Mooney Factory

[Bob_Belville]

Why not?  I did it...  Jumped on my Screaming Eagle with a whopping 43 hours on my log and never felt threathed or uneasy with it.  After 7 years, 2000 hours, ATP and 2 type ratings, I can tell you there's no better foundation for precise flying techniques than a Mooney.

 

If I was able to do it, I don't see why anybody else can.

I started flying Mooneys with about 50 TT. It was in '69 so not a long body.

[RobertoTohme]

Any Mooney, long or short body, is a precise flying machine and would serve for the purpose, however, I bet Mr. Chen's intentions is to sell new planes to asian flight schools. 

 

I started flying Mooneys with about 50 TT. It was in '69 so not a long body.

[KSMooniac]

it's always easier, cheaper and quicker to amend the M20 Type Certificate to attain different versions of the same airframe.  Want an example?  The TBM850, vastly superior to the 700, is still officially a TBM700N...  It's faster and carries more weight farther than the previous versions, all this with an amendment to the original TC instead of seeking a new one...  Of course, it's greatness has solid Mooney roots, the M30; it's sad that they had to part out of that venture back then due financial reasons.

 

This is definitely true.  The 737 Next Generation (737-600, -700, -800, -900 etc) are all amended from the original TC issued in the late 60's even though these planes are vastly different from the original.

[ghovey]

Complex trainer? Already available from Piper- Arrow selling for $431,500 from the factory.

If it is a trainer only three things matter- capital cost, cost of operation and reliability. Nobody really cares how they fly.

Mooney must sell more than trainers.

[BigTex]

Complex trainer? Already available from Piper- Arrow selling for $431,500 from the factory.

If it is a trainer only three things matter- capital cost, cost of operation and reliability. Nobody really cares how they fly.

Mooney must sell more than trainers.

 

Mooney will need to find it's niche in GA... Being a complex training isn't it.  Back in the day when I was obtaining my PPL, I would see the occasional  Piper Comanche or Bellanca Viking at the airport.  They were super cool planes but were almost never used for training.  I'd look and dream how it would be like to fly one before jumping into the Piper Arrow for a lesson.

 

There's a company out there now that's retrofitting B-36's with PT-6 power plants (featured on last week's AOPA Live).  Super cool looking plane and the sound of a Bonanza's turbine spinning up was unreal.  Realistically Mooney's going to have to do something like this with their Acclaim to make them unique enough to cause someone to look.

[RobertoTohme]

I discussed this topic on the Mooney Wishlist thread here a few days ago…  That's where Mooney was heading with that "cooperation agreement" with Rolls Royce shortly before the factory shutdown; sounds like sticking a RR250 on a long body, like the Tradewind Bonanza…  I, for one, would look seriously into that as a retrofit for my Eagle.

 

There's a company out there now that's retrofitting B-36's with PT-6 power plants (featured on last week's AOPA Live).  Super cool looking plane and the sound of a Bonanza's turbine spinning up was unreal.  Realistically Mooney's going to have to do something like this with their Acclaim to make them unique enough to cause someone to look.

[ghovey]

This would put Mooney at the top of the list for 4 seat singles (which I fly solo 80%of the time anyway).

You have to accentuate the qualities that created Mooney's reputation in the first place and smooth out the problem areas-cockpit access, maybe a larger baggage door. You turn this into a 280 kt turboprop and you will get a lot more attention than if you try and sell complex trainers to Malaysia.

[aviatoreb]

This would put Mooney at the top of the list for 4 seat singles (which I fly solo 80%of the time anyway).

You have to accentuate the qualities that created Mooney's reputation in the first place and smooth out the problem areas-cockpit access, maybe a larger baggage door. You turn this into a 280 kt turboprop and you will get a lot more attention than if you try and sell complex trainers to Malaysia.

 

Moving the Vne would require strengthening the airframe, possibly only adding strengthening gussets but possibly more.

 

Just throwing out numbers because its a forum and its fun to make up stuff with bravado:

 

I will call such a turboprop Mooney a 300kt performer and it will cost 1.2M.

[BigTex]

The PT6 conversion costs $480K plus a donor B36 so you might be a little high but not by much.

[aviatoreb]

The PT6 conversion costs $480K plus a donor B36 so you might be a little high but not by much.

 

When guessing how much an airplane will cost - always guess high.  :-/  Hey but its only money and we love the sound of a turbine when it spins up.

 

(...as if I would ever afford such a thing... )

[fantom]

I will call such a turboprop Mooney a 300kt performer and it will cost 1.2M.

The Mooney guys showed me a model and drawings for just such an offering at the 1997 AOPA Convention in Orlando. 300 kts, 1,200 mile range, trying to keep it under a million bucks. It looked like a slightly stretched Bravo, and may have had 6 seats. Beautiful. I heard no more about it but that study must be sitting in a cabinet somewhere in Kerrville.

[aviatoreb]

The Mooney guys showed me a model and drawings for just such an offering at the 1997 AOPA Convention in Orlando. 300 kts, 1,200 mile range, trying to keep it under a million bucks. It looked like a slightly stretched Bravo, and may have had 6 seats. Beautiful. I heard no more about it but that study must be sitting in a cabinet somewhere in Kerrville.

 

No kidding.  Pressurized?

[fantom]

No kidding.  Pressurized?

 

I don't think so....can't have everything

[aviatoreb]

I wouldn't kick it out of my hangar.

[DaV8or]

The PT6 conversion costs $480K plus a donor B36 so you might be a little high but not by much.

 

To help put this in perspective, the Lancair Evolution kit plane costs $1,070,000 for everything you need except paint and interior and you have to put it together yourself. So slapping a new PT6 or a RR on the nose of a new Mooney is going to cost well over a million dollars for a four passenger, non pressurized single with one tiny little door to climb in. Who exactly is going to buy this plane?

 

IMO, the turbine Mooney is a non starter. To be even close to competitive with Piper, or Socata, it would require a whole new airframe and certification of the airframe. They'll have to create creative ways to repackage the M20 as it will always be piston powered, or possibly someday if Mooney, GA and humanity in general last long enough, electric.

[BigTex]

To help put this in perspective, the Lancair Evolution kit plane costs $1,070,000 for everything you need except paint and interior and you have to put it together yourself. So slapping a new PT6 or a RR on the nose of a new Mooney is going to cost well over a million dollars for a four passenger, non pressurized single with one tiny little door to climb in. Who exactly is going to buy this plane?

 

IMO, the turbine Mooney is a non starter. To be even close to competitive with Piper, or Socata, it would require a whole new airframe and certification of the airframe. They'll have to create creative ways to repackage the M20 as it will always be piston powered, or possibly someday if Mooney, GA and humanity in general last long enough, electric.

 

There's a reason, Mooney quit building aircraft and that problem hasn't gone away.  In fact, the market may have less of an appetite for the current fleet of planes now.  So I will be really interesting to see what they come up with.  Maybe they're starting things up to clear out the half built aircraft they have setting in the factory.

 

To me, with the current M20, their only option is to create something that competes against the Arrow.  The current Arrow sales for around $430K.  So if Mooney could build something in the $450k range, I think they'd compete pretty strongly there.  So maybe a smart play would start manufacturing the 201.

 

For the PT6 version.  There are folks out there that would like to have the worlds fastest four place single engine turbine aircraft.  That;s what you'd have if you took the Acclaim and put the 500hp PT6 on it.  If you priced it under $1.5M I bet it would sale.  Right now, if you want to purchase a new turbine powered aircraft, you're looking at something like the Meridan at $2.1M or a Pilatus for $2.3M.  Not that it's not a large market but there is a niche that's not being filled.

 

Their only other option would be engineer a six seater and compete in that market.... Just my two cents.

[jetdriven]

After you put 150 gallons of fuel in that turbine acclaim you can put 75 lbs in the cabin including the pilot.

[Parker_Woodruff]

I will call such a turboprop Mooney a 300kt performer and it will cost 1.2M.

That's when you go buy a TBM-700

[BigTex]

I will call such a turboprop Mooney a 300kt performer and it will cost 1.2M.

That's when you go buy a TBM-700

If you're only looking at currently manufactured aircraft, you'd have to rule out the TBM700 since they're no longer manufactured.

[ghovey]

Well, back to the idea of trying to make modest improvement to the acclaim and ovation. How about 200kts max cruise at 8500 for the Ovation and 250 kts at 25,000 for the Acclaim. Speed does sell. Look at Cessnas new marketing campaign.

[DaV8or]

To me, with the current M20, their only option is to create something that competes against the Arrow.  The current Arrow sales for around $430K.  So if Mooney could build something in the $450k range, I think they'd compete pretty strongly there.  So maybe a smart play would start manufacturing the 201.

 

For the PT6 version.  There are folks out there that would like to have the worlds fastest four place single engine turbine aircraft.  That;s what you'd have if you took the Acclaim and put the 500hp PT6 on it.  If you priced it under $1.5M I bet it would sale.  Right now, if you want to purchase a new turbine powered aircraft, you're looking at something like the Meridan at $2.1M or a Pilatus for $2.3M.  Not that it's not a large market but there is a niche that's not being filled.

 

Their only other option would be engineer a six seater and compete in that market.... Just my two cents.

 

Competing with the Arrow isn't even worth the effort. If you look at the sales reports they put out every year, they sell next to nothing in the way of Arrows. Some years they don't sell any. Maybe if this much hyped GA explosion in China happens, it might be worth it, but so far, year after year, we hear in the aviation press about everybody gearing up for China and yet... no real airplane sales. The problem there is, ordinary citizens aren't really allowed to fly. The military owns all the airspace.

 

There may be folks out there that want the world's fastest certified four place single and are willing to pay crazy money for it, but after you sell those six or seven planes, then what? If this were a good idea, the after market would be already doing it like they do for 210s and Bonanzas.

 

6 place Mooney? New type certificate. Not cheap, or easy, but likely what is necessary.

[DaV8or]

Well, back to the idea of trying to make modest improvement to the acclaim and ovation. How about 200kts max cruise at 8500 for the Ovation and 250 kts at 25,000 for the Acclaim. Speed does sell. Look at Cessnas new marketing campaign.

 

So, where's that new speed going to come from?

[BigTex]

I'm afraid you are right. I just don't see a market for the Acclaim. For what they'd have to sell it for, would put it in the G36 and Matrix price range. Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

[aviatoreb]

After you put 150 gallons of fuel in that turbine acclaim you can put 75 lbs in the cabin including the pilot.

 

Obviously that won't work.  Actually, I am very doubtful a turbine Mooney would and should happen - and I will never afford one in any case, so I am just having fun...

 

But just playing through....  It is my guess that the M20 type certificate could be modified with some supplemental engineering to allow for the changes necessary.  The necessary changes would require more fuel, and therefore more weight, and also an increased Vne.  So to do these things, it would need even better landing gear to cope with the greater weight so that you could carry 150 gallons of fuel and at least two adults.  Then for the greater Vne something would need to happen to strength flying surfaces to delay onset of flutter.  My guess is that simply adding gussets welded inside the structure at wing roots would be sufficient.  From an engineering standpoint these things can be done without too much fuss.  From a certification stand point, I dunno...

 

I was just this weekend with my sons at Udvar-Hazy Smithsonian museum at Dulles airport.  It is an amazing place - it is stunning the advancements in technology that were made in airplanes during certain periods, such as WWII.  To reach a P51 or a B29 (Enola Gay) both displayed there in just a few short years, not to mention jets, its stunning.  Or the SR71 on display there - is a stunning example of engineering - supersonic airplane in the early 1960s - so no computer simulations to anticipate the super sonic shock that wants to put out the jet engine, so a pilot operated retractible cone to adjust where the shock occurs to control for subsonic flow in the engine....wow its stunning.

 

That is an an aside, but I'm just saying, that a 320tas turbine M20 with sufficient fuel and good weight and good vne for safety could be engineered easily in my opinion.  Could it be certified for a reasonable cost?  Probably not.  Would it market and people buy it for what it would actually cost?  I don't know.  There may always be a place for the mostest-coolest-fastest niche of anything amongst the uber-rich?  I mean we can go and buy a Buggati-Vyron 270mph 1200hp car for a mere $1.7M, and that is just a piston engine...and it sells.  Not a lot but it does sell.

[RobertoTohme]

For the record, both versions of turbine Bonanzas have the same factory spec VNE; they're just flown with different climb profiles and higher altitudes where IAS decreases and power back accordingly in level flight to just below VNE.  Another example of this procedure is the Piper Cheyenne Blackhawk modified, where you're bumping VNE if power not reduced accordingly.

 

So, doing the math for a PT6, 175 kts IAS @ FL250, ISA +10 (-25C), would true 263 kts.  For a RR250, 175 kts IAS @ 18,000 ft, ISA +10 (-15C), would true 232 kts.  The RR250, being a helicopter engine by design, is most efficient in the mid teens, whereas the PT6 sweetspot is the mid 20's.

 

There may be takers for that, specially where avgas is in short supply or unavailable.