Factory Closed Down?

[KSMooniac]

simple question...

What would it take to revive the three seat, diesel, training Mooney?
 
Best regards,
-a-

The wiser choice would be to start over with the same concept. Seriously.

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk

[chinoguym20]

I heard a few employees went in (without pay!) to see if they could fulfill some spares orders from off the shelves. The $ taken will pay for their insurance to continue for a few weeks. No new parts are being made or bought so get them while you can. What a terrible thing to put these people through at this time of year after all they have done.  And still no WARN or formal notice from the company owner or management.  

[Austintatious]

1 hour ago, chinoguym20 said:

I heard a few employees went in (without pay!) to see if they could fulfill some spares orders from off the shelves. The $ taken will pay for their insurance to continue for a few weeks. No new parts are being made or bought so get them while you can. What a terrible thing to put these people through at this time of year after all they have done.  And still no WARN or formal notice from the company owner or management.  

damn, that is awful.

[Parker_Woodruff]

11 hours ago, johncuyle said:

And presumably be even lighter, but one thing the K model is not known for (at least not in a good way) is takeoff performance at gross. Aluminum three blades are just too heavy for the K model (and forward CG is a problem for them, though the long body should be fine given how much heavier the big bores are) but the composite is light and with only 220hp and a relatively high gross, you’re probably going to want the three blade. Outright speed is no longer the sales pitch. Making the plane as generally useful for as many pilots as possible is. Dropping a knot or two in order to be able to more comfortably operate from more airports is a good trade off in the new, “useful planes first, speed second” Mooney.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

My takeoff performance at max weight was excellent with the 3-blade at 210 hp pre-conversion and 220 hp post-conversion.  I've never flown an Encore with a 2-blade, but I'd prefer the climb performance of 3 blades over the knot or two of speed that 2 blades would offer.

[LANCECASPER]

14 hours ago, Schllc said:

there is no real viable pressurized single other than the matrix, and I’m not sure I would fly in one of those much less own one. 

The Matrix was an unpressurized version of the PA46. The Mirage, now called M350,  is still being produced and is the pressurized version.

[Schllc]

1 hour ago, LANCECASPER said:

1 hour ago, LANCECASPER said:

The Matrix was an unpressurized version of the PA46. The Mirage, now called M350,  is still being produced and is the pressurized version.

Yes, mixed those two up but same point. 
No other pressurized single option. 

[Urs_Wildermuth]

I guess what makes this whole thing impossible to make money with is the deadly combination of low numbers / high overhead per airframe and huge manufacturing costs. That would obviously go for any renewed "J" and "K" as well. And I suppose this also has to do with the fact that they never went for that shute, it would mean a new certification which to this day in recent living history no company has survived without near or full bancruptcy. I guess the point has been reached where the M20 with it's construction is simply not viable from a manufacturing standpoint anymore.

Ok, so at this stage, we have a factory which is fully geared up to produce 2 almost identical models of airplane but has amassed massive cost and possibly debt as well as it is questionable whether each airframe sold is actually making money. What would probably be the best way is to bancrupt the whole thing to zero value and then have someone take over the factory with fresh money and streamline production as well as the model line into something which can be sold at 500k and make money. If that is possible at all, I have my doubts.

As for new clean sheet design, if one figure I have heard out of the grapevine in this discussion was $40-50 million to certify a new design, well, then the calculation is easy, at least on the surface. If one assumes that building one airframe costs north of 500k these days, then if you look at a series of maybe 500 sales, that is 100k overhead to pay for the cost of actually getting to the stage where you can produce and sell airplanes. Then add the overhead of maybe another 50k per airframe and you get to 650k, so pretty much the base price of an Ovation today. Only: They can't sell 500 Ovations, not nearly. So far they sell 10 per year approximately, so now make that calculation again and you get an airframe cost well north of a Citation!

So in order to go white sheet to be able to actually sustain a certification and sales to recuperate that money, we are talking somewhere around $ 3 billion needed to do what Cirrus has done (and needed refinancing too). That is upfront money to design and certify plus build 500 units before you earn the first dollar on selling them. I guess even 500 units won't really drive down production cost to the extent we see in the automotive industry. where we are talking millions of sold cars per model.

Looking at this, I'd have to basically say it is a totally hopeless business unless you get some Kazillionaire with enough dosh to up front finance it. And those would rather spend those on other things these days.

So a new sheet design is basically impossible today unless you are part of some large corporation which has the ressources to see that through.

 

[Schllc]

The biggest elephant in the room preventing affordability is regulation. 
$100k for a circa 1940 technology six cylinder air cooled engine, or the absolutely insane cost of the simplest of parts is 100% a function of regulation and litigation. 
Look at certified vs non certified avionics prices.

Demand is pummeled by this. 
I really thought the part 23 rewrite would have a bigger quicker impact. 
Regulation needs to be radically changed to stimulate real investment, innovation and then demand. 

[carusoam]

How many big elephants are in the room...

1) Cost of legislation

2) Cost of corporate insurance

3) Cost of certification 

4) Cost of new designs

5) Cost of employees

6) Cost of facilities

7) ?

Mike Patey/Draco builder and the Raptor guy...make it look so easy...

YouTube every week...

Best regards,

-a-

 

 

[johncuyle]

The biggest elephant in the room preventing affordability is regulation. 
$100k for a circa 1940 technology six cylinder air cooled engine, or the absolutely insane cost of the simplest of parts is 100% a function of regulation and litigation. 
Look at certified vs non certified avionics prices.
Demand is pummeled by this. 
I really thought the part 23 rewrite would have a bigger quicker impact. 
Regulation needs to be radically changed to stimulate real investment, innovation and then demand. 

Definitely true for the future of GA. We write off old airframes faster than new ones are being produced. The only way to solve that is more new planes, and that requires lower prices. Mooney would probably still be doing fine there was demand for five thousand planes a year.

That’s a less solvable problem than how to sell a hundred $800k planes into a market that does, in fact, buy three hundred $800k planes a year.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[aviatoreb]

10 hours ago, Schllc said:

The biggest elephant in the room preventing affordability is regulation. 
$100k for a circa 1940 technology six cylinder air cooled engine, or the absolutely insane cost of the simplest of parts is 100% a function of regulation and litigation. 
Look at certified vs non certified avionics prices.

Demand is pummeled by this. 
I really thought the part 23 rewrite would have a bigger quicker impact. 
Regulation needs to be radically changed to stimulate real investment, innovation and then demand. 

Quite right!

we could only wish for a bigger 300hp version of a rotax (modern) aviation engine.  Or I dream pf the EPS Diesel engine.  Im the matrix of cost and quality we have,

-old and cheap....ok.  sorta.

-new and cheap ... yeah baby.

-new and expensive ... alright...good things cost. Maybe modern things cost a lot - this is where an eps diesel would be.

-old and expense...are you kidding me?  

[Steve B]

Is this or is there a thread to discuss how ongoing maintenance of the fleet will happen if the factory does not reopen? Obviously other types keep flying long after their original manufacturer is gone - but I think it takes organization by the owners.

Are there things owners should be doing to prepare?

Also - presumably the company has the best database of active legacy aircraft. Can they use that to project what future part support is needed? At a minimum, that might give an investor interested in the support business more transparency around future revenues. What are the parts typically needed from the factory as the aircraft age?

I’m new to all of this so don’t fully understand the regulations around what must be done by Mooney vs by others. (In particular for an O3 with G1000).

What parts are currently only available via the factory vs other suppliers?

For those of us with the G1000 - how is that supported into the future. I know availability of NXi was dependent on Mooney’s participation. If the factory doesn’t come back up does that mean there is no future support path or can Garmin then move forward.


Sorry if this has been covered - I didn’t find it in a search and there have been a ton of posts in this thread.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cargil48]

On 11/14/2019 at 3:44 PM, GeorgePerry said:

Porsche (and Cirrus) have evolved to meet consumer demand.  Mooney didn't.  Porsche (and Cirrus) are still in business...Mooney isn't.  

Short and right on target. Remains to be seen - by the Mooney community  as well as potential new customers - which demands they made and were not fulfilled. 

[carusoam]

Welcome aboard, @Steve B

This is about the third shutdown that has occurred over the last two decades that I have endured...

Owning and operating a Mooney in NJ has been pretty ordinary when the factory has been closed...

The maintenance organizations are independent of the factory...

Most consumable parts come from third party suppliers...

A real hassle can occur if you bend sheet metal... this may require the factory to supply parts...

G1000 support has always been painful... it had taken a long time to get WAAS available from the last shut down...

So...

Everything goes along as usual... including engine, and prop overhauls... turbo and exhaust systems... and all other wear parts...

Finding replacement parts for unique airframe parts will be a challenge...

Waiting for word from the factory to get a better word on what is expected next....

Always put the gear down... and everything should be OK... Also don’t park outside during hail storms... thin flight surfaces are extra sensitive to dents...

PP thoughts only, not a mechanic...

Best regards,

-a-

[Guest]

On 11/27/2019 at 9:58 AM, Steve B said:

Is this or is there a thread to discuss how ongoing maintenance of the fleet will happen if the factory does not reopen? Obviously other types keep flying long after their original manufacturer is gone - but I think it takes organization by the owners.

Are there things owners should be doing to prepare?

Also - presumably the company has the best database of active legacy aircraft. Can they use that to project what future part support is needed? At a minimum, that might give an investor interested in the support business more transparency around future revenues. What are the parts typically needed from the factory as the aircraft age?

I’m new to all of this so don’t fully understand the regulations around what must be done by Mooney vs by others. (In particular for an O3 with G1000).

What parts are currently only available via the factory vs other suppliers?

For those of us with the G1000 - how is that supported into the future. I know availability of NXi was dependent on Mooney’s participation. If the factory doesn’t come back up does that mean there is no future support path or can Garmin then move forward.


Sorry if this has been covered - I didn’t find it in a search and there have been a ton of posts in this thread.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Welcome aboard Steve,

The factory is not really shut down, people are still there, they are in another hibernation.  If they shut down fully, parts like fight control skins, push rods for landing gear etc will become an issue.  But third party suppliers generally fill the need.

With a newer airplane like yours there is less worry about worn parts.

Clarence

[Steve B]

Thanks M20Doc and Carusam. That is reassuring! Gear down, gear down, gear down.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[flyboy0681]

Sigh. That's the only expression that I can come up with after reading through so many of these posts. Everyone has their own scheme on how to keep the money losing company afloat, from re-starting production of a $200k J model to placing a turbine in front of an Ovation to rebuilding older Mooney's to like new condition. The only winning idea - if you can even call it that - is to keep the doors open just to manufacture new parts, but that's probably a money losing idea as well. And to compound the pain, everyone throws out their own numbers, no matter how ridiculous. "Well, if they build  3,000 planes this year they can sell them for less than a 172". Oh brother.

The only thing we can hope for is for a knight in shining armor to come along - again. But I'm not sure how realistic that is if a Chinese company with deep pockets couldn't even make a go of it.

[fantom]

11 minutes ago, flyboy0681 said:

...The only thing we can hope for is for a knight in shining armor to come along - again. But I'm not sure how realistic that is if a Chinese company with deep pockets couldn't even make a go of it....

Always the realist, Mike. 

Be very glad your J is totally repaired!

[whiskytango]

1 hour ago, pmccand said:

Ok, I'll bite...

 How about retaining 10 employees to make legacy parts for existing users, while slowly ramping up the M10J offering as an experimental homebuilt on the side?  Transition the M10 to a certified aircraft only after the M10 proves itself in the experimental market.  Drop the retractables totally. 

I’ll invest in this formula.

I like the part about starting over with a small company devoted to support of the existing fleet.  It would seem that with a CNC machine, sheet metal brake and other metal fabrication machine tools a small company could be profitable.  As others have said, the critical parts are those that would be damaged in a gear-up landing, hangar rash, hail encounter, runway over-run etc. If the next iteration of the company (assuming there is one) is not profitable in a very short time period, maintenance of the current fleet could become very costly and time consuming. 

[INA201]

I don't know a lot about the Grumman AA-5 other than Roy Lopresti and his influence and design work on the AA-5 B Tiger.  It is a similar story to the J series. We have a few Grumman built aircraft locally and everyone is happy and not grounded.  The fact that some 11,000 Mooneys were produced leaves no need for long term parts concerns.  Coming to grips with the continual decline in pilots and aircraft sales is really the tough pill to swallow.

https://www.avweb.com/features/used-aircraft-guide-grumman-tiger/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_American_AA-5

https://grumman-parts.com/

[flyboy0681]

2 hours ago, fantom said:

Always the realist, Mike. 

Be very glad your J is totally repaired!

I qualified it by stating that I don't know how realistic it is because the odds are clearly against us.

[EricJ]

3 hours ago, flyboy0681 said:

The only thing we can hope for is for a knight in shining armor to come along - again. But I'm not sure how realistic that is if a Chinese company with deep pockets couldn't even make a go of it.

If that knight is somebody with some existing TCDSs and/or PMA or something like that, so that they're aren't dependent on the Mooney business but it supplements an existing system, I think it'd work.   I think Mooney has consistently faltered by expecting too much from a single product line.    Beech and Piper slog along with a more diverse portfolio, so even if one  line struggles there's other stuff to keep it going (usually).    Even a small supplier might be able to keep the parts business going with good management and a diverse line.

[Daneshgari]

They closed again today and send everyone home. I feel so sorry for those loyal workers. I might have the very last Mooney built in the world. S#33-0018. Let's hope it will not die for good.

Perry

[HRM]

20 minutes ago, Daneshgari said:

They closed again today and send everyone home. I feel so sorry for those loyal workers. I might have the very last Mooney built in the world. S#33-0018. Let's hope it will not die for good.

Perry

Again! Jeez!

Although I feel bad for the workers and the brand overall, the reality is that for vintage Mooney owners this pretty much means nothing.

[mooneygirl]

The whole situation is such a mess. I agree that I feel worst for the factory workers.  Beyond frustrating.