New Mooney Sales - M20 Upgrades?

[Guest]

9 hours ago, 201er said:

Other - price reduction. Their new airplanes are just no competitor to a used airplane. Second door? Cmon, really? What use are two doors in a four seat airplane with the useful load to only carry two people?

They gotta up the useful load, stick in the parachute gimmick, all while cutting the price by at least 30% or the plane just doesn't compete. 

They are going to have to replace the landing gear system to get any more payload out of it.

A 30% price reduction will certainly mean sending production off shore.  Would you be willing to call the employees in Kerville and tell them the happy news?

Clarence

[mike_elliott]

10 hours ago, 201er said:

Second door? Cmon, really? What use are two doors in a four seat airplane with the useful load to only carry two people?

It may have made the difference in saving one life I know of. It would be huge on my list on a new plane.

[Marauder]

Pilot relief tube. Turboprops and jets have it. Why not the Mooney. The joy of using it is priceless. Best upgrade I have in my M20J.
José

We're going to need check your prostrate José. You keep talking about that relief tube of yours. How about a lifetime supply of Depends instead?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Mooneymite]

Want to sell more Mooneys?  Lower the price.

Simply make it the best bang for the buck.

[Marauder]

The number 1 thing they can do is not go bankrupt. Mooney has a history of being bought, sold and going bankrupt. Cirrus has shown they know how to manage their business.

Why would someone buy a new Mooney (aside from deep pockets) with the uncertainties of whether Mooney will be there? They are in a tough market with established competitors who find a way to keep trucking along.

They need to address consumer confidence to start.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[bradp]

1 hour ago, M20Doc said:

A 30% price reduction will certainly mean sending production off shore.  Would you be willing to call the employees in Kerville and tell them the happy news?

Clarence

If they're really only selling 11/year Kerville is still at risk of closing its door again.  

[1964-M20E]

I like the second door they should have put it in 50 years ago.

Price I think is a big issue for many pilots who are not buying the plane for their personal business travel and can write off the expenses.  Mooney is trying to organize partnerships which is great but getting pilots together is like herding cats and for me it would have to be a 6 or greater partners to make it work.

Full electronic ignition and fuel injection would be great.  As mentioned above I think subbing out components to other facilities that can capitalize on automation in manufacturing could save many hours of hand forming parts like the tube frame, landing gear etc.  CNC machines could cut and robot welded with minimal assistance from workers could increase quality and decrease costs especially if subbed out a little or no investment in machinery.  I think the tail cones wings and other components could largely be riveted by robots as some underutilized plant with the advantage of every rivet being photographed and cataloged.

As for the panel I prefer an all electronic modular type approach opposed to the full glass G1000 approach but that is me.

Finally I know the economics don't work but bring back and offer the J air frame with a TNIO360 on it and manual gear.  Would increase production of similar components for both lines.  Economies of scale start working for you.

Better yet offer a EXJ as a fast build kits even a EX10J.  Rivet one skin on the tail cone, rivet ailerons, elevators and rudder and assemble the kit.  Mechanical gear,flaps, and you control what avionics you want on it.  Maybe this would be a place to try new alloys for the current 4130 steel components as well s other improvements.

 

Pressurization would be nice but pressurizing a square box does not work very well.

 

 

Just my thoughts

 

 

[Seth]

12 hours ago, GeorgePerry said:

I won't argue that point...Now I have the STC allowing me to fill up to 89 Gal, when the gas is cheap I top off.  But 90% of the time I run the plane at 75 Gal since there's no reason to lug extra weight in the air unless I have to.

I agree George-

 

I have a 98 gallon capacity and usually keep 60 in the wings for flexibility.  When I need longer legs or find less expensive fuel I top off.  Otherwise that's a lot of weight to carry around.

With my former F model and 54 gallon bladders, I would top off after every flight.

-Seth

[Ron McBride]

Building each airplane by hand is very expensive.  Out source the wing spars, cage, wiring to a car company, yes: just order 5000 units.

These planes are for the rich.  I am not rich and never will be.     But Mooney, keep making parts and planes so that I and many others can keep ours in the air.

Ron

[KSMooniac]

Automation will never come to an industry with sales volume measured in the dozens. The capital expense for machines and tooling would never make economic sense. Even bizjet wire harnesses and rivet operations are done by hand today.

737 fuselages are mostly riveted by machine, but they're being produced at a rate of more than one per day so it makes sense. Not to mention the sales price supports the millions of dollars in machine and tooling costs.

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk

[Igor_U]

2 hours ago, Hyett6420 said:

Totally irrelevant to my mind.   If the company can make the aircraft cheaper elsewhere,then the employees have two options, 1. Take a pay cut to match the off shore to keep it on shore, 2. Work harder with fewer employees to match offshore.  Otherwise any company worth its salt will outsource.  

I personally feel that too much of the mooney is hand made, the steel frame could be made by BMW by machine in a car plant for a fraction of the time and effort that Kerville do it.  The wiring loom is made by hand, REALLY, REALLY, in this day and age each planes loom is made by hand!!!.  Well i dont know if you have noticed but the car industry does it by machine, thousands of them per day! Spar manufacture, offshore it and ship it bsck in if needs be, or car plant it.  Mooney need to update their processes.  Too many laws (read expense) have been made re health and safety of employees for any factory these days to employ people. Automate the hell out of it where they can.  

Oh and add a parachute!  

Hyett,

You never worked in aerospace, don't you? Or took a tour of a (big) plane factory?

it's all in numbers of units and planes will never be up there with cars. Not even B737/A320s that are leaving their factories like 2 a day come close to a automotive assembly line!

Kerville workers could work for free and Mooney still couldn't reduce prices 30% and make money. It's tough business and most of the companies go under...

 

 

Regards,

 

Igor

 

 

 

 

[201er]

10 minutes ago, Igor_U said:

Kerville workers could work for free and Mooney still couldn't reduce prices 30% and make money. It's tough business and most of the companies go under...

If only the lawyers would work for free then

[Bob_Belville]

As I have observed before on another thread or two, ISTM Mooney's challenge is much less engineering than it is sales/marketing. Even if Cirrus is better in every way, and it certainly is not, there ought to be a lot of folks interested in buying something other than the dominant player. Millions of people bought Ford Pintos - think about that! Mooney has a great deal of sizzle to sell. 

"Okay boys, this is what we make, quit making excuses concerning your competition - everybody has competition, move some planes or we're getting someone who can." Google "Red" Motley - Nothing Happens Until Someone Sells Something. 11 planes this year? They ought to do more than 1 a month by mistake! The good people in Kerrville deserve a better effort from sales. 

(Bob Kromer could sell Mooneys in Antarctica and he's not a "salesman".) 

Richard and Dirk were talking at Summit about a big new marketing program about to be unveiled. 

[larryb]

Annual G1000 software updates. Not allowing me to have the latest features in my new airplane is a deal breaker.

[aviatoreb]

2 hours ago, KSMooniac said:

Automation will never come to an industry with sales volume measured in the dozens. The capital expense for machines and tooling would never make economic sense. Even bizjet wire harnesses and rivet operations are done by hand today.

737 fuselages are mostly riveted by machine, but they're being produced at a rate of more than one per day so it makes sense. Not to mention the sales price supports the millions of dollars in machine and tooling costs.

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk
 

 

How many doors does a 737 come with?  I think I will get one of those.

Wait - never mind - no parachute.

[Piloto]

7 hours ago, Marauder said:

 

We're going to need check your prostrate José. You keep talking about that relief tube of yours. How about a lifetime supply of Depends instead?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

I know you prefer Depends but where and how do you dispose of them? How many extra you carry in your flight bag? 

José

[Marauder]

I know you prefer Depends but where and how do you dispose of them? How many extra you carry in your flight bag? 
José

They are easy to dispose of. I typically hit the men's room on arrival and slip into a pair of underwear and pitch the Depends in the trash. They are absolutely no spill. Even if you have an elephant sized bladder.

There is one, not to be named Mooney owner, who ended up wearing an extra pair I had with me as insurance.

I usually carry two for each trip.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Piloto]

Just now, Marauder said:

 

They are easy to dispose of. I typically hit the men's room on arrival and slip into a pair of underwear and pitch the Depends in the trash. They are absolutely no spill. Even if you have an elephant sized bladder.

There is one, not to be named Mooney owner, who ended up wearing an extra pair I had with me as insurance.

I usually carry two for each trip.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Do you put them on before flight or when the needs come while in flight. Do you have a video?

[Marauder]

Do you put them on before flight or when the needs come while in flight. Do you have a video?

On before the flight. The new style are really thin and feel like you are wearing normal underwear. Diaper technology has advanced faster than aviation technology :-)

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[201er]

5 minutes ago, Marauder said:

On before the flight. The new style are really thin and feel like you are wearing normal underwear. Diaper technology has advanced faster than aviation technology :-)

Do are you saying marketing needs to include a pallet of diapers to sell airplanes?

[Bob_Belville]

1 hour ago, Hyett6420 said:

...The question you actually need to ask yourselves is why does a 98k aircraft in 1982 now cost 750k amd not 339k which is what it should cost if it had tracked the RPI.  

Andrew

In 1982 the only models made were the J and the K so which unfortunatley are no longer being built so the base cost has to be adjusted. Price in the long body, the bigger engine, the redundant 24V electric system and the much more capable avionics for starters before applying the RPI.

What's the equivalent price comparison for Piper & Beech? 

[KSMooniac]

The legal climate is absolutely to blame for most of the insane prices in our world today. That started in the early 80s, and led to the production decline that in turn caused prices to increase. Every supplier in the production chain has liability exposure, and it gets compounded all the way thru the line until the plane is rolled out. High development and cert costs combined with very low volume production means new stuff is unaffordable to most. Quite a shame.

There is no easy fix, either. I'm just thankful I can barely afford a 39 year old plane that meets my needs better than anything else out there.

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk

[ArtVandelay]

Composites are not lighter in the GA world, unfortunately. They offer a lot of advantages, but not weight savings.

My understanding is that composite,carbon fiber are more resistant to hail damage and less man hours to manufacture, than hand made fabrication we do today.

[Guest]

The Toyota factory down the street from the airport here poops out a Corolla every 55 odd seconds,. They therefore can afford machines to do all sorts of tasks.  Airplane manufacture has and will always be a very small market, I doubt that automation will ever become the norm.

Clarence 

[KSMooniac]

My understanding is that composite,carbon fiber are more resistant to hail damage and less man hours to manufacture, than hand made fabrication we do today.

Not always true. Hail resistance is dependent on thickness, and for light GA planes this can add extra weight beyond what is needed for normal loads/stress.

If designed well with a good tooling/manufacturing plan, they can be less labor intensive to build versus riveted aluminum. But not always! Often they end up much heavier and more expensive than aluminum construction.

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk