Mooney Ownership - Cost, Options, Insurance and Corporate America for a 37y/o new pilot

[dkkim73]

12 minutes ago, KLRDMD said:

What about commercial? CFI, CFII, MEI? ATP? There's a LOT more pilot training available to those who want to continue to learn and continue to get better.

Sorry for the ambiguity and misunderstanding. I meant the completion of*primary* pilot training. The instrument rating fills in a lot in terms of navigation, system understanding, and operational capability. 

All of the above is still just a license to learn, for me...

[Parker_Woodruff]

15 hours ago, SilentT said:

I have a ton of respect for you Lan, and I mean no disrespect, but did you read my liability coverage part? I have a multi million dollar policy that doesn't exclude aviation. In no way am I flying without liability coverages. Under no circumstances! Its non-negotiable for me. Yes flying naked with hull does put me at risk of having a loss without coverage. Gear up landings are running about $50-70k from what I hear these days as an example. I do really appreciate your input though, perhaps shopping around for other insurance is a good way to go.

Doesn't your umbrella policy require an underlying limit?

[Parker_Woodruff]

Also, @SilentT, sorry if I missed it....what is your total logged fixed wing flight time?

What @KSMooniac said is spot on.  Insurance is going to hurt the first year.  Just fly a lot and you'll have better options.  I see the claims...it's really not something to skip on...

[flyboy0681]

One thing not mentioned, or may have been but was embedded within a reply, is that aircraft owners need to have the stomach for unforeseen, expensive repairs. Just last year, my 83 J needed the landing gear relay replaced, both tanks resealed and exhaust valves lapped. All told, the repairs came out to $23k. While this was not a "typical" year, there have been other unexpected, expensive repairs along the way. So if you don't have the ability to tolerate these unforeseen (but inevitable) situations, then I recommend that you stay away or take on partners. Other than that, aircraft ownership is a great privilege and experience.

Just my 2¢

[Shadrach]

On 2/27/2024 at 10:05 PM, SilentT said:

Thanks for the perspective, the idea also was to learn and train in the Mooney. Rather than the clapped out 152 rental with limited avionics. 

True on 252 just looking for cheaper options as well. 

Some may disagree, but I think there are benefits to learning in a clapped out rental 152. They can safely perform spins, aggressive departure stalls, accelerated stalls, cross controlled accelerated stalls, full forward slips, full side slips, slips to landing...and more with little propensity to bite the student.  Clapped out trainers are designed to tolerate the abuse from both the overly confident and the overly timid...And if one destroys one, it's not a huge loss to the fleet.

I do not understand the desire to prolong primary flight training by doing it in a high performance aircraft. I took my intro lesson in a 1966 C150F on July 29, 1998, I soloed on August 12th, 1998 with 12.5hrs. (we had to break for three days to change a cracked cylinder). My next flight after solo was on the same day. I did 2.1hrs alone with the aircraft with 16 landings. The following day I did 1.4 and 5 landings before lunch and 1.4 and 6 landings after lunch…all solo.   I came back and finished up the following summer break, taking my ride on August 8th, 1999 with just under 46hrs TT, 22 of which were solo. The point is, a lot of learning and skill honing takes place when it's just student and machine. Training in a complex aircraft robs the student of the opportunity to get that first license to learn early in their training.

Everyone is different I suppose, but I felt like having a plane that was simple enough to solo early on really accelerated my confidence and skill acquisition.  When I returned to college after getting my ticket, I met a guy who was training at a local flight school. He was training in C172s.  He had 20hrs more flight time than me but it was spread out over long period. He had yet to solo because his training was so spread out that each additional lesson was half review. Soloing is as much a license to learn as getting the ticket, if not more so. If one is aggressive in their training, one could have a PPL finished faster than one could find and buy the right Mooney.

If you have the time and money to shop for a Mooney, you have the time and money to devote to primary training. There is little practical reason to complete training in an HP/complex aircraft other than bragging rights. Which to use an archaic fighter pilot phrase, strikes me as "all balls, >ick and no forehead"...

 

[Pinecone]

I agree that PP training is best in someone else's plane.

Once past the PP, no reason not to train in the plane you will be flying.

FYI, the Air Force starts people out in a DA-20 (used to use C-172s) to the point of solo.  You are exempt from that if you already have your PP.

[Danb]

2 hours ago, Pinecone said:

I agree that PP training is best in someone else's plane.

Once past the PP, no reason not to train in the plane you will be flying.

FYI, the Air Force starts people out in a DA-20 (used to use C-172s) to the point of solo.  You are exempt from that if you already have your PP.

Kinda agree to get started in a plane simple enough to concur the principles of flight before getting into complex issues like landing gear complex autopilots and systems. I started in a Cherokee 140 rental for nine hours and one month I rented a block of ten hours of time, being an accountant and a dumb one at that I calculated that I shouldn’t pay for rentals, I already fell in love with flying so quitting wasn’t going to happen I bought a Cherokee 151 and got my PPL so after almost a year later and 147 hours I bought a 1977 J to get my instrument rating in even though I had a year and about 150 hours it was quite a transition but a good idea building time learning a complex plane and getting my IR in my Mooney now 40+ years and 4 Mooneys later I’m still flying Mooneys I thought the ‘77 was a forever plane wasn’t buy the Mooney line of planes were. It’s seems difficult to say especially when I was a young one to say I’m buying my forever plane, things change. A client of mine bought his forever plane a nice single had engine failure and scared him into NOT flying in a single engine plane he now a a twin. 
Stuff happens and changes occur 

D

[dzeleski]

2 hours ago, flyboy0681 said:

One thing not mentioned, or may have been but was embedded within a reply, is that aircraft owners need to have the stomach for unforeseen, expensive repairs. Just last year, my 83 J needed the landing gear relay replaced, both tanks resealed and exhaust valves lapped. All told, the repairs came out to $23k. While this was not a "typical" year, there have been other unexpected, expensive repairs along the way. So if you don't have the ability to tolerate these unforeseen (but inevitable) situations, then I recommend that you stay away or take on partners. Other than that, aircraft ownership is a great privilege and experience.

Just my 2¢

I’ll add to this because I completely agree, the annual done by the owner as apart of my purchase of my J was $10k, the next 3 annuals were about $5k, the last two have been $10k and $13k. On top of random stuff sprinkled in through out the year (hoses, cables, sensors, oil, etc). And we are completely ignoring the 60k in panel work.

When a cylinder goes, a valve sticks, or the tanks leak things get expensive. Then something like your spinner bulkhead cracks and the part doesn’t exist so your December annual turns into a May annual.

You can write down whatever numbers you want on a spreadsheet but the accuracy of those numbers are going to be wrong. If insurance cost is what is preventing you from moving forward I would highly reconsider the entire concept of owning an airplane at this cost bracket or RG.

I bought my J at 80 hours TT, I don’t regret it but it took me another 100 hours to feel confident enough to do my IR. There is no chance in hell I would try flying for work without an IR, your dispatch rate will be terrible or you are going to be taking massive risks to do the flight.

Just another set of pennies though.

[Shadrach]

44 minutes ago, Pinecone said:

I agree that PP training is best in someone else's plane.

Once past the PP, no reason not to train in the plane you will be flying.

FYI, the Air Force starts people out in a DA-20 (used to use C-172s) to the point of solo.  You are exempt from that if you already have your PP.

Yes, both of those are excellent trainers and both are well suited to all the maneuvers I mentioned.

As you well know, Flight training in the USAF, is a full time job. The quality, intensity and frequency of the instruction is not typical of the civilian world. I don’t remember the actual numbers but I remember being surprised reading the total time of some military pilots and seeing that the bulk of there time was in their assigned combat aircraft and comparatively little in anything else. Also surprised by the low TT numbers for some of the combat pilots. It’s a testament to the training. 

[Skates97]

21 minutes ago, dzeleski said:

There is no chance in hell I would try flying for work without an IR, your dispatch rate will be terrible or you are going to be taking massive risks to do the flight.

Just another set of pennies though.

I'm glad I don't fly for work, and when I hear of those thinking of buying a plane for commuting it always sits a little uneasy for me precisely for what you mention. Even with an IR there are times that risks might be taken that shouldn't be taken. I love flying, but I'm glad that I have the flexibility to go when I want or cancel when I want.

[Utah20Gflyer]

16 minutes ago, Skates97 said:

I'm glad I don't fly for work, and when I hear of those thinking of buying a plane for commuting it always sits a little uneasy for me precisely for what you mention. Even with an IR there are times that risks might be taken that shouldn't be taken. I love flying, but I'm glad that I have the flexibility to go when I want or cancel when I want.

I fly some for work and it has worked out well.  For my particular application I have a great deal of flexibility which is what makes it possible.  I can easily move my trip forward or back on my schedule several days and in most cases I could probably bump as much as a week.  Generally within a weeks time there will be a good day for flying.  Of course there is always the option to drive as my trips are usually around 250 miles or less.   I’ve done that a few times but not for weather but because my plane was down for annual. 
 

If I had to be at location X at exactly 8 am on March 1 or there would be consequences then I don’t think general aviation would work.  

[SilentT]

9 minutes ago, Utah20Gflyer said:

I fly some for work and it has worked out well.  For my particular application I have a great deal of flexibility which is what makes it possible.  I can easily move my trip forward or back on my schedule several days and in most cases I could probably bump as much as a week.  Generally within a weeks time there will be a good day for flying.  Of course there is always the option to drive as my trips are usually around 250 miles or less.   I’ve done that a few times but not for weather but because my plane was down for annual. 
 

If I had to be at location X at exactly 8 am on March 1 or there would be consequences then I don’t think general aviation would work.  

I agree, there are some wild assumptions here around flexibility. No matter how much I say, there is extreme flexibility some people wont accept that. Hell I drive it alot at 10 hours because I didnt like the commercial flight hour options. 

All of that to say, there are very real considerations here to not lose sight of as well.

[Shadrach]

33 minutes ago, Skates97 said:

I'm glad I don't fly for work, and when I hear of those thinking of buying a plane for commuting it always sits a little uneasy for me precisely for what you mention. Even with an IR there are times that risks might be taken that shouldn't be taken. I love flying, but I'm glad that I have the flexibility to go when I want or cancel when I want.

It's two jobs in one. Blending "must make" professional deadlines with go/no go flight planning is fraught with potential problems. I have done some flying for business, but it's my business and on my terms. If I need to be somewhere at a specific time, I fly commercial.

[Texas Mooney]

12 hours ago, donkaye said:

A few more thoughts:  While getting my 25 hour (recommended by Lycoming) $350 oil change today, I was talking to Mark who said getting parts not made by Mooney, but required to go through Mooney, are becoming nearly impossible to get.  This is because he says Mooney will not buy externally sourced parts any more.  They even offered to prepay for the parts and Mooney said no.  Nobody understands their reasoning.  Mooney is still making parts, but that is all.

Who is "Mark"?  Can you elaborate on your statement "Mooney will not buy externally sourced parts any more"? 

[Shadrach]

25 minutes ago, Texas Mooney said:

Who is "Mark"?  Can you elaborate on your statement "Mooney will not buy externally sourced parts any more"? 

Reads to me like Mooney’s suppliers have set terms at cash on delivery or prepayment. It’s likely not that they “won’t” buy externally sourced parts, but more that they don’t have sufficient cash reserves to meet vendor terms.

[geoffb]

I've been flying to my project sites for years and now do it in a 262 conversion, so I've got some direct experience.  Can be a huge time saver and definitely a frustration reducer and increases the number of nights in my own bed.  Did it in an E for many years in the Northwest crossing mountains.  The plane didn't have the capability to give me super dispatch reliability, but if you need to go, you drive or fly the tube.  The combination of ice and MEAs in my neighborhood often limited options for the E.

I would not do my instrument or commercial in a 252.  I did both in my E and that was no problem.  As a practical matter, you spend too much time flying the engine instruments in a turbo and it would distract from learning instrument flying.  Same for the commercial.

Before I spent the money on a 252, I'd want some sort of guarantee from my employer that this was and will continue to be allowed.  The next CFO could pull the rug out from under this in a heartbeat.  Say airplane and people get weird.  I say it because it has happened to me.  New CEO, no more personal aircraft.  Bam.  Get it and any terms they want in writing.  A decent letter of indemnity, liability insurance that matches the company auto policy and makes them named insured should address the concrete concerns.  The emotional concerns can be harder to address.

They can be expensive to keep up.  I do most of my own maintenance, but for a single, these are pretty complex airplanes.  I spent 3x the time on the K that I spent on the E.  More  "stuff" makes more stuff to maintain.  My E was cheap to own, my K not so much.  If you are looking at putting 300 hours a year on it, it will consume time and money.

And, 160 kts average on 10 gph average on an average 3-hour leg?  Not gonna happen.  For me, flight in the mid teens, first hour is 17 gals climbing to 15,000 at 120 indicated.  Following hours at 12 gph (average) 165kts TAS cruise @ 15,000.  A little less fuel if it's below ISA.  Mine's a couple knots slow due to the TKS install.

For years my normal trip was Western OR to the N Cal, about 430 nm.  For that, I bought an E and never regretted it.  Cheap to buy, cheap to keep, honest 150 kts, and 10.5 gph block to block.  If it wasn't for 10,000 FT MEAs I might still have it.

Edited February 28 by geoffb

[Fly Boomer]

35 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

Reads to me like Mooneys suppliers have set terms at cash on delivery or prepayment. It’s likely not that they “won’t” buy externally sourced parts, but more that they don’t have sufficient cash reserves to meet vendor terms.

Or outstanding debt.  Unlikely a supplier would ship new parts even with cash up front unless outstanding balance paid.  I wouldn't.

[donkaye]

1 hour ago, Texas Mooney said:

Who is "Mark"?  Can you elaborate on your statement "Mooney will not buy externally sourced parts any more"? 

Mark runs Top Gun in Stockton, California, one of the major Mooney Service Centers in the Country.  I've had my airplane serviced there since I bought it nearly 32 years ago.  Cash for parts purchases by Mooney didn't seem to be the issue, since they offered to prepay for the parts they needed and were denied by Mooney.  Mark seemed to think it was going to take pressure on Mooney by Owners to try to change their policy.  Nobody seems to know why Mooney has taken this position on outsourced parts.  Apparently, if a part can be fabricated at Mooney, they will make it, though.

[LANCECASPER]

8 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

I don’t know anything about Mooney’s business.

But as a VP of an aircraft manufacturer for 15 years or so I suspicion that their overhead is killing them. I assume or suspicion that they have an entire aircraft factory that they have to keep maintained as electric bill, keeping the roof from leaking and it’s likely old, meaning the repairs aren’t insignificant. I think the factory is a White Elephant.

“A white elephant is a possession that its owner cannot dispose of, and whose cost, particularly that of maintenance, is out of proportion to its usefulness.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_elephant

 

Thankfully while the Chinese owned it they sealed the factory roof and invested a small fortune in LED lighting, but yes they have much more space than they need. They would be smart to partner up with someone or take on a lot more contract parts business.

[Igor_U]

Don,

Are you saying parts that Factory can make will not be made anymore by outside Vendor?

Or does that includes ALL parts including one that Mooney never built, like landing Gear pucks, Engine intake ducts and such? This really doesn't make sense.

I have my concerns regarding Mooney factory support and parts availability for 4-5 years now and LASAR sale and move to OR didn't help as they stopped making most of their PMA parts.

Regards,

12 minutes ago, donkaye said:

  Cash for parts purchases by Mooney didn't seem to be the issue, since they offered to prepay for the parts they needed and were denied by Mooney.  Mark seemed to think it was going to take pressure on Mooney by Owners to try to change their policy.  Nobody seems to know why Mooney has taken this position on outsourced parts.  Apparently, if a part can be fabricated at Mooney, they will make it, though.

 

[LANCECASPER]

2 hours ago, SilentT said:

I agree, there are some wild assumptions here around flexibility. No matter how much I say, there is extreme flexibility some people wont accept that. Hell I drive it alot at 10 hours because I didnt like the commercial flight hour options. 

All of that to say, there are very real considerations here to not lose sight of as well.

I think you may be missing part of the real world "flexibility" point that several people are making. Once you have decided to fly a particular trip because the weather looks good, but then the forecast doesn't work out as predicted, and it's too late to drive, your options aren't there. I grew up and learned to fly in the midwest and, before my instrument rating, got stranded more than a few times and had to land to wait out weather many times and turned around more than once. After my instrument rating I flew some flights IFR I probably shouldn't have in a single engine piston airplane. My risk adversion has increased over the years.     

"Time to spare, go by air"

[SilentT]

1 hour ago, geoffb said:

I've been flying to my project sites for years and now do it in a 262 conversion, so I've got some direct experience.  Can be a huge time saver and definitely a frustration reducer and increases the number of nights in my own bed.  Did it in an E for many years in the Northwest crossing mountains.  The plane didn't have the capability to give me super dispatch reliability, but if you need to go, you drive or fly the tube.  The combination of ice and MEAs in my neighborhood often limited options for the E.

I would not do my instrument or commercial in a 252.  I did both in my E and that was no problem.  As a practical matter, you spend too much time flying the engine instruments in a turbo and it would distract from learning instrument flying.  Same for the commercial.

Before I spent the money on a 252, I'd want some sort of guarantee from my employer that this was and will continue to be allowed.  The next CFO could pull the rug out from under this in a heartbeat.  Say airplane and people get weird.  I say it because it has happened to me.  New CEO, no more personal aircraft.  Bam.  Get it and any terms they want in writing.  A decent letter of indemnity, liability insurance that matches the company auto policy and makes them named insured should address the concrete concerns.  The emotional concerns can be harder to address.

They can be expensive to keep up.  I do most of my own maintenance, but for a single, these are pretty complex airplanes.  I spent 3x the time on the K that I spent on the E.  More  "stuff" makes more stuff to maintain.  My E was cheap to own, my K not so much.  If you are looking at putting 300 hours a year on it, it will consume time and money.

And, 160 kts average on 10 gph average on an average 3-hour leg?  Not gonna happen.  For me, flight in the mid teens, first hour is 17 gals climbing to 15,000 at 120 indicated.  Following hours at 12 gph (average) 165kts TAS cruise @ 15,000.  A little less fuel if it's below ISA.  Mine's a couple knots slow due to the TKS install.

For years my normal trip was Western OR to the N Cal, about 430 nm.  For that, I bought an E and never regretted it.  Cheap to buy, cheap to keep, honest 150 kts, and 10.5 gph block to block.  If it wasn't for 10,000 FT MEAs I might still have it.

Thanks for this perspective. 

I've taken this advice, and the advice of @LANCECASPER and am looking for something cheaper, non K. 

I found a very reasonable J for about 150k which is more than @LANCECASPER suggested but avionics and quality make a huge jump between 100-150.  I can also get traditional coverage on it (at a dear cost) but is what it is.

As mentioned before I dont need the plane to be fully funded by work, it just makes it more affordable. The point was I have an opportunity to get work to fund my hobby, not I can't have the hobby if they dont. The reality is that without also flying for work, I wont get enough hours to justify keeping the bird for weekend flying only.

[Igor_U]

1 minute ago, LANCECASPER said:

Thankfully while the Chinese owned it they sealed the fcotyr roof and invested a small fortune in LED lighting, but yes they have much more space than they need. They would be smart to partner up with someone or take on a lot more contract parts business.

Lance,

Do we know how many people are working at Mooney these days? Some years ago it was only 7-8 IIRC but I believe they added some work force as they took on making more parts for the fleet. My point: with their small workforce they can't even produce small quantity of parts for our fleet let alone win a contract and execute it profitably for the OEM or other big company. They would need to hire and train a number of people and that cost money, not to mention it's hard to get skilled workforce in Kerrville; whoever were there before are long gone. 

In my view, current owners bought a company from Chinese in order to sell and make money, however they didn't pan out. I know they had an interested party visiting the facility that my employer at the time worked with but them being and OEM "of the future" (composite, electric propulsion and such) I saw no way that would happen. We all saw their sales pitch at Bizquest few years ago...

Sad but that is reality, IMO. I don't think they will ever make a new plane and now I'm afraid parts are endangered species as well. 

[SilentT]

2 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

I think you may be missing part of the real world "flexibility" point that several people are making. Once you have decided to fly a particular trip because the weather looks good, but then the forecast doesn't work out as predicted, and it's too late to drive, your options aren't there. I grew up and learned to fly in the midwest and, before my instrument rating, got stranded more than a few times and had to land to wait out weather many times and turned around more than once. After my instrument rating I flew some flights IFR I probably shouldn't have in a single engine piston airplane. My risk adversion has increased over the years.     

"Time to spare, go by air"

I mean thats fair; I've not found myself in that condition yet. I'm offsetting 11-13 hours of commercial travel for 2.5 hours of flight. To your point if at the last minute I dont depart, I'm in the same condition I was in anyway. Drive, it takes 11 hours. No differently than the alternative. 

At some point you have to have personal commitment and discipline to make the right choices and not take unnecessary or unmitigated risks. Like emergency and backup planning, its essential to have an out; my out is driving if the weather turns bad from a good forecast. If the forecast was always bad, I flew commercial. Ultimately, the goal is to have an IR in the next 3-4 months because every day I'm home I schedule to fly. Flying doesn't always work out due to weather, that has been dramatically impressed upon me at this point. 

Thank you most of all for your wisdom though. These are the things I needed to hear.

[LANCECASPER]

1 minute ago, Igor_U said:

Lance,

Do we know how many people are working at Mooney these days? Some years ago it was only 7-8 IIRC but I believe they added some work force as they took on making more parts for the fleet. My point: with their small workforce they can't even produce small quantity of parts for our fleet let alone win a contract and execute it profitably for the OEM or other big company. They would need to hire and train a number of people and that cost money, not to mention it's hard to get skilled workforce in Kerrville; whoever were there before are long gone. 

In my view, current owners bought a company from Chinese in order to sell and make money, however they didn't pan out. I know they had an interested party visiting the facility that my employer at the time worked with but them being and OEM "of the future" (composite, electric propulsion and such) I saw no way that would happen. We all saw their sales pitch at Bizquest few years ago...

Sad but that is reality, IMO. I don't think they will ever make a new plane and now I'm afraid parts are endangered species as well. 

Last I heard it was 17, but that was over a year ago.

Surprisingly people that worked at Mooney even fifteen years ago are fiercely loyal and would jump at the chance to work there again. Everyone around here knows how volatile a job at Mooney is, but most of them would give up the security of their present job to go build airplanes for sure, parts maybe.