Ultras Certified!

[yvesg]

14 hours ago, xcrmckenna said:

When I was at the factory earlier this month I was told the M10 program has ended. There is something new that is coming.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I said it right at the beginning as soon as I have seen it... the M10 tail is too small!

Yves

[cbarry]

Congratulations to Mooney for receiving their FAA certification on the Ultra!  I may be mistaken, but I read a long time ago that Cirrus' certification was being held up initially due to difficulty in recovering from a spin and thus the BRS was used to reach certification.  Does anyone know if that the case? They're are both nice aircraft, but I'm a little biased toward the Mooney!

[jkhirsch]

It sounds like the majority of you have forgotten about China. As far as I am concerned, the US is not Mooney's highest priority regardless of what they say.

Let's restate a couple simple premises here:

• Did the people that bought Mooney buy it to become the number one aircraft manufacturer in the United States?
•      or
• Did the people that bought Mooney buy it because they think they can make money?

What is the best way for Mooney to make money?

Do you think these people believe that they are offering a full fuel 4 place airplane?

Better yet do you think that the new management of Mooney is downright stupid?

The history of Mooney to me is bad timing combined with poor capitalization to weather the storms they went through.

While we're at it, they should take 3 of the seats out, redesign the baggage door and pitch Mooney for business use as a 1 person cargo plane.

Do you think behind closed doors they are saying that they need to 'take down' Cirrus like some played out American underdog story?

They can say all the right things to every Mooney pilot in the US and I'll continue to believe that money always tells the real story.

They bought the company to make money, there is money in more places than our good old US of A.

Please donate to my campaign to stop myopia it's a wretched condition.

Edited March 30, 2017 by jkhirsch

[Shadrach]

On 3/30/2017 at 8:22 AM, jkhirsch said:

It sounds like the majority of you have forgotten about China. As far as I am concerned, the US is not Mooney's highest priority regardless of what they say.

Let's restate a couple simple premises here:

• Did the people that bought Mooney buy it to become the number one aircraft manufacturer in the United States?
•      or
• Did the people that bought Mooney buy it because they think they can make money?

What is the best way for Mooney to make money?

Do you think these people believe that they are offering a full fuel 4 place airplane?

Better yet do you think that the new management of Mooney is downright stupid?

The history of Mooney to me is bad timing combined with poor capitalization to weather the storms they went through.

While we're at it, they should take 3 of the seats out, redesign the baggage door and pitch Mooney for business use as a 1 person cargo plane.

Do you think behind closed doors they are saying that they need to 'take down' Cirrus like some played out American underdog story?

They can say all the right things to every Mooney pilot in the US and I'll continue to believe that money always tells the real story.

They bought the company to make money, there is money in more places than our good old US of A.

Please donate to my campaign to stop myopia it's a wretched condition.

Mooney has a storied history of being purchased by companies that thought they could make money on Mooney.  As far as I know, very few of them realized much of a return. Maybe the Chinese market will prove fruitful, but it's going to be a while before we know.  I wish Mooney could find a solution to the modern fleets biggest challenge...payload.  If my 50 year old bird can take 800lbs over 600sm with VFR reserves, the latest and greatest should.

Hmmm, the 200hp Mooney market is still so robust. Since we're comparing to Cirrus, let quickly compare an SR20 to say my 50yr old F. I'll call the speed a wash as both 150Kt birds +/- 5 knots.

Usefull load goes to my F by 100lbs (likely more in may cases)

Climb rate goes to my F by a solid 200fpm margin 

Range goes to my F as an SR20 will be a glider before I hit VFR reserves.

In hindsight, perhaps the best thing Mooney could have done was refined the 252 further and worked on getting to a MGW increase. Refining the airframe engine combination and offering reasonably priced upgrades to the existing fleet might have been profitable for decades until time to design a totally new design.  

Imagine a 3000lb - 3100lb MGW 252 yielding a real 1050-1150lb useful load with all of the cabin refinement of the current birds. 205-215kts at altitude, sipping <13GPH with real range and payload.   I'm not knocking the big sixes, but it's a lot of noise, weight, fuel burn and cost for 10-20% more speed...and lousy payload

 

Edited April 6, 2018 by Shadrach

[KSMooniac]

The M20 is at the point now where it needs to lose weight to recover payload since it is limited by stall speed, and perhaps landing gear capability. Cirrus did it with the G5 evolution, and it is commendable. We all know the legendary strength of the M20 wing...If it is good for 12g's an argument can be made easily that 8g's ought to be good enough...which is still 40% more than required by the regs. Why not take 100-150 lbs out? Ditto for the roll cage.

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

[jkhirsch]

1 hour ago, Shadrach said:

Hmmm, the 200hp Mooney market is still so robust. Since we're comparing to Cirrus, let quickly compare an SR20 to say my 50yr old F. I'll call the speed a wash as both 150Kt birds +/- 5 knots.

WE ARE THE ONES MAKING THESE COMPARISONS.

There you go, that's myopia at it's finest. It's not about what WE as existing Mooney pilots think or know.

It's about the marketplace, and that again goes back to Mooney as a brand and company.

How aware do you think Cirrus purchasers are of Mooneys in general or even more details required to understand Mooney capabilities?

Which brings me back to my previous point:

• Do you think that Mooney's highest priority is market share in the USA?
•      or
• Do you think that current Mooney management's highest priority is to make the money?

You guys have done a terrific job over and over of declaring that Mooneys are not trainers and you've won the battle!

What plane do you think people show up at a flight school and see...look at the thread of Sam Husky.

Did any of you think that dude was actually going to buy a Mooney?

Edited March 30, 2017 by jkhirsch

[xcrmckenna]

I think this says it all.... it is nice to know I have another pee cup though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Browncbr1]

awesome preflight!

[gsengle]

WE ARE THE ONES MAKING THESE COMPARISONS.
There you go, that's myopia at it's finest. It's not about what WE as existing Mooney pilots think or know.
It's about the marketplace, and that again goes back to Mooney as a brand and company.
How aware do you think Cirrus purchasers are of Mooneys in general or even more details required to understand Mooney capabilities?
Which brings me back to my previous point:

• Do you think that Mooney's highest priority is market share in the USA?
•      or
• Do you think that current Mooney management's highest priority is to make the money?

You guys have done a terrific job over and over of declaring that Mooneys are not trainers and you've won the battle!
What plane do you think people show up at a flight school and see...look at the thread of Sam Husky.
Did any of you think that dude was actually going to buy a Mooney?

A Cirrus sure isn't a good trainer either

And yet how's diamond/Cessna/Piper selling?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jkhirsch]

3 minutes ago, gsengle said:

A Cirrus sure isn't a good trainer either

Doesn't matter whether you/we/anyone thinks it's a good trainer. People are being trained in them. In many cases I imagine it's those people's first exposure to GA as well.

Edited March 30, 2017 by jkhirsch

[Alain B]

1 hour ago, xcrmckenna said:

 

 

I think this says it all.... it is nice to know I have another pee cup though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

That show how Cirrus owners  are savvy about aviation . LOL 

[Ron McBride]

My flight instructor, has a Cirrus to instruct in also, He does not like the plane.  He is a retired air line pilot.  He prefers the Mooney much more.

Pilots can learn in a complex aircraft.  I was sixteen, Dad had a Comanche 250 and I learned a lot in that plane, from the right seat and then the left seat. Had maybe 75 hrs. in it, with Dad teaching (not a CFI).   My official training was in a C150.  During my Student days, I was signed off in the Comanche with about an hour of dual.

What does the Air Force and Navy teach in today?

My biggest complaint in most air craft are price, usable fuel, range and useful load.  Generally longer flights are just the 2 of us, and 700 + miles per fuel stop. Yes I have flown over 5 hours in my F.  Fuel stop and then another 4 + to me destination many times.  Many aircraft can't do this.  A third leg to make this flight would make it to long to complete in a single day.

Ron

[xcrmckenna]

That show how Cirrus owners  are savvy about aviation . LOL 

They do seem pretty entitled don't they...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[thinwing]

On 3/28/2017 at 11:00 AM, 201er said:

Cool, perhaps with the flood of current long body owners selling to upgrade to a second door, I might be able to afford a newer Mooney. 

Well you can forget about mine..I don't need the extra door

[Skates97]

9 minutes ago, thinwing said:

Well you can forget about mine..I don't need the extra door

Wouldn't getting out of the left seat to the left be just as awkward as getting out of the right seat to the right? It's much easier for me to get out of the left seat to the right side when nobody is in the right seat. As I am always in the left seat of my plane I think I'll just keep one door... (That and by the time the Ultra is old enough for me to buy on the used market I'll be 6' under )

[zaitcev]

3 hours ago, jkhirsch said:

What plane do you think people show up at a flight school and see...look at the thread of Sam Husky.

Sorry, but are you talking about China or U.S.? If the "people" you mention "show up at a flight school" in China, they are going to see L-7, not a Cirrus. It's an fine trainer for people who plan to transition to faster and heavier iron. PLAAF accepted it into inventory. Russians are making a version of it with a diesel as Yak-152.

[thinwing]

On 3/28/2017 at 4:17 PM, gsengle said:

 

Nah I don't like how it handles. Particularly don't like the bungee trim system.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Flying a Cirrus gives me left wrist carpel tunnel syndrome!

[zaitcev]

1 hour ago, N803RM said:

What does the Air Force and Navy teach in today?

Used to be all on Diamonds, but they swapped DA40 for SR20 for AF Academy a few years ago. They kept Initial on DA20 in Pueblo.

[thinwing]

On 3/28/2017 at 7:34 PM, donkaye said:

Just one question.  You're on Mooneyspace why?

Don..I think he had his Mooney repossessed by the bank and is feeling grumpy about it

[jkhirsch]

22 minutes ago, zaitcev said:

Sorry, but are you talking about China or U.S.? If the "people" you mention "show up at a flight school" in China, they are going to see L-7, not a Cirrus. It's an fine trainer for people who plan to transition to faster and heavier iron. PLAAF accepted it into inventory. Russians are making a version of it with a diesel as Yak-152.

My apologies that was unclear.

People in the US show up to a flight school what do they see? They do not see a Mooney.

[thinwing]

On 3/29/2017 at 7:02 AM, tigers2007 said:

I stumbled upon some of Piloto's postings about this in an old thread last night. I'm planning a 6.5hr cross-country and just realized that I'll probably need to pee more than once. So I ordered an 18-pack of Travel John bags that have the gel in them. I was shocked to read about these "relief tubes" as I thought those were Old Pilots Tales; my grandfather, a WW2 pilot, told me about them many years ago but I didn't believe him until now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh great!Just another reason for the general public to hate general aviation once they find out Pilotos been peeing on their homes and gardens!Gives new meaning to "golden showers"

[gsxrpilot]

I wish Mooney was still making E's, J's, and 252 Encores. You'd want two offerings of each, basic steam gauges and all glass.

You could probably drop the E's and just make the J's and the Encores. But I would love to have a new Echo. The J's and the Encores would be exactly the same firewall aft. In fact, customers could decide towards the end of the assembly process if they wanted the J or the K. That would just determine the cowl and the engine.

If the price was right, they'd sell a lot of them.

[Hank]

3 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

I wish Mooney was still making E's, J's, and 252 Encores. You'd want two offerings of each, basic steam gauges and all glass.

You could probably drop the E's and just make the J's and the Encores. But I would love to have a new Echo. The J's and the Encores would be exactly the same firewall aft. In fact, customers could decide towards the end of the assembly process if they wanted the J or the K. That would just determine the cowl and the engine.

If the price was right, they'd sell a lot of them.

Many people have said that for a long time. Seems the cost delta for the manufacturer is mostly the difference in engine pricing from Lycoming. And I've heard that the mid-body jigs are gone . . .

If mooney could acquire a used automotive welding robot at a good price, this might be possible. Remember, in theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. 

[Godfather]

1 minute ago, gsxrpilot said:

I wish Mooney was still making E's, J's, and 252 Encores. You'd want two offerings of each, basic steam gauges and all glass.

You could probably drop the E's and just make the J's and the Encores. But I would love to have a new Echo. The J's and the Encores would be exactly the same firewall aft. In fact, customers could decide towards the end of the assembly process if they wanted the J or the K. That would just determine the cowl and the engine.

If the price was right, they'd sell a lot of them.

If restarting a model like this was done you'd want the same basic avionics package for all the units to keep costs down. Steam gauges are a thing of the past so I would drop that option to differentiate new units from 30 year old aircraft. 

The price is the problem. I bet the cost delta to produce a new J and R would be very little.  If they took off 100k off the price of the ovation it would be very hard to find buyers.  I think the SR20 sells at a 1 to 10 ratio to the 22 even though it is 2-400k less expensive. 

[MooneyMitch]

5 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

I wish Mooney was still making E's, J's, and 252 Encores. You'd want two offerings of each, basic steam gauges and all glass.

You could probably drop the E's and just make the J's and the Encores. But I would love to have a new Echo. The J's and the Encores would be exactly the same firewall aft. In fact, customers could decide towards the end of the assembly process if they wanted the J or the K. That would just determine the cowl and the engine.

If the price was right, they'd sell a lot of them.

As stated many, many times by the Mooney bean counters.  It would cost mostly the same to produce a J as it does the Ovation and the Acclaim.

Therefore, sales prices would have to be similar to current sales prices, which puts in doubt that they could sell a bunch of them.