1980Mooney

Uh...airports lose money because cost is greater than all sources of revenue (city, state and federal subsidies, landing/ramp fees, rents, FBO fees, fuel mark up, etc. I said "The notion that airports only lose money because of poor management is nonsense." You misquoted me. Companies with stagnant or declining demand protect profits two ways - they cut costs (pay less, offer less, hammer suppliers if they can, etc) or they raise prices. where they can't cut costs. And their costs are going up just like ours. I am sure they are paying more for insurance...just like us. Statistically GA continues to shrink as pilots from the "golden era" of GA pass and their estates send their hangar queens to scrap at a higher rate than new GA are built. Some airports have tried to cut cost by reducing hours, closing and abandoning a runway, etc. Most have needed to raise prices. Many airport owners, especially in Houston, have found it is more profitable and less headache to close the airport and sell to developers - I have seen closings - Andrau (700 acres) is now housing, mixed use, Old Westheimer (74 acres) is now housing, Weiser (102 acres) is being developed. I wager that the heirs of the current owners of West Houston and David Wayne Hooks will sell out by the end of the decade. I don't understand your "4x to 5.5x median income is actually not too bad" comment but your comment about "I've been more concerned with this 3x factor." is spot on. A Bonanza has gone from 4 X median income to 13 X (3.25 times more) A Cessna 172 has gone from 1.6 X median income to 5.5 X (3.45 times more) "If" Mooney were to make planes again at a profit I suspect that they would also need to price them at $900K just like a Cirrus SR22. Let's face it, when Mooney were last selling priced at $700K-800K without options, they lost money.

Spot on. You never get back what you invest. Many modifications are overhyped. Yes they generally produce some improvement, but many are disappointed. See thread from 2010 below. Some deliver big improvement - like putting an IO-550A into a M20J - but at the penalty of operating cost. Here is an example. There is a 1982 M20J, N301TV. They want $199K. The same plane was for sale in 2020 here on MS with more specs shown. It has a Missile (IO-550A) conversion by Rocket Engineering in Dec 1996 - that cost $60K back then - about $120k in today's dollar It had CAV TKS installed - someone on MS in 2020 said that costs $75K It has Monroy Long Range Tanks - that costs about $10K today It was painted in 2019 - that costs about 15-20K today It has Aspen 2000 Pro MAX with GPSS adapter - about $30K today So we are up to $255K for mods and upgrades.....excluding the cost of the basic airframe A lot of J's with mid-time engines (1,000 hours on this one) are asking $135-140K, If you add the "current cost" of the modifications it should sell for almost $400K.....but it doesnt and won't. 1982 MOONEY M20J 201 MISSILE For Sale in Longview, Texas | Controller.com

I understand that these are emotional responses. This is a difficult situation, but it is always best to deal with the facts. We are all distressed that every cost in aviation is going up - A&P shop hour rate, fuel, parts, the cost of new planes, online flight and data subscriptions, etc. For some reason people seem to overlook the fact that the cost to operate an airport and airspace is going up also. The notion that airports only lose money because of poor management is nonsense. "Three-quarters of general-aviation airports lose money every year and stay solvent only with cash from local taxpayers, says Vitaly Guzhva, a finance professor at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Florida. "An awful lot of them are in very deep financial trouble," says airport consultant David Plavin, aviation consultant and past President of Airports Council International - North America. General Aviation Airports: A National Asset (May 2012) (faa.gov) And we think the tax on the sales of AvGas, the stuff we use (how many airports have a "self serve Jet-A pump"?) at all these GA airports, pays for everything. However we overlook the fact that AvGas sales continue to decline. And think about it. There are 3,300 GA airports open to the public. 413,000 gallons of AvGas per day sounds like a lot but that is only 125 gallons per day per average GA airport. That isn't even 2 and a half 55-gallon drums per day. Busy gas station convenience stores sell more beer than that per day. If there is $1 tax on that AvGas do you honestly think the $125/day goes very far towards airport expenses? You said something about living in Italy and knowing in the US that "Capitalism is against monopolies and we have antitrust to prevent" "anything goes as long as the government is not involved". Look no further than patented drugs - the US Govt. gives developers a 15 year monopoly - it is called a "patent". And yes companies can charge anything they want - "anything goes". There are many drugs that cost $500,000 - $3 million per dose or full course. In aviation, single FBO's at any remote airport is monopoly. And as single operators buy up the FBO's in a region, it is a regional monopoly. As said above the volume is just not there at most airports to support competition. Lastly many pilots forget that the average voting, tax-paying citizen does consider flying private planes to be a "rich man's game". We are the 1% of the 1%ers. Affordability of GA flying has only gotten more expensive from the "golden era" of the 50's-60's. My next door neighbor bought a brand new Beechcraft Bonanza N35 in 1962. Per Flying Magazine review of the time, it cost $26,500. A lowly Cessna 172 was under $10,000 that year. The median income in 1962 was about $6,000. So a Bonanza could be had for about 4 X the median household annual income and a 172 for about 1.6 X. Today a Bonanza (and Textron/Beechcraft actually sold a couple Bonanza's this year) goes for about a $million and a 172 for about $440,000. Median household income today is about $80,000 so a Bonanza is about 13 X and the 172 is about 5.5 X the median household income. Look at your aviation magazines - most of it is "Turbine edition" now. Most of the discussion is about moving up to a turboprop or jet. Even here on MS there is a lot of discussion about future Mooney's with a turboprop or pressurization. So it is not surprising the average public has that perception.

Doesn't it mean "Air Carrier"? There are some other airports with the same notation, but they will say ACR Ops with more than 30 PAX or something like that

Owner information....assuming he is the pilot.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1671267902639722497 This should work....Overlays both planes with audio.

I thought I attached them....let me try to fix it.

True - it has gotten harder to become a "UFO".....especially with ADSB, radar, security cams, doorbell cams, social media, iPhones, etc.... I can't say that it is one of my goals. The contract Tower at my home drome gets really really pissed if I show up unannounced and unidentified even in the era of ADSB/GPS.

Excellent summary of the FUBAR by N531DD, a 1980 Mooney M20J. The owner, age 69, has owned it since 2001. He doesn't seem to be on MS. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/watch-f-35-head-butt-private-plane-during-low-level-intercept-over-marin N531DD Flight Tracking and History - FlightAware Watch the F-35 maneuver in front of the Mooney (with ATC audio)

Nothing new reported on the site since March 29. The website is still alive but not attended.

What do you mean by "fly with an instructor"? Do you mean a certain number of hours with a CFI before flying solo? Is it once a year or recuring? How many and how often? Thanks

Distribute costs to others?...Yes by definition. He said they set one fixed price annually- the same for every plane. He said they lose money on 500 planes (i.e. those get far more service). And the other 4,500 make enough profit to cover the loses on the 500. The cost over-run on the minority of planes needing excessive service is distributed back to the majority of planes. Another way to say it is that majority of planes subsidizes the minority of maintenance hogs. It is like insurance. And he said that he looks at the overall profitability of the business. If it doesn't make money then he raises the fixed price the next year.....Just like insurance.

At first I thought it screwed up talking about wings made of carbon (thinking carbon fiber) but it must be a poetic metaphor meaning the carbon molecules which ultimately provide the energy for lift.

“Not that making such a determination based on medical fitness is the solution, but it would be far more objective and logical, if there was a reasonable way to do so, than pulling a number out of the air like we have now.” - Any suggestions? It sounds simple but the devil is in the details. And I don’t see how the ATP rule changes insurance company decisions. They are driven by capitalism, not Congress.

The only production aircraft that uses them is the Tecnam P2012. They put some on the Lancair Evolution but I heard most owners removed them and converted to turboprop. If you look at the specs the TEO540C1A used on the Tecnam (single turbo and no intercooler) is quite a bit heavier than the TIO-540. The TEO540C1A is rated at 375 HP The standard TIO-540-AE2A is rated at 350 HP. It is much lighter and costs a lot less. Aviation is a series of trade offs and optimizations.

On a hot summer day in Houston the B Cool lasts about half an hour. This is just basic physics and a function of relative humidity. The "latent heat" load in any cooling system is directly related to the humidity of the air. The Latent heat is the heat capacity of the water vapor. And the latent heat cooling load can be more than the "sensible heat" cooling load. In the summer, the average relative humidity is: Utah around Salt Lake City - about 40% Phoenix - about 20-30 % average Houston - about 70% In Phoenix there is little to no Latent Heat load - so the B Cool works at its best. It's 3,000 BTU's are cooling the dry air - almost all sensible heat. In Utah the Latent Heat load is about 60% more than the sensible heat load. Only 63% or 1,890 BTU of the 3,000 BTU's are cooling the sensible heat (the sensible temperature). The other 37% or 1,190 BTU are consumed in the heat capacity of the water vapor. In Houston the Latent heat load is about 1.9X more (190%) than the sensible heat load. only 35% or 1,050 BTU of the 3,000 BTU's are cooling the sensible heat (the sensible temperature). The other 65% or 1,950 BTU's of the the total 3,000 BTU's are consumed in the heat capacity of the water vapor. Of course the B Cool works better in Phoenix and of course it delivers much less sensible cooling capacity in Houston. Example 5000 SCFM Air Conditioner - Required Cooling Load vs Relative Humidity That is Latent Load as a % of Total.

The upcoming Textron/Pipistrel Panthera (2024) is more of a Mooney competitor and makes a lot more sense than the Diamond.

I think the DeltaHawk 2 stroke diesel is single lever. Diesel has the highest compression.

A stronger spark does not necessarily create more power. Power is a function of the thermodynamics of the hydrogen oxygen combustion. Only if there is a problem with ignition or flame propagation will a stronger spark help.

Why not KISS? Keep It Simple Stupid. Just go with a 2 stroke diesel. DeltaHawk. Highest thermal efficiency you can get.

Right. Those things make the engine more efficient at the low power settings that automobiles typically operate. At wide open throttle peak power, you can’t make the physics any better.

There might be a couple out there. Somewhere I heard there was one in Germany. There was one for sale recently on Barnstormers.

This has been discussed a few times. There is an FAA process - they have to contact the former owners, etc. But no one has seen anyone transfer an "abandoned" Mooney STC from Mod Works, Mod Squad, Mooney Mart, etc (all the prolific STC shops that closed down). Permission is one thing - the drawings and specs are another. And I bet there is a lot of lost "know how" that was not captured in data sent to the FAA.

Apologies. I should have sent you the Service Manual. It has all the electrical parts. It is also in the Download Section here on MS Look at page 62. It is called a Cowl Actuator.. Originally it was 880050-501 made by Globe. Then they improved it to 880050-505. And later the bearings were improved with needle bearings to 880050-513. The M20K used the same geared motor actuator for the cowl flaps. This has been discussed previously - see topic below. @Larry above has the right info - Globe became Allied. http://mooney.free.fr/Manuels M20J/M20J/Mooney Service Manuel M20J Vol. 1 of 2.pdf http://mooney.free.fr/Manuels M20J/M20J/Mooney Service Manuel M20J Vol. 2 of 2.pdf

Maybe someone will ask your questions at MooneyMax. And maybe someone will be there from Mooney that is willing to to provide some insight. But if history is a guide, probably not.