What should Mooney do?

[201er]

What would YOU like to see Mooney do and what do you think the viable reality should be for the company?

[triple8s]

Sell aircraft that don't cost 600,000+ with G1000. Just sell a good J or K with options on the avionics. Everyone doesn't buy their auto with every available option, why should we be forced to buy airplanes with the absolute latest and most expensive avionics packages?

[ArtVandelay]

Sell aircraft that don't cost 600,000+ with G1000. Just sell a good J or K with options on the avionics. Everyone doesn't buy their auto with every available option, why should we be forced to buy airplanes with the absolute latest and most expensive avionics packages?

I don't think G1000 is what driving the up the cost of the plane, if you tally up the cost of all the analog gauges it replaces, including engine monitor, I'll bet it's a wash.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Andy95W]

People who can afford to buy a new airplane don't much care about $50,000 difference between a new Ovation and (what would be) a new J. So why build a new J?

In the meantime the rest of us will continue to buy and fly $30-150K C-K's.

[carusoam]

Stay in business....

I intend to buy either an Acclaim or an M20E 15 years from now... Depending on work, retirement, investments and S.S.

Based on my history, it will be pre-owned.... And be somewhere between 15 and many years old...

The factory is a living means of support for our existing machines.

Having it be alive and sourcing parts also helps maintain the value of our A/C. (Within reason)

I always had interest in the turbine Mooney. Unfortunately, FF and hot side inspections are unrealistically high for private ownership by ordinary people....

My thoughts shared,

-a-

[larryb]

Produce parts at a reasonable price and lead time. Support the existing fleet! I do think the g1000 is a liability due to difficulty and expense of upgrades. Why not garmin 500 750 650 88 ? I hear the g1000 solution isn't 2020 compatible? Crazy...

[Piloto]

Mooney should build the planes in Mexico. A much lower labor cost. But don't expect a $300K new Mooney. A lot of the cost is in parts and material like engine/prop ($100K) and avionics ($100K). When you add the production cost plus some profit the best they can do is $600+K. When you want to be super fast with the latest super technology you end up being super expensive.

 

José 

[cliffy]

I see a couple of issues:
1) No pressurization
2) High labor hour input per unit (this has been the bane of our Mooneys since the beginning)

 

Higher performance Acclaim? What to improve? 

Turbine power? Again no pressurization available or possible with this airframe. Compete with turbine Malibu? ?

I think you reach a point where those who can afford a turbine want and need (age) pressurization. 

 

Now, doors on each side/ Not a bad idea! 

Build in China for a lower cost per airframe labor input-possible solution to compete. 

Build in China and assemble here? Might be a very good idea. 

But these are not big steps forward.

 

What's unique about Mooneys?

     Wing-strong and good performance, no change needed.

     Tail-good design, unique, recognizable, no change needed.

Now what holds those two together? the fuselage!

How about a new design (without the labor intensive steel cage, "sacrilege you say"?) that can incorporate pressurization. 

Not an impossible task. Design it to accept both turbine and avgas power plants. Everything except the fuselage remains the same. Now Mooney can compete with the plastic airplanes and the pressurized S/Es at the same time. The fuselage design could and should be engineered to be much less labor intensive to make. One could even stretch the idea to be able to accept the new diesel power plants now being designed. One fuselage could cover it all and now be competitive in several markets. 

This could be a very cost effective way to a new/old Mooney design and would be a giant leap forward from the old airframe. You don't have to have a complete new design and the development costs involved therein. 

Even if you stayed with the current speeds (which ain't too bad!) for flutter, harmonics and vibrations you'd still have a very competitive airplane in today's market.  

[kerry]

Bring back the M22 mustang and hang a turbine on the front of it.  I couldn't afford it but it would be fun to see.

[ArtVandelay]

They need to use 21st century technology:

Carbon fiber, lighter, stronger, less labor costs

2 doors, pressurized cabin, parachute, A/C, electronic ignition, fully adjustable seats, quieter cabin (CF should help there and increase useful load), air bags, built in fire extinguishers with heat sensors and fuel cells the resist impacts.

[FAST FLIGHT OPTIONS LLC]

 

Here is a novel idea...start by figuring out a way to increase the anemic useful load by 100+ lbs. They figured out the speed and efficiency part. Now how about utility?

[Piloto]

Building airframe sections in China is not cost effective due to the long distance  of 10,000 miles by boat and truck. Keep in mind you will also need to transport parts to China to complete the assembly. While with Mexico you are dealing with about 200 miles all by truck. English to Spanish translation is much easier than to Mandarin. And there is a lot of Spanish speakers in Texas and some English too..

 

As for improvements to the Mooney the one I would focus is in noise level. Since the introduction of the automobile noise has been a quality by which you measure the comfort of a car. Would you buy a car that sounds like an airplane?. A quiet Mooney would be a big differentiator among the competition. And it is not that expensive to achieve like pressurization or adding a turbine. 

 

José

[FAST FLIGHT OPTIONS LLC]

...As for improvements to the Mooney the one I would focus is in noise level.

 

Mooney doesn't have to solve that problem because Bose already did!

[Ron McBride]

My opinion is; a new fuselage, more headroom, a little wider and less noise.   More useful load.  Many of the new planes have a useful load of full of gas and a 150# pilot.  Carry 2 or more people and a 2 hour range.   Acclaim is a distance flying machine, You would not climb into the high teens for a 2 hour mission, would you?

 

As far a J is concerned, look at the production numbers of the SR20 vs the SR22.    The SR20 would be the direct competition to the J.

 

Ron

[1964-M20E]

I think they should bring back the J model as I have said before.  There are very few companies that only sell one model of anything and continue to be successful.  Different models with different options within reason allows you to appeal to a broader market and increase sales.

 

Oh and two doors.

[ArtVandelay]

There are very few companies that only sell one model of anything and continue to be successful.  Different models with different options within reason allows you to appeal to a broader market and increase sales.

Agreed, they need a 2 engine model, with 6 seats, or optionally 4 seats and a bathroom.

[N201MKTurbo]

If they could build a $150,000.00 J model they could sell them as fast as they could build them. But they can't, they can build a $500,000.00 stripped down J, but who is going to buy it?

 

You talk about using new materials. Well, it would be a huge investment in engineering and manufacturing and you would end up with a Cirrus or a Columbia with a Mooney tail. If the Chinese wanted to do that, why buy Mooney just start from scratch. Besides, they would end up with a "Me Too" design to compete with Cirrus. Look at how that worked out for Cessna.

[carusoam]

There are four-ish Mooney options...

Would you like the four or six cylinder variety?

And...

Would you like that N/A or TC'd / TN'd?

Having a diesel variety would be nice. More energy per gallon(pound)

Best regards,

-a-

[cbarry]

They should be slightly concerned due to the lack of qualified bidders that turned out for the current model plane since the "return of Mooney production." They are probably going to need to expand their production for a basic model, unfortunately in a lower labor-cost (this is mostly due to lower manufacturing regulations) country to produce a model that syncs with the stage of emerging demand in the world market. They then can continue to make the high end models in the U.S.A. in a traditional custom hand made approach to meet the high end performance minded buyer. This exactly what many companies have done and continue to be successful. For example, Trek bikes builds it's high end carbon fiber performance based bikes in Wisconsin to the tune of well less than 50,000 units per year, but well over 1,000,000 units are built overseas and sold around the world--including the U.S. The bottom line is Mooney should keep their core product, but consider expanding into emerging market production in order to build a model that is similar to the models most of us started with or still fly because we're "sold" on them--the "J" for example.

[cliffy]

carusoam

Piper did that with the Comanche 180 4 cyl, 250 260 6 cyl and the 400 8 cyl.

[Jerry 5TJ]

Just back from wandering Oshkosh for 4 days where I was impressed both with innovative introductions and legacy product enhancements, but I saw nothing suggesting anyone can meet the "demand" for a small, turbine Mooney-class airplane for LSA prices.

For that matter, many of the LSA planes displayed approach $200K as delivered.

Lots of neat hardware out there, loads of optimistic enthusiasm for GA. I admire the people who are working away at light aircraft improvements, including Mooney.

[Andy95W]

How about bringing out a stripped down J with a simpler engine? Maybe shorter with a carburetor instead of fancy fuel injection?

After that, in order to capture the flight training market, they could offer a fixed gear version. With a little thought, they could convert it to retract once the owner got his/her license. Perhaps call that the M20D?

Nostalgia is great, but there are good reasons the factory isn't producing the C, J, or K anymore. It is the same reason they stopped producing the E in 75, the F in 77, and the C in 78.

[ChrisH]

If they could get a pressurized diesel optimized to fly 10-20k, they could have a winner. Mooney's not a trainer, the NA market is tough with Cessna / Beech / Piper and the used market, the 20k+ turbine flyers are dominated by Pilatus / TBM / Lancair / Piper. Mooney has to find a nich that is relatively empty. Problem is that a Lancair Evolution is 1.2MM, tough to beat that with anything.

[Jerry 5TJ]

... the 20k+ turbine flyers are dominated by Pilatus / TBM / Lancair / Piper...

I count about 3,000 single engine turbine aircraft built by all 4 of those manufacturers combined in the past ~25 years: About 1,300 PC12, 1,000 TBM700 (including 850 and 900 models), about 800 Pipers (counting both Meridians and Jetprops) and a few dozen Lancairs. 

[Andy95W]

Well, the "M" in TBM 700 originally stood for Mooney, so there's your turboprop.