if you didn't have a mooney, what would you have?

[ryoder]

Wing Derringer Two seater twin sounds like fun.

[ArtVandelay]

11 minutes ago, teejayevans said: A plane designed to carry 1 person, no luggage and probably limited fuel, empty weight is probably 800lbs so drag from lift and frontal area is minimal. It's all about the weight and parasitic drag.

Something like the Mooney M-18?

 

 

Exactly except with more horsepower, improve the aerodynamics (the exposed cylinders aren't helping, great for cooling tho).

[Mooneymite]

29 minutes ago, teejayevans said:

.....the exposed cylinders aren't helping...

Oh!  I thought those were turbo exhaust recovery units.  

No wonder it had that high 4 GPH burn rate.

[wishboneash]

The new Pipistrel Panthera is fast and economical to operate. A modern version of the sports car look that Mooney has held ... The latest AOPA has a feature on it. 

[1964-M20E]

3 minutes ago, wishboneash said:

The new Pipistrel Panthera is fast and economical to operate. A modern version of the sports car look that Mooney has held ... The latest AOPA has a feature on it. 

I looked onto the experimental kit version and the cost was in the $170k for the kit.  I'm not sure of what all was included but I do like them and would like to have one.

 

 

[bonal]

In keeping with my reality budget perhaps an Grumman Yankee with a 150hp not too many options that I can afford and none that match my Mooney for speed and usefulness in that price range. Guess that's why I have what I have. The grass isn't always greener.

[DaV8or]

I really like the Glasair II and thought it would be a great replacement for the Mooney as I have no need for back seats, but when I started to talk with actual Glasair owners, the high landing speeds and long runway requirements soured me on them. I also like the Lancair 360, but it's even worse in this regard and has very little baggage area. I think the best fit or me know is the Velocity SE RG. Freedom of an Experimental, stall proof, a little faster than a 201 on the same fuel burn, decent landing speeds and can be used on short runways. It also looks cool.

 

[peevee]

I love the canards, but if the high approach speeds and long runways scared you away from those others, the velocity might not be for you

[Mooneymite]

http://www.boldmethod.com/blog/video/2015/12/ride-along-in-the-cirrus-vision-jet/

[aviatoreb]

On 12/15/2015 at 1:51 PM, teejayevans said:

A plane designed to carry 1 person, no luggage and probably limited fuel, empty weight is probably 800lbs so drag from lift and frontal area is minimal. It's all about the weight and parasitic drag.

You aren't impressed by 224KTAS on 7.3gph?  I am.

[steingar]

This is, Lancairs, Glasairs, Velocities and their kin mostly have really good gliding distances.  I agree that high landing speeds are a concern and would be to me, but if you can fly high enough with the kind of glide you should be able to make your way to somewhere you won't die trying to land.

[xrs135]

Super Cub.

[ArtVandelay]

On 12/15/2015 at 1:51 PM, teejayevans said: A plane designed to carry 1 person, no luggage and probably limited fuel, empty weight is probably 800lbs so drag from lift and frontal area is minimal. It's all about the weight and parasitic drag.

You aren't impressed by 224KTAS on 7.3gph?  I am.

Its Analogous to a motorcycle vs car.

That plane is a motorcycle, a Mooney is a car.

[DaV8or]

1 hour ago, peevee said:

I love the canards, but if the high approach speeds and long runways scared you away from those others, the velocity might not be for you

Maybe. I'd have to talk to real owners. I'm just going on the Velocity factory numbers. They claim 70kt landing speed and a 1400 ft take off roll and a 1500 ft landing. If that's true, that works for me.

[peevee]

12 minutes ago, DaV8or said:

Maybe. I'd have to talk to real owners. I'm just going on the Velocity factory numbers. They claim 70kt landing speed and a 1400 ft take off roll and a 1500 ft landing. If that's true, that works for me.

No flaps man. No flaps. 

I'd like to ride in one, it would be good for what I want to do

[DaV8or]

6 minutes ago, steingar said:

This is, Lancairs, Glasairs, Velocities and their kin mostly have really good gliding distances.  I agree that high landing speeds are a concern and would be to me, but if you can fly high enough with the kind of glide you should be able to make your way to somewhere you won't die trying to land.

That's what the owners of Glasairs and Lancairs will always tell you. The assumption is that you will only have an engine out during cruise. Reality is, the motor quits more often in climb or descent. These birds are made of fiberglass and when impacted, they tend to fracture and break apart much more so than aluminum. The high speeds involved make an off field landing in a plowed farmer's field much more likely to be fatal than in a Mooney.

I don't know about the Velocities. I haven't studied them much yet, but I think I will. 

[carusoam]

Dave, while you are looking...

the velocity has the best example of a backwards tail.

The whole airplane is backwards, and it has two tails!

Add in a pair of IO550s to go with that.....  They are close together for improved single engine OPs.

For economic reasons I will be staying with the one I have.

 

Best regards,

-a-

[Alan Fox]

2 hours ago, DaV8or said:

That's what the owners of Glasairs and Lancairs will always tell you. The assumption is that you will only have an engine out during cruise. Reality is, the motor quits more often in climb or descent. These birds are made of fiberglass and when impacted, they tend to fracture and break apart much more so than aluminum. The high speeds involved make an off field landing in a plowed farmer's field much more likely to be fatal than in a Mooney.

I don't know about the Velocities. I haven't studied them much yet, but I think I will. 

The structural integrity of the composite aircraft far surpasses anything made of metal.....I had a friend that they basically poured out of his Glassair 4 after a midair collision , composite is amazing , I have parted out enough planes to know that most people die getting bounced around in a cockpit that maintained its structural integrity.....

[Shadrach]

22 minutes ago, n74795 said:

The structural integrity of the composite aircraft far surpasses anything made of metal.....

Like anything, it depends on the situation.  Cirrus fuel tanks don't have a real stellar reputation for their structural integrity. To be fair, in most cases it's merely the difference between an open and closed casket...

[aviatoreb]

3 hours ago, teejayevans said:

Its Analogous to a motorcycle vs car.

That plane is a motorcycle, a Mooney is a car.

Yeah - but dude - whatever the reason - 224tas on 7.3gph.  I AM impressed.

[DaV8or]

All I know is this used to be a Lancair 360. It lost engine power due to electrical failure. (You know, electronic ignition and who ever loses all electrical power?) He attempted a forced landing in a farmer's field and this is the result. The gear was down.

 

This is the field. I would think in most single engine certified planes you would walk away here.

[Shadrach]

20 minutes ago, DaV8or said:

All I know is this used to be a Lancair 360. It lost engine power due to electrical failure. (You know, electronic ignition and who ever loses all electrical power?) He attempted a forced landing in a farmer's field and this is the result. The gear was down.

 

This is the field. I would think in most single engine certified planes you would walk away here.

Not much in the way of damage to the field. It looks like maybe he pancaked it.

[Bravoman]

On December 15, 2015 at 7:37 PM, M20F said:

Definitely a Bonanza which is better than Mooney's in just about every area other than economics (hence why I own a Mooney). 

Do you think Beech is better quality overall than Mooney? I know Beech is very good but I have been impressed with my Mooney( it is the only Mooney I have ever flown in much less owned). I think the Mooney has real good fit and finish plus that roll cage which is pretty unique. I have also heard that a Mooney airframe has never failed in flight. Your comment may be broader than what I am addressing but I think that for a little airplane the Mooney is very well put together

 

[Raptor05121]

Comanche 180

[peevee]

what this thread has proven to me is that there's really nothing out there for the money that can do what our 231 can. Either can't go as high, can't go as fast, burns more fuel etc.

I think the only suitable replacement for my mission is a lancair 360, mustang ii (maybe...) or a glassair II. The lancair is the prettiest of the bunch so maybe that's the winner LOL

I'd do horrible, horrible things to all of you for a questair venture but there is something like 60 of them total.

I'd love a cozy or velocity. A 3 seat cozy would be pretty good I think but hard to come by and probably not great in the mountains of CO. I do like to be different though.