fewer people, no liability. Owning an airport is a PITA fraught with liability. And PE owners would find ways to cut cost - like outsource ATC centers to somewhere like India. After all why do they need to be in the US?!! History of the User Fee Fight in the United States - AOPA

Not sure where you are coming from saying "for a FBO company to come in and then claim that part as theirs to charge a fee is wrong". The FBO is just doing it as an agent of the Owner of the airport (City, County or private) under contract. The contract may stipulate that the FBO gets a service fee. If you have an issue with the practice, take it up with the Airport Owner - they are making the decisions. And as far as charging to enter or use a publicly owned asset, how is this any different from a City charging to enter and park in a City owned parking garage? (and they probably hire a third party to collect the fees as an agent to the City). Same as the State charging a fee to enter a State Park. And charge more if you stay overnight. A perfect example is a City or County funded and owned sports stadium. Of course the City or County is going to charge you to park and enter. Toll fees on public bridges? - common and most going cashless with license plate reading technology. And the road in front of your property?...if the Owner (City or County and yes paid by taxes) wanted to turn that into a Toll Road, they could hire you to collect the fee as their Agent. Yes you will get a commission on the collections to cover your service costs. I think you will see more user fees on everything as Government entities struggle to cover the costs of operating, maintaining and replacing assets and infrastructure. Most Cities/Counties have balanced their Annual Budgets by deferring needed spending/maintenance on assets and infrastructure. It can't go on forever.

@Shiroyuki Take a look at this post. It has pictures of the Dukes actuator which was also manufactured by ITT (interchangable). There is an exploded diagram of the worm gear and gear set. There is also a picture of the Eaton actuator used in 1978 and on for comparison. The Eaton was also manufactured under the names of Eaton and also Avionics Products Company, CONDEC, Vickers (all the same actuator - just predecessor companies acquired by Eaton). This is the actuator with the "no-back spring". There was also an actuator shown made by Plessey which was interchangeable with the Eaton. Plessey is no longer supported and should be avoided. .

Because back on Sept. 24 Mathew P posted in the '20 or 40' topic - "From what I understand, Mooney Engineers designed the gearing to be used in the actuators and therefore the gears (drawings) are Mooney proprietary that are produced by a 3rd party vendor, which is still in business and CAN fabricate the gears but Mooney REFUSES to take/place an order for us."

Soaring America Corp is owned by Meijing. It is not owned by "Soaring Aviation". No doubt that Meijing is having a hard time in real estate. That is likely why they stopped putting money into Mooney at the end of 2019. When you say "what will happen to Soaring America Corp?". Well for the meantime - probably nothing. It appears that with their US Financial LLC deal, Soaring America Corp does not have to put any money into Mooney. They can just sit there and monitor. A couple of years ago, Jonny and US Financial were shopping the company. Most likely they told Soaring America/Meijing that they could flip the company and make everyone money. Well it didn't work out and now US Financial is struggling to make payroll (like has happened so many times in the history of Mooney Corp.). Taking on any new liability likely does not work for Mooney. And Meijing/Soaring likely are in a position to "just say no" to Jonny. BTW - good intel on the Meijing facility and the fact that they only reassembled to planes that were shipped from Texas.

The problem is that you are looking at Chinese legal entities and Chinese subsidiaries of Meijing in China. Soaring America Corporation is a US legal entity of the parent Meijing Group. (It is not "Soaring Aviation") It is active and in good standing. It owns 20% of Mooney International Corporation and may have secured much more of Mooney. From the California Secretary of State today. That is the same source as the Registration Documents above. https://bizfileonline.sos.ca.gov/search/business

Not exactly right. In October 2013, Mooney Aviation Company was bought by Soaring America Corporation, Chino, CA, a US subsidiary of China’s Zhengzhou-based Meijing Group (which is a real estate and import/export company.) The Mooney company was renamed "Mooney International Corporation" This was well documented in Mooney Flyer November 2013 on page 7 https://themooneyflyer.com/issues/2013-NovTMF.pdf http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2013-10/17/content_17040096.htm https://opencorporates.com/companies/us_ca/3521271a In September 2020, after considerable cash investment in Mooney only to cease operations in 2019, Meijing Group sold 80% of Mooney International Corporation to "U.S. Financial LLC, WY" Soaring America (Meijing Group) retained 20% of Mooney and retained the right to manufacture Mooneys in China and Africa. This is well documented in the October, 2020 Mooney Flyer on page 3 and in the Aviation Week "Sounding Board: Five Minutes With Mooney International CEO Jonny Pollack". Present Position Sounding Board: Five Minutes With Mooney International CEO Jonny Pollack | Aviation Week Network I don't think anyone would argue that Meijing poured a lot of cash into Mooney. I suspect that Meijing put it on the Mooney financial books as loans....and loans that are secured by assets of Mooney like the Type Certificates, designs, engineering data, Intellectual Property as well as factory assets. That is what any smart financial advisor or attorney would recommend. If any of you followed the bankruptcy of Vans Aircraft you can see the obvious parallel. Founder Van Grunsven (and family) had supposedly sold the company to the Employees. But the company needed cash loans which Van Grunsven provided. However, he secured all the valuable assets, engineering data, designs, certificates, manufacturing assets and building to those loans. When Vans filed Bankruptcy, he stood at the head of the line for claims and the entire company came back to him like a big rubber band or yoyo. Upon exit of bankruptcy, the Van Grunsven family now owns 100% of Vans Aircraft. The employees' "investment" got hosed. Everyone wonders why Jonny can do a deal with Lasar on the Eaton "no back spring" but can't do anything with the Dukes actuator w/Mooney designed gears. It is likely because he cannot trade away the "Dukes IP" because it is secured by loans from Meijing and he cannot do anything without their approval. The "no back spring" was likely an Eaton design that they would rather not make any longer. Hence they were willing to work with Jonny. But when it comes doing anything that requires a concession by Meijing I bet his hands are tied. Additionally, Likely Jonny is desperate to avoid bankruptcy because Meijing will get all the secured assets. The factory building (leased from the Kerrville Airport Authority which is co-owned by the City and County) will go back to the Airport Authority. U.S. Financial will likely lose everything. Soaring America Corporation - the US subsidiary of Meijing - which owns 20% of Mooney is alive and well and still actively exists. Soaring America Corporation (A California Corporation) shows its principal corporate address (that is Soaring America's corporate address - not it's investment or subsidiary address) as 165 AL MOONEY ROAD NORTH KERRVILLE, TX 78028.. Meijing Group may have unwisely invested in Mooney but I doubt that they are stupid..

This is for a Dukes landing gear actuator. They were last used in the first year of the M20J - 1977 (basically a carryover of much of the 1976 M20F until the engineering was finished and parts inventory was used up). It has nothing to do with your plane which has an Eaton landing gear actuator. AD 75-23-04: SB M20-190 | Mysite

So no - that is wrong. - Actually the price is stable @IvanP $2,178 in Aug. 2024 was only for shock discs. @exM20K Oct. 2024 parts price of $3,300 included shock discs and spacer assemblies, which if they came from Mooney, were expensive. Aircraft Spruce has them ( Lord Landing Gear Shock Disk J-11968-14) in stock for $178 each. $178 x 11 = $1,958 (ship free on large orders) https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/lgpages/lord-m20-mooney.php?clickkey=4860169

Is that parts + installed labor and tax or just the cost of Lord discs?