Factory Closed Down?

[PT20J]

I needed some technical info on a part and got a timely response from the factory yesterday.

 

[MooneyMitch]

I completely understand that I’m out of the loop these days and I know nothing of Mooney goings on........but, please help me understand.........

Millions ($) were invested in Mooney for the resurrection in 2014 ( I know, I was there), coupled with what I believe, was a long term (15 year ?) plan ....... cause that’s how the Chinese do it, I was told.

What happened to the plan? 

Did the Chinese give up? Abandon it?  Drop it?  Not paying taxes due? Isn’t that uncharacteristic of them?  

Jerry Chen, etc? Chino/ M10J failure? Change in general aviation dynamics in China? A combination of all, and more?  What?

 

 

[Blue on Top]

2 hours ago, hammdo said:

https://dailytimes.com/promotions/article_d71a5660-a787-11ea-a761-cbcb95b15659.html  -Don

Interesting read.  I hope the financial facts are more accurate than the airplane "facts".  There are only 2 parts of a Cirrus that are "carbon": the main spar and one of the paint schemes.  As for the M20 shell, it was originally fiberglass.  This is the only way to get it nearly as light as the aluminum was.  Carbon would need a lightening strike mesh for dissipation/transfer (and it makes it heavier).

The article doesn't mention new owners.  Hummmmmm.

[MooneyMitch]

New owners?  I’m a mushroom in the dark.......

Has the new owner paid past due taxes?

[carusoam]

Economics were on the edge of getting better back home...

if the US/China trade agreement is helpful for Meijing...

Covid-19 Pandemic in China isn’t much better than the same pandemic around here... everything probably got shut down...

Similar economic wreckage probably ensued...

 

A reminder of who and where they are from the original buy-out from years ago...

https://archive.shine.cn/Business/transport/Meijing-Group-buys-USbased-Mooney/shdaily.shtml

 

No new owners... just tighter finances than before... with Mark’s tragedy thrown in the mix...

That’s been one heck of an international business year...

The sunshine is just starting to shine through...

Keep the engine running.... 

Go Mooney!

Best regards,

-a-

 

[Daneshgari]

This is great news. I wonder when they would catchup with their warranties and what they owe to the plane owners and service centers. They owe me a big chunk of change. 

[Daneshgari]

BTW, I had a chance to fly a Cirrus SR22T yesterday. Very impressive plane, with all the safety features. But, it is not an Acclaim Ultra. Mooney beats it hands down in every aspect, but technology. Now all we have to do is reduce the cost of production and the manpower needed to third of what it is to complete with Cirrus and put some technology in it. Funny thing is, reducing the cost is the easiest thing to do at the current production process. Have done it hundreds of time during the last four decades. 

[Blue on Top]

4 hours ago, Daneshgari said:

Funny thing is, reducing the cost is the easiest thing to do at the current production process. Have done it hundreds of time during the last four decades. 

Have you done this in aviation where mass production is not even a viable, realistic concept?

Yes, there are many areas on Mooney aircraft where labor can be reduced (the spar being one of the biggest), but how do you recoup costs of a several million dollar redesign on the margins of production of 10 or even 100 airplanes a year?  The break even time is longer than the longevity of the last 5 Mooney "Company" owners (maybe even combined).  Btw, building a fiberglass, aerodynamic shell is not one of them.

With you being an owner of one of the new airplanes, I totally respect where you are coming from and want to listen to all you have to say.

[chinoguym20]

This is great news and sounds like Mooney is coming back to life. I wonder if they will bring the M10 (Chino) back to life?  That was carbon. I hear it is now based in Kerrville, but not sure if it’s still flying.  

[Daneshgari]

Yes we have done improvements in production of prototype style of products, such as Mooney many times including the car manufacturers prototype shops. It is just the matter of improvement of FTP and reduction of waste in labor usage. They just need to learn to build with different set of mindset and don’t even need to look at different material. 

[cliffy]

2 hours ago, Daneshgari said:

Yes we have done improvements in production of prototype style of products, such as Mooney many times including the car manufacturers prototype shops. It is just the matter of improvement of FTP and reduction of waste in labor usage. They just need to learn to build with different set of mindset and don’t even need to look at different material. 

Can it be done with no changes to the design of parts and structures?   

[Daneshgari]

It sure can. 

[cliffy]

2 hours ago, Daneshgari said:

It sure can. 

Interesting

[mike_elliott]

In WWII, we were cranking out a new battleship every 2 weeks... Just saying...

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[N201MKTurbo]

11 minutes ago, mike_elliott said:

In WWII, we were cranking out a new battleship every 2 weeks... Just saying...

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 

There were only 8 battleships built during WWII the only ships that hit those types of numbers were Liberty ships and landing craft.

[N201MKTurbo]

To hell with ship production, for the years 1941 to 1945 the US produced an average of 162 aircraft per day!

That number is wrong, that was just Army air craft. The Navy boosts that number up by about 30%

[N201MKTurbo]

I'm somewhat familiar with the Mooney spar. It is a bunch of aluminum plates some with bends that are fastened together with Huck bolts and rivets. There are a few machined pieces.

I have spent a bit of time at a huge automated sheet metal fabrication facility in North Phoenix supervising the production of some parts for my previous employer (Roche). 

They have every conceivable CNC sheet metal production tool ever made along with automated riveters. I would estimate they could make that spar in a couple of hours.

[mike_elliott]

Could be, I gleaned it from this article at destroyerhistory.org concerning shipbuilding in Bath, Me

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[cliffy]

Farming out some of the manual labor items to a more automated process might be just what could be done to lower production hours. I grew up in the old style manual labor machine shop  (some with overhead lay shafts and flat drive belts). My Dad could make any of the old hand machines sing (he also had the first Moog tape controlled machining center in Las Angeles). 

But the hours of hand labor to do what a modern automated machine center can do with just basically the CAD program could cut labor significantly.  

One BIG issue though is getting FAA approval for the process and shop to do it. 

[N201MKTurbo]

23 minutes ago, mike_elliott said:

Could be, I gleaned it from this article at destroyerhistory.org concerning shipbuilding in Bath, Me

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 

Yes, they were producing a destroyer every 17 days. It took 120 days to actually build them.

[MikeOH]

50 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

They have every conceivable CNC sheet metal production tool ever made along with automated riveters. I would estimate they could make that spar in a couple of hours.

What would they charge for set-up, jigs, programming, etc.?  That is, what are the costs that would need to be amortized?

Honestly, while I love all this talk of taking massive costs out of Mooney production, I'm skeptical only because I find it hard to believe that NO ONE at Mooney has EVER thought to pursue these cost reduction ideas.  I just don't believe their management team is that ignorant that SGOTI can solve all their production woes.

[N201MKTurbo]

Just now, MikeOH said:

What would they charge for set-up, jigs, programming, etc.?  That is, what are the costs that would need to be amortized?

Honestly, while I love all this talk of taking massive costs out of Mooney production, I'm skeptical only because I find it hard to believe that NO ONE at Mooney has EVER thought to pursue these cost reduction ideas.  I just don't believe their management team is that ignorant that SGOTI can solve all their production woes.

Without drawings and an actual quote from the company I can just guess. The machines are all CNC so once the programs are developed and the production manuals written, the setup and production would be pretty easy.

Wild ass guess would be $25000 for NRE and the $5000 to $10000 per spar.

[MikeOH]

Just now, N201MKTurbo said:

Without drawings and an actual quote from the company I can just guess. The machines are all CNC so once the programs are developed and the production manuals written, the setup and production would be pretty easy.

Wild ass guess would be $25000 for NRE and the $5000 to $10000 per spar.

That seems like a pretty rational estimate.  I wonder how many manual labor hours are being spent with the present methods...

[cliffy]

Guys  You still need to factor in the FAA cost to approve the system and subcontractor. 

[MikeOH]

1 hour ago, cliffy said:

Guys  You still need to factor in the FAA cost to approve the system and subcontractor. 

Help me understand this.  I thought as long as the finished part (wing spar, in this case) met all the original part design requirements the manufacturer with the type certificate was free to pick and choose whether to build in-house or subcontract out.  IOW, I didn't think the FAA certified the production process, just the design.  Looking at it another way, would Mooney have to get FAA approval if THEY bought the fancy CNC machine and started using it themselves?  Are you telling me they are forced to use hand assembly, and manual Bridgeports since that's how the plane was originally built for certification?