Zach S.

I am re-building the owner/operator list so that I can accurately gauge interest and evaluate the model breakdown. Please send me the following if you have not already done so. Owner Name: Model: Serial Number (If willing to share): Registration Number (If willing to share): S-TEC system currently installed (if any): Primary Avionics System Installed: Current Level of Interest (i.e. Low, Medium, High): Comments/Questions/Concerns: Thank you, Zach Zach.Sands@genesys-aerosystems.com

Hello Matthias, yes we've had some interest in this effort. To-date, 7 owners/operators including yourself have reached out to me to express their interest in moving this project forward. 4 of those aircraft are G1000 equipped. The newest contact reached out to me today actually. Most are saying they have a medium/moderate level of interest. Please send others my way and I will gladly add them to the list. Thank you, Zach

I've had a few owners/operators reach out with their information. Thank you, please keep them coming.

Update: I am gathering information on our legacy STC kits for the Mooney M20 series. This takes some doing, but it will yield some backup data for the Genesys team to consider. In parallel to that activity, I am asking anyone that is still interested to send me the following information via email: zach.sands@genesys-aerosystems.com. If you've already spoken with me and provided this information, there is no need to do it again. Yes, I realize that you've been down this path before and I apologize for any duplication of effort. I am re-building the owner/operator list so that I can accurately gauge interest and evaluate the model breakdown. Owner Name: Model: Serial Number (If willing to share): Registration Number (If willing to share): S-TEC system currently installed (if any): Primary Avionics System Installed: Current Level of Interest (i.e. Low, Medium, High): Comments/Questions/Concerns: Thank you, Zach

Thank you, I'll read through the previous threads to get some more background. Zach

I understand where you are coming from. Seems like it was a pretty frustrating effort all around - for numerous reasons. I appreciate the information and don't see it as "pounding on the new guy". My information was posted on this forum after a discussion with MS member and I believe that I need to be a part of the conversation so that information is accurately conveyed and everyone is on the same page. People are free to share their opinions and thoughts - moderating the conversation is not my place. Ultimately, our competitors are going to do what makes business sense to them and customers are going to purchase products that provide them with the functionality that they want at the value that they expect. I can only commit to re-examining the business case for our organization. Ultimately, if sufficient customer interest remains and the project is technically feasible, then we move to the next phase. Thus far: There is customer interest remaining, I've heard from several MS members that have attested to this. The list is growing, but remains relatively short. There are technical hurdles to overcome: Large variety of Mooney airframes and associated performance characteristics that fall under the M20 series umbrella G1000 interface challenges Not to say that these can't be overcome, but it would be a mistake to pretend that there isn't a sizeable hill to climb. Zach

Amelia, thank you for your insight. I am sorry to hear about the loss of your friend. David also shared that story with me and it is sad to learn about the passing of someone so respected and admired. Regarding the 3100, I can't speak for the past. Simply because I was not here, I don't know enough about the history, and there are always multiple sides and perspectives to every story. And at this point....I am all but guaranteed to step in "it" no matter what I say! What I will do is pick up the baton and do my best to find a path forward. My hope is that we find a suitable solution. Clear skies and tailwinds to your friend that has passed on. Zach

Dan, I can understand and appreciate that. Hopefully through the revival of this conversation we can find a solution. Zach

Matthias, I appreciate your take on this. Like I mentioned in my response to Jeff, I was not here so I won't comment on the "why". What I will do is work to figure out if we have a valid way to move forward. If we can find one and a valid business case can be made, I will advocate for it. Zach

Jeff, thank you for the information and your email. I would like to give you a call at some point next week to pick your brain a bit more. I was not with the company when the 3100 was conceived, designed, or certified - so I cannot offer an appropriate answer to the "why" question. I will say that this is my 20th year in aviation and I've had the opportunity to work for a number of avionics manufacturers, aircraft MROs, and flight departments. The relationships between product manufacturers is often very complex and is usually not as collaborative as we all would like. The aircraft manufacturer is usually the determining force behind an integration effort that would otherwise not take place. In this case, we're missing that component and as a result need to look at other avenues of integration. Zach

Thank you for the kind welcome. Those that I have spoken with already, have been a wealth of knowledge regarding the Mooney platforms. My MO is that I treat people with respect and operate with integrity. Aviation is a small community and I've worked too hard to become a part of it to compromise my own name. Like I said in my previous posts, I will do what I can, communicate honestly, and advocate to advance this effort.

Thank you Oscar, it has been a pleasure talking to you. I appreciate all of the information that you provided. While I am not in a position to make any promises and, in fact it would be foolish of me to do so, I will say that I am listening and will do what I can on my end. I understand and can appreciate the frustrations surrounding this topic. Zach

Daniel, First and foremost thank you for the call and the interest. Thanks also for helping to get the information out there. I understand that there is a storied history behind this effort and in reading the responses to your post, I can see that there is no lack of passion for the subject. We all know that completing STCs of any kind is a complex business. Certification efforts for autopilots and flight control systems only serve to compound that complexity. In short, it is no simple (or inexpensive) task for any organization to undertake for any airframe. I am relatively new to the Genesys team, so I won't pretend to know the ins and outs of what happened 2, 3, or 4 years ago. If there is a specific concern or issue, I'd be happy to address that privately. In regards to moving forward, we do need to understand who is still interested, what Mooney variant they fly, and what their level of interest is (ex. just kicking the tires and shopping the market to "here, take my money"). One proviso that I will add to Daniel's post is that the 3100 DFCS is not currently compatible with the G1000 avionics system. My understanding is that this has been discussed at length in previous posts so I won't go into the details here. This is a complex, OEM-designed, and purpose-built interface and while there is an interest in getting the 3100 to work with the G1000, no guarantees can be made. If you're interested in this effort or if you have questions, please feel free to contact me via email at zach.sands@genesys-aerosystems.com. Daniel has provided my mobile number above, but I am not always available to answer the phone. Email is your best bet and I will respond as soon as possible. Thank you, Zach Sands, Technical Sales