Jump to content

WOW 6 Rockets on the Market


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Rickymooneyflyer said:

Looking to buy a Mooney. Is there something going on with the Rocket I do not know? Can anyone give me a sense if this is typical? I thought the Rocket was a rare bird? Does anyone know how many are out there? Sorry for all the questions as I am a newbie.

Well that’s great!  You should buy two then.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, NJMac said:

Yep! I'll even let you store one in my hanger and I'd be glad to fly it as you request or I find fitting

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 

Ok, then he should buy 3, and store one in the hangar next time mine, in case mine is ever in the shop.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Rickymooneyflyer said:

Looking to buy a Mooney. Is there something going on with the Rocket I do not know?

The Rocket has an excellent climb rate and that’s about it. It has a whacky cg envelope and w&b profile. It is a two person airplane and they better be on the slimmer side! Very easy and almost guaranteed to be out of cg with three pax and any meaningful fuel quantity to go anywhere. And those that have long range tanks will most certainly be out of cg with pilot alone and full fuel. It is very easy to operate it out of cg which is not good. As far as units on sale there are about 100 Mooney’s for sale on controller. Excluding Piper there are by far more Mooneys than anything else.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You sound jealous, Peter. And bitter . . . like you were slow and someone else bought the Rocket you were looking at.

Ricky, I would concentrate on real information from actual Rocket owners instead of the rant above. Good luck in your search, and remember--the PPI is your friend!

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hank said:

You sound jealous, Peter. And bitter .

Not at all! You are doing a disservice by twisting things. I urge you to run some “real” w&b scenarios and enlighten yourself. There’s a spreadsheet on here somewhere if you care to find it. Run some numbers with reasonable FAA weight pilot and copilot and fuel. 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, MIm20c said:

A 252 conversion with a four blade prop would be stellar.  Paint it up like 3.14159 and copy Don’s panel. 

Hey!  That's my tail number.  Think of your own irrational number.  There are uncountably infinitely main of them.  Check the FAA registry and See that the sqrt of e is still available.  Sqrt(e)=1.6487....  That one was free - or I could "develop" another irrational number for you, for a mathematical consulting fee since a highly trained eager mathematician such as myself doesn't come cheap.  Plus the paint job scheme, was my own design - no design service - so royalties there.  Forgive me... just raising funds for more fuel.

It is true that the rocket is nose heavy - as are all large bore Mooneys, but it can be operated within balance but that takes decision making skills between loading and fuel. I drove it that way for about 6 years, but then the 4 blade mt prop changed that story dramatically as it takes 35lbs off the nose so it is truly no longer a nose heavy airplane and its light in pitch comparable to a 4 cylinder mooney.

Edited by aviatoreb
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Rickymooneyflyer said:

Great comment! Makes a lot of sense. I wonder what the actual weight difference for the additional two cylinders would be? The prop may be the equalizer.

Its the primary reason I spent all that money on a prop conversion.  Savings on weight is nice too but it makes a massive difference in balance.  The arm of the prop is even beyond the arm of the engine btw, obviously.  There are also Charlie weights in the tail which I left in place, but if the weight is more important to you than the balance, you could remove those once the lighter prop is there. There are also lightweight lipo ("blue") batteries that also can adjust weight and balance but I am not bothering with that.  It is a super plane and I really like it, and I am on my 11th year of ownership.  BTW the 4 blade is also, smoother, climbs better, better ground clearance, quieter, isn't slower (about the same) despite the extra blade since it is a better aerodynamic design, and ... it looks cool.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Rickymooneyflyer said:

All the STOL pilots put weight in the tail. Did you notice shorter landings or a lower stall speed after the prop mod?

It isn't enough a dramatically lower stall speed that its easy to notice.  I have VGs too which more so lower stall speed.  Stall speed is well below book.  But mostly I fly my AOA and not the speed.  Take of roll is easier to notice is shorted but that is not just related to stall speed.  Landing roll is noticeably shortened but that could well be the flatter disc that a 4 blade presents when you flatten out the blade it really acts like a speed brake.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Rickymooneyflyer said:

I believe this is with long range tanks. Here is the W/B Spreadsheetwb Version 3.8 231 Rocket (2).xls

Long range tanks on a Rocket are useless. I don’t think anyone in their right mind would put them in a rocket! The ones with them had them prior to the conversion.

A "conversion" does not hold its value as well as a factory Mooney. Also it has to be an exceptional airplane to even consider it over a factory airplane. I'm not certain the Rocket is.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Rickymooneyflyer said:

I know people are passionate about their Rockets. Does anyone know why Rocket Engineering stopped doing the conversion? They clearly are still in business.

They got into the more lucrative business of the propjet conversion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Rickymooneyflyer said:

I know people are passionate about their Rockets. Does anyone know why Rocket Engineering stopped doing the conversion? They clearly are still in business.

Because it’s not a Bravo and it can’t compete with certified airplanes from Mooney.  It’s a two light person airplane. And nothing wrong with that if that’s what you want and understand its limitations.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.