What was actually announced today?

[WilliamR]

That's the thing.  Is it really back?  It's hard to take someone serious no matter how much of a fanboy they are when it's clear running the company will just be a hobby.  Summary: temper you're expectations. 

Yep, I'm a pessimist today.

William

[HRM]

36 minutes ago, WilliamR said:

That's the thing.  Is it really back?  It's hard to take someone serious no matter how much of a fanboy they are when it's clear running the company will just be a hobby.  Summary: temper you're expectations. 

Yep, I'm a pessimist today.

William

Good point. The reality is that i wonder if there is anyone on MS that is thinking of (or able to) purchase a brand new Mooney. So, who cares?

Second, almost all Mooney owners are flying older birds. I doubt there is a large number of "OMG, Mooney is out of business and the part you need has made your bird obsolete and unrepairable." So many used parts out there it is mind boggling.

Third, I think the news that the company was OOB hurt used Mooney sales--EVEN IF IT DIDN"T MATTER. So, that's why it's a good thing they're back, even if they aren't really 

[MooneyMitch]

The owner of the small company I worked for, for 35 years had a saying on his desk which I took to heart.  I found the plaque to be quite profound for me in a very positive way.

"Find a way to do it, not a reason you can't". 

I prefer to think positively that this new Dreamteam will find many ways to do it and make it happen.

It is a HUGE undertaking indeed, but hopefully they will indeed find the ways to success!

[LANCECASPER]

On 9/4/2020 at 1:18 PM, MooneyMitch said:

The owner of the small company I worked for, for 35 years had a saying on his desk which I took to heart.  I found the plaque to be quite profound for me in a very positive way.

"Find a way to do it, not a reason you can't". 

I prefer to think positively that this new Dreamteam will find many ways to do it and make it happen.

It is a HUGE undertaking indeed, but hopefully they will indeed find the ways to success!

A saying I had on my desk for years was "Let's Think Of a Few Reasons Why It Can Be Done!"

[hammdo]

Let’s say there are really ~7500 mooney’s out there. Pre J’s probably 4500 +- a couple of hundred. J’s and up say around 3000 +- a couple of hundred. Where do you think the ‘parts’ side will focus? Probably the J’s and up because there would likely be a higher profit margin.

I would not expect much of a focus on the pre J’s just yet. Newer models sold need support right away - considering what was spent to buy them..

JMHO...

-Don

[Guest]

With Cirrus having killed off all of the other high performance aircraft competition, let’s hope that Mooney can rise to the occasion and restart production.  
 

Clarence

 

[anthonydesmet]

Just ready room spitballing 

I had a saying when starting a new task, mission, etc: define what right looks like then outline a roadmap to get there...my opinion of what right looks like in order:

1) start a premier Mooney refurbish line for all J and newer that offers three refurbish options.  Executive, standard and basic. Establish subcontract relationships with GArmin, Avadyne, etc for next, newest and older but relevant supply base. Add jobs to America’s skilled labor force with seamstress and machinists to offer interior refab, tank reseal and corrosion services.  SB-208 should be part of package.

2) Line 2: warranty service for Acclaim and Ovations under warranty

3) build parts supplier service and Mooney consulting services.....similar to the great business Mike Busch has generated.

 

then and if things go well consult all members on Mooney space about starting a new production line........

[Cruiser]

the primary focus needs to be on selling planes. 

[Matt Ward]

34 minutes ago, Cruiser said:

the primary focus needs to be on selling planes. 

Exactly. An airplane company that isn’t making and selling airplanes isn’t. 

[Missile=Awesome]

2 hours ago, anthonydesmet said:

Just ready room spitballing 

I had a saying when starting a new task, mission, etc: define what right looks like then outline a roadmap to get there...my opinion of what right looks like in order:

1) start a premier Mooney refurbish line for all J and newer that offers three refurbish options.  Executive, standard and basic. Establish subcontract relationships with GArmin, Avadyne, etc for next, newest and older but relevant supply base. Add jobs to America’s skilled labor force with seamstress and machinists to offer interior refab, tank reseal and corrosion services.  SB-208 should be part of package.

2) Line 2: warranty service for Acclaim and Ovations under warranty

3) build parts supplier service and Mooney consulting services.....similar to the great business Mike Busch has generated.

 

then and if things go well consult all members on Mooney space about starting a new production line........

Counter-point.  I don’t need Mooney for tank re-seal.  I just had my tanks resealed by Paul Beck at Weep No More.  Interior?  NOPE.  There is Jaeger and there are paint and interior shops that are outstanding.  I want Mooney for gear doors/Gear/fuel selector/glare screens/flaps/ailerons/knobs/servos/rod ends etc.  There is a great after market cowl that will be available (Sabre)...I want Mooney to be there for parts, but I see refurbishment as competition with and for the vintage dollar.  I will continue to support Hector for leather yokes etc. and let Mooney focus on competing with “the chute” for top dollar from those that have ‘em to spend.

[Missile=Awesome]

I am super curious to see what retract gear sans bungees will be offered that will allow a gross weight increase and ability to sustain a post chute deceleration vs. a fixed gear.  If “it”/we are talking a fixed gear option to obtain additional useful load would that be attractive? Would that be “A Mooney”?  

Inquiring minds are standing by....

[Raptor05121]

^^ agreed with everything he said.

I think they're on the right track. IF they make a new landing gear and IF they increase the gross weight and IF that gross weight allows bigger cabin and a parachute....Mooney has a chance.

I *really* think they need to open a lower and higher market. They should bring the M10 online as a trainer and they need to rekindle some sort of turboprop. If Mooney had stuck with SOCATA with the TBM700....they'd probably be huge today. I think I remember seeing ~1,000 units have been made and 80% reside in the US? Imagine if Mooney had made those as per their original agreement with the 301 development...

[chriscalandro]

I think there is a lot of money in the research and improvement of the vintage models.  
 

Modernized engine options for the C/E as a start.  I would certainly rather spend money on a modern replacement than an overhaul of a 60 year motor...

Improved structures that take advantage of cooling and airflow research over the last 60 years. 

General TCDS updates. 

[Urs_Wildermuth]

From the European vantage what would really be something people will look at would be an option to equip the 180-200 hp Mooneys with Diesel engines. And as an option getting them certified for automotive fuel, which is a huge thing in Europe.

Seeing that planes with similar engines (O360/IO360) such as the PA28 and C172 models have gotten STC's for Continental Diesels, it should be feasible. Also, automotive fuel STC's should be possible in one way or the other certainly for the "C" (PA28's using O360 engines do have them) and possibly the E,F and J models as well.

I would also see a role in Mooney taking over or securing STC's which go orphaned as their producers retire or go out of business. There are several STC's which are too important to be lost such as the 201 style cowls and windshields, long range tanks (some of which were even available as factory options) and so on. Mooney could also play a major role in getting additional STC's not done by some manufacturers for the lack of customer commitment as testbeds, such as the STEC 3100 or Avidyne DCF90 Autopilot upgrades which a lot of STEC 55x users crave but can't get.

As for a model line I fully agree with previous posters who say the need an entry level model as well as possibly a even higher end than the Acclaim Ultra is now. For the entry level, we have to consider that those Mooneys who were most popular in the whole history are the C and F/J Model lines which both had the highest produced numbers. What made them unique? The C (and the E to a smaller extent) is one of the most efficient planes ever built with a LOT of bang for buck on a simply, bog standard O360 coaxing out 140 kts of that 180 hp engine. The J even more so, getting 160 kts out of a 200 hp IO360. The C and J also had better payload. The C and E in Europe have the advantage of being sub 1200 kg which means ELA1 maintenance requirements.

I think in any case, to produce new airplanes, Mooney would need to massively change their manufacturing process to something where a lot more parts can be produced at much lower cost in a modular way and then combined to the final model they wish to deliver. The wing is more or less standard to all airplanes safe for fuel capacity. Fusellage may well need two sizes if an entry model is considered. The question will be, can more elements be reengineered to become composite materials to save weight and cost? What can be done to get the manufacturing price of a Mooney wing and fusellage down to a point where they can be sold for a price people will want to spend?

The M10 project was promising but if I hear what problems they ran into is probably a dead horse. If it could be redone properly, I think it could be very successful, but basically they would have to start pretty much from scratch from what I heard. They did not stop it because it worked. So in the immediate future, that leaves us with the M20 cell which is also the only way to avoid a total new certification, something which has broken the back of almost any manufacturer in recent years.

Looking at the current model line, there are options for an entry level model provided they can reduce manufacturing cost. The Ovation and Acclaim are way too heavy in their current state of furnishing and equipment to be powered by 200 hp let alone 180 or a Diesel. However, looking at the Ultra's cabin modification to two doors using lighter material as well as the idea they now have for producing light weight cowls, what options could be available to produce an entry level airplane along the lines of

- possible Medium body combinded with the 2 Door shell and light weight cowl or, if sufficient weight reduction can be achieved, the long body.

- Either Diesel or 200/210 hp injected engine with electronic ignition, possibly FADEC

- Weight optimized cabin/cowl and structure, retaining the steel cage but easier and cheaper to produce skin and possibly wings.

- 64 to 90 USG fuel capacity with a minimum of 500 lb payload with full fuel at 64 USG and 300 lb with long range tanks.

- 160-170 KTAS @ 8 USG consumption or less with Jet A1/Diesel

- Lower priced avionic set up such as the Dynon certified series/Aspen 2000 or similar with basic to intermediate AP options (Tru Track to Stec 3100)

- Shute at least as an option.

In the price range somewhere between a new PA28/C172 and an SR20.

The Ovation and Acclaim Ultra series need payload increase badly, otherwise they are very attractive planes provided they can do something about the price and manufacturing cost.

High end would have to go in the direction of turboprop/pressurized or similar. Looking at the competition, the one plane which sticks to the Mooney mantra of best bang for buck, the Jetprop conversion of the Piper Malibu sticks out, even tough also that one suffers from massive payload challenges. Mooney could come up with a 4-5 seater with pressurized cabin and a turbine or higher powered turbodiesel engine in the 250 kt range and certified to FL250 to 280 for a competitive price it would own that market pretty much. Or Mooney could consider going a different way and producing a Mooney style jet somewhere along the SF50 line but with more speed and better range. But I personally would shy away from development cost for something like that until the current line has been totally updated and is selling in number.

Personally I think Mooney is now in  position it's never been before and no other airplane company has ever been in, in so that it is owned by people who are directly involved with the brand as pilots, maintenance companies and other significant players. We all think we know what was wrong with Mooney in the last decades or so and have rapsed about it here often enough. Now it is the time where we shall see if a company run by an ownership thus conceived will indeed prevail. I certainly hope so. The approach they choose now, one step at the time and support for the fleet as a first goal and clear analysis of what is to come later, sounds a lot more level headed than other stuff i heard before.

 

[ArtVandelay]

the primary focus needs to be on selling planes. 

They need to design one first.


Tom

[LANCECASPER]

https://dailytimes.com/promotions/article_e115f834-eefb-11ea-b59c-330177cf429f.html#utm_source=dailytimes.com&utm_campaign=%2Fnewsletters%2Flists%2Fheadlines%2F%3F-dc%3D1599303621&utm_medium=email&utm_content=headline

[takair]

I’ve looked, but can’t seem to find....has anybody seen a list of majority owners and the management structure?  Seems this may be a hint to how priorities would be established.

[HRM]

48 minutes ago, takair said:

I’ve looked, but can’t seem to find....has anybody seen a list of majority owners and the management structure?  Seems this may be a hint to how priorities would be established.

I'd love to see that as well. Given that there are a huge number of active Mooney owners here, it would be great if at least one of them would weigh in.

[Missile=Awesome]

9 hours ago, Urs_Wildermuth said:

From the European vantage what would really be something people will look at would be an option to equip the 180-200 hp Mooneys with Diesel engines. And as an option getting them certified for automotive fuel, which is a huge thing in Europe.

Seeing that planes with similar engines (O360/IO360) such as the PA28 and C172 models have gotten STC's for Continental Diesels, it should be feasible. Also, automotive fuel STC's should be possible in one way or the other certainly for the "C" (PA28's using O360 engines do have them) and possibly the E,F and J models as well.

I would also see a role in Mooney taking over or securing STC's which go orphaned as their producers retire or go out of business. There are several STC's which are too important to be lost such as the 201 style cowls and windshields, long range tanks (some of which were even available as factory options) and so on. Mooney could also play a major role in getting additional STC's not done by some manufacturers for the lack of customer commitment as testbeds, such as the STEC 3100 or Avidyne DCF90 Autopilot upgrades which a lot of STEC 55x users crave but can't get.

As for a model line I fully agree with previous posters who say the need an entry level model as well as possibly a even higher end than the Acclaim Ultra is now. For the entry level, we have to consider that those Mooneys who were most popular in the whole history are the C and F/J Model lines which both had the highest produced numbers. What made them unique? The C (and the E to a smaller extent) is one of the most efficient planes ever built with a LOT of bang for buck on a simply, bog standard O360 coaxing out 140 kts of that 180 hp engine. The J even more so, getting 160 kts out of a 200 hp IO360. The C and J also had better payload. The C and E in Europe have the advantage of being sub 1200 kg which means ELA1 maintenance requirements.

I think in any case, to produce new airplanes, Mooney would need to massively change their manufacturing process to something where a lot more parts can be produced at much lower cost in a modular way and then combined to the final model they wish to deliver. The wing is more or less standard to all airplanes safe for fuel capacity. Fusellage may well need two sizes if an entry model is considered. The question will be, can more elements be reengineered to become composite materials to save weight and cost? What can be done to get the manufacturing price of a Mooney wing and fusellage down to a point where they can be sold for a price people will want to spend?

The M10 project was promising but if I hear what problems they ran into is probably a dead horse. If it could be redone properly, I think it could be very successful, but basically they would have to start pretty much from scratch from what I heard. They did not stop it because it worked. So in the immediate future, that leaves us with the M20 cell which is also the only way to avoid a total new certification, something which has broken the back of almost any manufacturer in recent years.

Looking at the current model line, there are options for an entry level model provided they can reduce manufacturing cost. The Ovation and Acclaim are way too heavy in their current state of furnishing and equipment to be powered by 200 hp let alone 180 or a Diesel. However, looking at the Ultra's cabin modification to two doors using lighter material as well as the idea they now have for producing light weight cowls, what options could be available to produce an entry level airplane along the lines of

- possible Medium body combinded with the 2 Door shell and light weight cowl or, if sufficient weight reduction can be achieved, the long body.

- Either Diesel or 200/210 hp injected engine with electronic ignition, possibly FADEC

- Weight optimized cabin/cowl and structure, retaining the steel cage but easier and cheaper to produce skin and possibly wings.

- 64 to 90 USG fuel capacity with a minimum of 500 lb payload with full fuel at 64 USG and 300 lb with long range tanks.

- 160-170 KTAS @ 8 USG consumption or less with Jet A1/Diesel

- Lower priced avionic set up such as the Dynon certified series/Aspen 2000 or similar with basic to intermediate AP options (Tru Track to Stec 3100)

- Shute at least as an option.

In the price range somewhere between a new PA28/C172 and an SR20.

The Ovation and Acclaim Ultra series need payload increase badly, otherwise they are very attractive planes provided they can do something about the price and manufacturing cost.

High end would have to go in the direction of turboprop/pressurized or similar. Looking at the competition, the one plane which sticks to the Mooney mantra of best bang for buck, the Jetprop conversion of the Piper Malibu sticks out, even tough also that one suffers from massive payload challenges. Mooney could come up with a 4-5 seater with pressurized cabin and a turbine or higher powered turbodiesel engine in the 250 kt range and certified to FL250 to 280 for a competitive price it would own that market pretty much. Or Mooney could consider going a different way and producing a Mooney style jet somewhere along the SF50 line but with more speed and better range. But I personally would shy away from development cost for something like that until the current line has been totally updated and is selling in number.

Personally I think Mooney is now in  position it's never been before and no other airplane company has ever been in, in so that it is owned by people who are directly involved with the brand as pilots, maintenance companies and other significant players. We all think we know what was wrong with Mooney in the last decades or so and have rapsed about it here often enough. Now it is the time where we shall see if a company run by an ownership thus conceived will indeed prevail. I certainly hope so. The approach they choose now, one step at the time and support for the fleet as a first goal and clear analysis of what is to come later, sounds a lot more level headed than other stuff i heard before.

 

Correct me if I am wrong, but weren’t you the guy that said your family is afraid to fly with you and that GA was dying in a previous thread?  Market had already spoken Chute won and sales had decided?  Perhaps I am wrong on this...I will have to go back to the “call me a wimp” post and re-read.  Always good to keep perspective on history.  History if not learned from is likely to repeat itself.  Mooney should certainly look at history and reality as they chart a course for the future of the company.  Last time a pressurized airframe was tried...They died.  Last time they went all in for speed...they died.  Last time they went long body and eliminated a more affordable cost option...they died.  History can be a wonderful guide when plotting a course to a long term sustainable future.  History is history.  Unless you are the one re-writing the books and burning a few pesky outliers that tell “the wrong story”.  Gear/Cabin/Weight/Chute/Avionics ALL areas that make PERFECT sense to me in looking at history and what is needed for a successful course to the future.  Fossil fuels are the “BIG” what if in the scenario.  Some want ‘em GONE in 20.  Maybe we will have a MUCH lighter battery by then.  THAT would be a game changer.

[Missile=Awesome]

1 hour ago, HRM said:

I'd love to see that as well. Given that there are a huge number of active Mooney owners here, it would be great if at least one of them would weigh in.

Or you could read the letter from the new ownership that discussed the priorities...

[Missile=Awesome]

11 hours ago, chriscalandro said:

I think there is a lot of money in the research and improvement of the vintage models.  
 

Modernized engine options for the C/E as a start.  I would certainly rather spend money on a modern replacement than an overhaul of a 60 year motor...

Improved structures that take advantage of cooling and airflow research over the last 60 years. 

General TCDS updates. 

I don’t.

[takair]

2 hours ago, Missile=Awesome said:

Or you could read the letter from the new ownership that discussed the priorities...

They discussed the priorities but not the how. They said they revealed the new ownership, but names and roles were lacking.  Maybe it was intentional, but seeing some engineering or certification  representation might be an indicator...or do they still need to hire an engineering staff to accomplish these priorities...which gets expensive.  Facebook hinted at Don Maxwell being one of the owners, will he be taking on a direct role  in engineering or production?  That would probably be a good thing if he has the bandwidth.  

[toto]

Just saw this article in my AOPA email. It's one of the few that appears to have independent quotes from Jonny Pollack and Don Maxwell. 

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2020/september/03/pilots-aircraft-owners-buy-mooney-international

Almost every other article I've seen is just quoting the press release on the Mooney home page. 

[Missile=Awesome]

17 minutes ago, toto said:

Just saw this article in my AOPA email. It's one of the few that appears to have independent quotes from Jonny Pollack and Don Maxwell. 

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2020/september/03/pilots-aircraft-owners-buy-mooney-international

Almost every other article I've seen is just quoting the press release on the Mooney home page. 

Parts support for existing owners and patience were my take-aways.  All good in my world.

[J Bird]

I hope that means there's parts available for the 252------Encore conversion.