nels Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 (edited) Anybody know how many new Mooneys have been built and how many have been sold? I wonder if the new ones are significantly quieter inside. That would be the most significant improvement I could imagine in a new small airplane of any make. Edited April 23, 2017 by nels Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yetti Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 Will never have that much money to spend on a hobby. Other people can talk about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyNameIsNobody Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 1 hour ago, nels said: Anybody know how many new monies have been built and how many have been sold? I wonder if the new ones are significantly quieter inside. That would be the most significant improvement I could imagine in a new small airplane of any make. Sound Deadening insulation adds weight and weight impacts useful load and speed. They invented these nifty things called intercoms and noise canceling headsets. You wear them on your head and you can listen to ATC if you are flight crew or music and other passengers if you are a "rider". Check them out. Been out for 25 years or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyNameIsNobody Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 And if you are not selfish you can monitor 121.5 when others aren't talking on it and making noises through the headsets too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Fox Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 15 minutes ago, MyNameIsNobody said: Sound Deadening insulation adds weight and weight impacts useful load and speed. They invented these nifty things called intercoms and noise canceling headsets. You wear them on your head and you can listen to ATC if you are flight crew or music and other passengers if you are a "rider". Check them out. Been out for 25 years or so. Has nothing to do with insulation , The skin on a Mooney is not a stressed Monocoque , It is loose and not rigid , and very susceptible to harmonic vibration , Basically they have spent zero dollars on R&D , or they would have done away with the cage 60 years ago...... And before every goes crazy defending the cage , They just took a Fabric covered fuselage design , and threw metal on top..... Mooneys weigh about 150 lbs more than comparable aircraft... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Fox Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 2 hours ago, nels said: Anybody know how many new Mooneys have been built and how many have been sold? I wonder if the new ones are significantly quieter inside. That would be the most significant improvement I could imagine in a new small airplane of any make. Many turboprops actually have active noise cancellation , built into the aircraft itself.......Probably big money.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsengle Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 Many turboprops actually have active noise cancellation , built into the aircraft itself.......Probably big money.... Only big bucks because it's aviation. ANR is not new tech....Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Fox Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 Just now, gsengle said: Only big bucks because it's aviation. ANR is not new tech.... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Even so , designing and incorporating a dozen or so speakers and mics , into the cabin of an aircraft , is no small task.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 For me, looking at new Mooneys is like reading about the restart of Lamborghini or watching a documentary on the new engine factory that Ferrari built to make engines for one model of car, then tore down. It's all interesting, but is completely irrelevant to me, as I'll never own any of them. Maybe some day I'll move into a newer Mooney, but pretty sure it'll be a 20th century model, too. Not because I don't want one, but for the same reason I bought a house "near" the Lake and not waterfront--it's out of my reach. No can do. But I wouldn't turn down a ride in one! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisk Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 4 minutes ago, Hank said: For me, looking at new Mooneys is like reading about the restart of Lamborghini or watching a documentary on the new engine factory that Ferrari built to make engines for one model of car, then tore down. It's all interesting, but is completely irrelevant to me, as I'll never own any of them. Maybe some day I'll move into a newer Mooney, but pretty sure it'll be a 20th century model, too. Not because I don't want one, but for the same reason I bought a house "near" the Lake and not waterfront--it's out of my reach. No can do. But I wouldn't turn down a ride in one! Out of my reach too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 Just now, bluehighwayflyer said: Yeah, me too, and I also live on the non water front side of a lovely water front street. Birds of a feather, Hank. Jim I do have the neighborhood boat ramp, though. And a view of the neighborhood pond that drains into the Lake. Just like I have an old Mooney in the hangar. If only there were more pilots around here . . . . Everybody has boats that cost more than my plane, yet I'm supposed to be the "rich airplane owner." Oh, well, at least I have a good plane, and I can still enjoy reading about the fancy new ones. It's fun to fly over the Lake and look at the traffic jams down there. Sometimes I'll go low and slow, just trolling along, then make a full power Vy climbout, just because I can. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M20F Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 In 1967 air travel was very expensive and did not have the expansive network we have today. General aviation was a real business tool and that in part drove growth. It is no small coincidence that right around deregulation the entire GA market fell apart. It wasn't the sole reason but certainly one of the drivers. If you look at the history of registration on planes it is amazing how high the percentage of business ownership was out there at one time. You see it some today but more often than not planes are a luxury like a boat and not a tool. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyNameIsNobody Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 51 minutes ago, Alan Fox said: Has nothing to do with insulation , The skin on a Mooney is not a stressed Monocoque , It is loose and not rigid , and very susceptible to harmonic vibration , Basically they have spent zero dollars on R&D , or they would have done away with the cage 60 years ago...... And before every goes crazy defending the cage , They just took a Fabric covered fuselage design , and threw metal on top..... Mooneys weigh about 150 lbs more than comparable aircraft... I agree. Why quote me? Quote the original responder Alan. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldguy Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 9 minutes ago, bluehighwayflyer said: Amen. For water access and the other niceties we are members of the local yacht club that is located a half mile down the street. Whenever I am there it is obvious that the often heard argument that GA is dying because it is too expensive doesn't exactly hold water (sorry for the pun!). There are plenty of people who could afford to fly if they wanted to. Including depreciation most of them spend more on their daily driver automobiles than I spent on my airplane. They just choose to do other things with their disposable income. +1 on that! Living near a serious bass fishing lake, I am always hit with "Take up fishing. It's cheap!" from people who have a F250/350 pulling their really nice bass boat. I'm glad they are supporting the local economy here, but like the above, I spend my discretionary funds on my airplane and rebuilding old British cars. Can't say if I would buy a new Mooney if I had the funds to do so or not. Always found it useless to speculate on impossible possibilities. I do hope people do buy them to keep the company going. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Avalle Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 I just can't get over the fact that I would have to spent the equivalent of a House in suburban Washington DC to get into a new plane. Even if I could afford it, it just does not sound right. Specially if you compare it with prices in the 70s or 80s. I would say that my "comfort zone" to consider a "new airplane" is in the 400k range. But then, I may be just a CB. Oscar 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonal Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 I feel the same way as Hank Ferrari does these incredible new designs and while very interesting of very little relevance to me. Another similar trait between Mooney and Porsche is with the 911 or 356. They took a great design and over the many years evolved it into the current model 911 but basically the same car. I think we all agree that Mooneys are kind of the same a great design that evolved but still keeping with the original design. I would equate the M20A to the Porsche 356. As for the new Mooney unless I won the Lottery could never afford one but if I could I would definitely give it a close look for consideration. Most of what my fellow Mooney spacers fly is way out of my financial league as well just happy the C's are out there. I wonder how the plastic planes will be when they are over 50 years old like mine. I was really excited about the new M10 and hope it was used as a concept that will lead the company into the future and not a failure that was abandoned. We'll see said the zen master we'll see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonal Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 And let's not forget about how costly certification is and product liability is. I have commented before about a conversation with the President of Cirrus and he said product liability is over 60 percent the cost of the airplane. This I'm sure holds true for all makes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 13 minutes ago, bonal said: And let's not forget about how costly certification is and product liability is. I have commented before about a conversation with the President of Cirrus and he said product liability is over 60 percent the cost of the airplane. This I'm sure holds true for all makes. God bless all the world's lawyers! Clarence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Godfather Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 I might be delusional but I feel the used c, e, and f market is just as important to general aviation as the new Mooney and Cirrus aircraft. It allows the middle class younger generation a chance to fly a fast certified plane which provides jobs to local mechanics, paint shops, etc ... MUCH more important than increasing shareholder values for a company in China. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M20F Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 30 minutes ago, bonal said: And let's not forget about how costly certification is and product liability is. I have commented before about a conversation with the President of Cirrus and he said product liability is over 60 percent the cost of the airplane. This I'm sure holds true for all makes. Their 2016 income statement indicates otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobertGary1 Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 35 minutes ago, M20F said: Their 2016 income statement indicates otherwise. I agee. I call BS on the cost of a plane being 60% liability. Sounds like he was making a political statement. -Robert 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 No, we need some laws. My nirvana would be to eliminate 80% or so of the lawyers, starting with the clowns who advertise on daytime & late night TV and on billboards--"Your consultation is free. There should no charge until your case is settled." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M016576 Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 1 hour ago, Godfather said: I might be delusional but I feel the used c, e, and f market is just as important to general aviation as the new Mooney and Cirrus aircraft. It allows the middle class younger generation a chance to fly a fast certified plane which provides jobs to local mechanics, paint shops, etc ... MUCH more important than increasing shareholder values for a company in China. The used market is far more important at this point to GA and it's future. Without it, there would be virtually no young GA pilots. Just military pilots, airline factory feeders and rich kids in daddy's "toy." economies of scale. To bring down the cost to where it "should be," we'd need to make flying more accessible and desirable. Move 100 times the aircraft through a factory, and they'd be much cheaper per unit, just like cars. The technology certainly isn't more complicated than a new Ford Fusion. It takes far fewer computers, wire bundles and sensors to build a mooney. Probably a little more aluminum, much less steel, though. And the engine is simpler in a mooney. The problem is the factory doesn't have the demand... so the unit cost is terribly high. sadly, flying GA is a hobby for most. An expensive one.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonal Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 8 minutes ago, RobertGary1 said: I agee. I call BS on the cost of a plane being 60% liability. Sounds like he was making a political statement. -Robert Fine I'm just recounting what he told me. Putting blame on legal vs profit or production costs dosn't change the bottom line so not sure what would motivate the guy to lie to my face. Especially since it is something me as a possible customer could verify and then find out I was lied to by the president of the company and not choose to buy his product. Is there anyone on this site that does not think product liability is a significant factor in the cost of an airplane? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M20F Posted April 23, 2017 Report Share Posted April 23, 2017 6 minutes ago, bluehighwayflyer said: Oh the nirvana it would be to live in a nation without laws. I think it is called Syria ;-) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.