Mooney Comeback!

[rbridges]

The other thing that I think is important is something Dave Marten touched on at OSH.  Namely that we might not be the ones to spring $700,000.  on a new Acclaim, but as owners move up, it allows others to get in to the Mooney market.  The fellow that owned our Ovation purchased an Acclaim.  Because of this, and [at the time] a down turned economy we could buy the Ovation.

 

All of you know I would do whatever I can to help Mooney.  But my opinion is that there has to be a solid business plan and great leadership.  Handmade airplanes are not something that is going to generate capital quickly.  I don't know about Bill Rickert and Jerry Chen's engineering prowess, but I am hopeful they will be able to make some technological advances.

 

Also, I think MAPA homecoming is going to be a BLAST this year.  April 10-12th KERV. Be there

 

since I have so much experience running an aviation company, I'm going to give my two cents.  

 

I think Mooney needs to have a second line of planes.  Something along the lines of a J model that more people can afford.  IMO it would be similar to Cirrus having the SR20 for people with less deep pockets.  I don't know any solid numbers, but I would assume that Cirrus sells more SR20s than 22s.  Although there may be less profit per unit, it does capture a portion of the market they would have lost.

[rbridges]

You would think that that would be the case, but it turns out that Cirrus sells way more SR22s than SR20s. People who can afford a plane in that price category don't mind spending an extra 50K for the bigger engine and paying for a little more fuel. Flight schools are about the only exception.

I agree with your sentiment. The numbers don't add up, though, unfortunately.

Jim

 

haha.  I knew as soon as I typed that, I was going to be proved wrong.  I didn't realize it was a 50K jump; I thought it was much larger.  

[aviatoreb]

since I have so much experience running an aviation company, I'm going to give my two cents.  

 

I think Mooney needs to have a second line of planes.  Something along the lines of a J model that more people can afford.  IMO it would be similar to Cirrus having the SR20 for people with less deep pockets.  I don't know any solid numbers, but I would assume that Cirrus sells more SR20s than 22s.  Although there may be less profit per unit, it does capture a portion of the market they would have lost.

 

http://speednews.com/documentaccess/103376_gama.pdf

 

In 2013 gama report, 51 Cirrus sold, 11 of which were SR20's and 40 were SR22s.

 

The idea of M20J has been gone over a lot here though, and the discussion included the remark that being handbuilt, the cost of the Mooney lies heavily in the manpower to build an especially intensive process.  Meaning the incremental cost of hanging a bigger engine on the nose is not a great fraction of the cost.

 

I for one am really turned off by the g1000 as it locks you in to mooney and garmin cooperation for upgrades, such as WAAS, svt, or whatever.  I would much sooner a multi-component setup, g500, gns430(650) and so forth.  Easier to upgrade components, and easier to repair a broken part, and cheaper.

[aviatoreb]

I found out tonight that the Ovation that went left for China last week was Jack Wiegand's.  For those of you who were at OSH you will remember that Jack is the young fellow who set the world record for round-the-world youngest pilot.  Jerry Chen invited Jack to go to China to the aviation summit or trade show in Xian.  Apparently the show runs from October 19-24th.  Jack will be telling of his trip around the world [but it didn't include China].

 

For whatever it is worth, I believe that we are talking about an investor not a buy out.

 

Neat - 

 

Xi'an by the way is the home of the Terracotta Army.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terracotta_Army

 

Its also the hometown of my students wife, and also the place of that titanium manufacture company that custom built my bikes I mentioned in another friend.

[rbridges]

http://speednews.com/documentaccess/103376_gama.pdf

 

In 2013 gama report, 51 Cirrus sold, 11 of which were SR20's and 40 were SR22s.

 

The idea of M20J has been gone over a lot here though, and the discussion included the remark that being handbuilt, the cost of the Mooney lies heavily in the manpower to build an especially intensive process.  Meaning the incremental cost of hanging a bigger engine on the nose is not a great fraction of the cost.

 

 

 

that is a surprising statistic.  Thanks.

[DAVIDWH]

JUST ANOTHER STASTIC:

 

Since 2005 the Chinese govt. has invested over $100,000,000 in the transportation sector of the world economy.

 

With those numbers flowing, I would expect the grand opening of the Kerrville opera house soon.

 

Source: BBC

[mooneygirl]

Jack Wiegand's round-the-world Ovation is on display at an aviation expo in Xian, China.  I am not sure where the title Mooney Fortunes tied to China comes from.  That was not mentioned in the interview.  Here is an interview with Jerry Chen:

[1964-M20E]

http://speednews.com/documentaccess/103376_gama.pdf

 

In 2013 gama report, 51 Cirrus sold, 11 of which were SR20's and 40 were SR22s.

 

The idea of M20J has been gone over a lot here though, and the discussion included the remark that being handbuilt, the cost of the Mooney lies heavily in the manpower to build an especially intensive process.  Meaning the incremental cost of hanging a bigger engine on the nose is not a great fraction of the cost.

 

I for one am really turned off by the g1000 as it locks you in to mooney and garmin cooperation for upgrades, such as WAAS, svt, or whatever.  I would much sooner a multi-component setup, g500, gns430(650) and so forth.  Easier to upgrade components, and easier to repair a broken part, and cheaper.

Ditto

 

Even if I had the money to buy a new one I would not want a G1000 system. Give me discrete components (steam gauges, aspen 1000, etc.) integrated together for information sharing but I can replace individual pieces.

[fantom]

As I've suggested before, whatever comes off the new Mooney International production line, it should have minimal fly away avionics, or, at best, one standard avionics package.

 

Bring new birds to avionics shops, the experts, to install any of the many hundreds of configurations a new owner can dream up. In my experiences Mooney was neither cost effective nor very flexible with panel design.

 

Let Mooney do what they do best.....build airframes, give the panel work to avionics experts. Given differing international requirements, this would simplify work in Kerrville, permitting them to focus on their core competency.

 

Yes, I'd what them to be 'green' airframes also. Let paint shops and designers do their thing. As a well known Mooney Director once told me, "if you got a good paint job from the factory, it was an accident."

[RobertoTohme]

What's with the ploy against the G1000?  Look around!  Cirrus, Cessna, Piper, Diamond and Kodiak have all turned to G1000 (that I can recall on top of my head) in the piston arena, not to mention turboprops and jets...  We're talking here about sales of new airplanes, not retrofitting used ones; technology sells, and not having what's standard on the competition is a major drawback.

 

Whether we like it or not, Garmin is taking over the avionics world by storm not only in pistons, but all the way up to Part 25 certified jets, and since Mooney is not in the basic trainer market they would shoot themselves in the head by not being up to par with the competition.

 

As to the paint jobs, my Eagle was repainted at the factory in 2009 on an Ovation scheme shortly before the shutdown, and 4 years down the road still looks flawless, brand new...  It used to be on the old days that their paintjobs weren't that good, but the late Mooney improved a lot on that front in the early 2000's.

[Rhumbline]

What's with the ploy against the G1000?  Look around!  Cirrus, Cessna, Piper, Diamond and Kodiak have all turned to G1000 (that I can recall on top of my head) in the piston arena, not to mention turboprops and jets...  We're talking here about sales of new airplanes, not retrofitting used ones; technology sells, and not having what's standard on the competition is a major drawback.

 

Ploy against?  As evidenced by what you've noted with the gaining popularity of advanced avionics in light aircraft, any ploy is on the part of avionics and aircraft maufacturers.  Preference is at issue and, make no mistake, all of the glittery gadetry that so many tout comes with a tremendous price tag.  Many want it and will, apparently, gleefully pay for it.  I'm gratified to learn, however, that I'm not singular in opinion but at least among a minority. 

 

I've had plenty of time sitting before a panel full of CRT's and too much time heads down programming an FMS. Well enough for an airliner but not what I want for enjoying the view and navigating out of the window well below the flight levels. When I decided to give aviation another try, I very deliberately bought a relatively simple plane with a normally aspirated motor, Johnson bar, hydraulic flaps and a basic avionics package.  In fact, I rendered it even more basic by replacing the whole instrument-current stack with something even less sophisticated but eminently reliable.

 

My rekindled interest in flying has, of late, had me considering a new (factory fresh) airplane and of note to me is this business of avionics ( I'll forego my thoughts on a more basic and affordable Mooney as why that can never again happen has been amply asserted elsewhere).  I just want a couple of NAV/COM's and a Xponder with round dials and steam gages but they seem to go from a transceiver and a handheld GPS to something unnecessarily sopisticated and, in my opinion, distracting for the average driver.  Since I doubt that an airplane can compare to the refrigerator/icemaker equation, I'm inclined to agree with anyone who suggests that a minimal avionics package be made available or accompany the airplane to wherever it can be customized and keep the cost down for those who don't want or need it.    

[NotarPilot]

I couldn't agree more. The standard feature of the G1000 and Avidyne systems in newer planes makes GA aircraft incredibly expensive for first time buyers. Give me a six pack, a 430 and I'm a happy flyer. I would like to see the option of a base aircraft without all the glitz that could be geared more towards a budget owner like myself.

Plus, there are a lot of VFR pilots with no need for a G1000 with all the bells and whistles. If I had to guess, entry level planes like the Skyhawk, Cherokee, SR-20 and even a Mooney M20J could be about $80k-$100k less expensive without the standard G1000 and other frills. And perhaps selling MORE less expensive planes would mean increased profitability through higher volume, but then again what do I know?

[DonMuncy]

I recognize and appreciate your positions. However, I strongly suspect you are in a relatively small minority. If that is the case, if you should ever decide to sell your plane, you will likely take a hit, as most buyers will pass over yours to get the bells and whistles.

This is not saying either way is good or bad, just a factor to be considered.

[RobertoTohme]

I understand your positions as well, and agree that a G1000 is overkill for basic VFR; unfortunately, looks like these days aircraft manufacturers are making planes that are IFR capable with all the bells and whistles, apparently under the direction of their market analysts who think that's what the market for a new plane has to have...   Perhaps not ideal for some, but that's reality.  Pricey? Hell yeah; Will manufacturers listen? I seriously doubt it.   

[aviatoreb]

+1 

 

I am not a fan of the all in one packaged avionics.  Any small problem or desire to upgrade becomes an all in one coupled and expensive problem.

[BigTex]

I don't think anyone would purchase a Mooney without a fully instrumented IFR panel including auto-pilot.  If they're looking for a VFR aircraft, there's better choices out there.  I've actually priced out both steam guages and glass cockpits and if doing one from scratch, believe it or not, the cost is almost a wash.  So I really don't see very many folks opting for steam gauges when purchasing a new aircraft.

[Rhumbline]

I recognize and appreciate your positions. However, I strongly suspect you are in a relatively small minority. If that is the case, if you should ever decide to sell your plane, you will likely take a hit, as most buyers will pass over yours to get the bells and whistles.

This is not saying either way is good or bad, just a factor to be considered.

 

My Good Sir, I've admitted my minority status.  As for the remainder, the old airplane is likely worth more as parts.  It cost less than a used car and has already been willed to my nephew along with the vintage Lincoln Continental he very much desires and the air machine may keep the old Ford going.  The airplane cost me less than a used car and, given the perceivable future of GA, its whole value may never exceed the sum of its parts.

 

I understand your positions as well, and agree that a G1000 is overkill for basic VFR; unfortunately, looks like these days aircraft manufacturers are making planes that are IFR capable with all the bells and whistles, apparently under the direction of their market analysts who think that's what the market for a new plane has to have...   Perhaps not ideal for some, but that's reality.  Pricey? Hell yeah; Will manufacturers listen? I seriously doubt it.   

 

I doubt it too.  I'm looking to buy a new airplane and few options are available.  Again, I believe I'm of a singular opinion or among a minority but is it really in the best interest of any manufacturer to ignore the fledgling market and bemoan the lack of demand for the middle market?  I dunno...  I don't know the first thing abount profitably building and marketing airplanes (though I'd bet that the number of used Cirrus ads in TAP out number any two or three popular models of another more venerable maker).  I just want to buy what I want.  I realize, however,  that there are increasingly geriatric, techno and patrician aspects of GA and, in any case, many can take some solice in knowing that they represented the last of a generation of recreational airplane owners.

 

I don't think anyone would purchase a Mooney without a fully instrumented IFR panel including auto-pilot.  If they're looking for a VFR aircraft, there's better choices out there.  I've actually priced out both steam guages and glass cockpits and if doing one from scratch, believe it or not, the cost is almost a wash.  So I really don't see very many folks opting for steam gauges when purchasing a new aircraft.

 

Again, I would.  My personal opinion is that a single engine airplane is not an inherently suitable IFR platform.  That raised some hackles.  An aircraft without a full complement of ice protection simply cannot safely or legally operate at the MEA's in my neck of the woods at any time of the year due to known or forecast icing or freezing levels so that driver has a lot of really expensive stuff to pop up through or drop down through a layer.  More sobering to me, though, is that should that proven motor fail or suffer a significant power loss in hard IFR and you do not care for what you see when you pop out, it may be the last thing you see. I'll catch hell for this too...  What on Earth do you guys want an autopilot for?  I thought you people like to fly!  Managing the autopilot for the satisfaction of the check airman during PC's was the toughest part of the ride for me as I never used the damn thing on-line!   

 

 

 

 

[ghovey]

VFR Mooney at an introductory price? Steam gauges, no autopilot. You wouldn't sell 5 of those a year. And they would still cost $400,000. Cessna just announced yesterday the Skycatcher program is dead. They cannot make an introductory airplane under 200 k and make money.

You want VFR buy a Cub. Great plane. Affordable. You want a single engine plane you can fly comfortably and safely at the flight levels and travel 1000 km nonstop and get there in under 5 hours. That should be the new Mooney. Yes it will cost at least $600,000.

There is no business model to support low cost hand built airplanes. Not built in America. 100 LSA companies and only a handful are selling any numbers. New 172 selling for $340,000.

This is a tough business with declining demand and increasing costs. There is only one direction to go. Build the fastest, best performing, sexiest looking piston single in the world. People will buy that.

[fantom]

I must be in a real minority as a dyed in the wool hand flying VFR cross country Mooney pilot. Jim

When the heck are you finally going to fix your auto-pilot, Jim?

[rbridges]

I must be in a real minority as a dyed in the wool hand flying VFR cross country Mooney pilot.

It's a shame.

Jim

 

It is a shame.  If everyone had your enthusiasm, aviation would be booming.

[jetdriven]

I must be in a real minority as a dyed in the wool hand flying VFR cross country Mooney pilot.

It's a shame.

Jim

 

Nope, the opposite. Its far more fun VFR.  I often take <200NM trips at 1000' and look out the window. There are still a lot of 1977 Firebirds on blocks in my part of the country!

[jetdriven]

When the heck are you finally going to fix your auto-pilot, Jim?

Dont make me come up there and fix it for you. A working autopilot is a lot of fun itself.

[aviatoreb]

Just for sake of discussion: I used to own an airplane that I think is relevant to this discussion.  My first airplane I owned was a 2003 Diamond DA40.  That was the year before Diamond went all G1000 for all of their airplanes.  It also had no autopilot.  I hand flew that airplane for I think about 300 hours, including getting my instrument rating (it was fully IFR cert - steam guage, but with a 530/430 stack - not waas), and I flew carefully cherry picked - light IFR with that plane.

 

It was configured that way by Embry Riddle as one of their fleet of trainers.  My tail number was N805ER.  I think they figured that their trainers should not need autopilot for sake of training future professional pilots good stick and rudder.  I think that plane was really useful for my own stick and rudder as I bet I would have over used my autopilot early if I had one, thus never developing stick and rudder.  Funny thing was when I wanted to add an autopilot later, it was impossible, since none of the autopilot makers, most notably STEC, were any longer extending their STC list, and the factory would not retro install the original oem KAP140 (Diamond is not a very helpful company in that way....they were just telling me to buy a new plane...and eventually I did!  A Mooney!).

 

I think Embry Riddle used to have M20J's in their trainer fleet too.

 

I really don't like G1000 for sake that if you want WAAS - you must pay $25K to upgrade to Mooney since it is not a Garmin upgrade thing, but that STC is owned by Mooney.  To do the same thing in a G1000 Diamond to WAAS is 15k by the way.  What will it cost to upgrade the G1000 to ADSB?  Who knows.   For this kind of price, for $25k, I could upgrade my steam guage Mooney (with a G430W) to G500!!  Or for 15k I could buy an aspen panel with SVT.  If one of the panels breaks, then I replace that panel.  If I want to get ADSB out (which I will do soon), I can buy the King KT74 drop in replacement for $2500+ I think....  I prefer modular.  I just think G1000 costs a lot more than the same kind of modern glass capability as a modular system.  

 

OTOH, I am perfectly happy with my steam guage rocket.  vacuum gyro, KFC200 autopilot, electric vacuum backup, an electric gyro attitude backup, GNS430W, Garmin Aera on the panel as a backup (poor man's GNS530...roughly the same size).  KT76 old-school mode-c-transponder  soon to replaced by a KT74 new school adsb-out transponder.

[fantom]

Seriously though, guys, it all comes down to time, money, and proficiency. If you need to be somewhere on a schedule, you need an instrument rating and, to varying degrees depending on proficiency, a very well-equipped airplane. Every system you add to a plane is just another that will have to be maintained. It all adds up. If it is about the destination, get the instrument rating or fly commercial. If it is about the journey, keep it simple and enjoy the ride. Jim

Good observations, you VFR pilot I have found that since the fuel cost surge it is many times much cheaper to fly commercial. If one knows what to do, it's no more time consuming than flying GA, depending on location, of course. A drink, a meal, stretching my legs, air conditioning and a lavatory are further inducements. Also, since I've been flying since the last ice age, I now do it mostly for relaxation. Flying practice approaches or twitting the engine to save that last drop of fuel LOP holds little interest for me. So, even in flying, what goes around comes around. Fly safe and have fun up there!