NEW NEWS FROM LASAR AND MOONEY AS OF 10/2/2025

[Sabremech]

@Cliffy,

You do not need the manufacturers drawing, DER approval or approved data for an OPP. What you do need is an original part to use to make the new one and be able to prove your part meets or exceeds the original part if ever challenged by the FAA to prove it is an equivalent. Of course having the drawing would be optimal but not likely from Mooney, DER would be nice but not required as well as some sort of approved data. You quoted the OPP rule fairly well but then went off course with what I’m disagreeing with you here! 
I have done OPP parts as we all know and have had numerous conversations with the FAA on this topic. The one inconsistency is the FAA between offices. 

[MikeOH]

2 minutes ago, Sabremech said:

You do not need the manufacturers drawing, DER approval or approved data for an OPP.

While I sure like the sound of that...I would think the devil is in the details.

Namely:

3 minutes ago, Sabremech said:

What you do need is an original part to use to make the new one and be able to prove your part meets or exceeds the original part if ever challenged by the FAA to prove it is an equivalent

So, it would seem this could get VERY tricky without an 'authority' such as a DER 'blessing' the 'new' design.  The Duke's landing worm-gear set comes to mind...first you'll need a NEW gear set to copy as you need original, NOT worn, dimensions. How do you establish tolerances? Then, you need to determine material, and hardening (and depth), maybe surface finish, etc.

[1980Mooney]

1 hour ago, cliffy said:

Question 9: What happens to the owner produced part on the aircraft if the original owner sells the aircraft?

Answer 9: Unless the part is no longer airworthy, the original owner produced part stays on the aircraft.

 

54 minutes ago, Sabremech said:

@Cliffy,

You do not need the manufacturers drawing, DER approval or approved data for an OPP. What you do need is an original part to use to make the new one and be able to prove your part meets or exceeds the original part if ever challenged by the FAA to prove it is an equivalent. Of course having the drawing would be optimal but not likely from Mooney, DER would be nice but not required as well as some sort of approved data. You quoted the OPP rule fairly well but then went off course with what I’m disagreeing with you here! 
I have done OPP parts as we all know and have had numerous conversations with the FAA on this topic. The one inconsistency is the FAA between offices. 

 

43 minutes ago, MikeOH said:

While I sure like the sound of that...I would think the devil is in the details.

Namely:

So, it would seem this could get VERY tricky without an 'authority' such as a DER 'blessing' the 'new' design.  The Duke's landing worm-gear set comes to mind...first you'll need a NEW gear set to copy as you need original, NOT worn, dimensions. How do you establish tolerances? Then, you need to determine material, and hardening (and depth), maybe surface finish, etc.

Interesting ... "be able to prove your part meets or exceeds the original part if ever challenged by the FAA to prove it is an equivalent".   :"IF EVER" is a long, long time.......So if that OPP part that you "participated in" happens to fail for a future owner of the plane leading to an accident , incident or any kind of a claim, then YOU will still be liable to prove this in the future.  At that time you will have no interest in the plane, probably no records and certainly no insurance to protect you.  You may have to prove it to the FAA and if it is a claim for damages, perhaps you will need to prove it in court.

@MikeOH is right the devil is in the details and @cliffy is right that it depends upon how complicated the part is.  But the Dukes Gear Set is a good example.  If I bought a Mooney with a Dukes actuator which which happened to suffer a gearup due to failure of OPP ("owner participated in") parts/gears , then I would hire a lawyer and go after the past Owner that was responsible for those OPP parts.

Now when you sell your plane, you may disclose your "participation" in OPP parts you had installed and you may stipulate in the contract a written release of liability for your OPP parts from the buyer, but that only protects you with the current sale.  Some planes get sold every few years.  The next owner after that has no knowledge of your disclosure and certainly didn't release you from liability of your OPP part.  This is the sort of thing that may come back and hit your estate.

I personally would want nothing to do with a plane which had a complicated or critical OPP part.  If it turned up in a Pre-buy examination of the maintenance logs I would walk or require the part to be replaced with a manufacturers or PMA part before purchase.  Same reason I will have nothing to do with an Experimental.

 

Edited Monday at 07:39 PM by 1980Mooney

[Sabremech]

11 minutes ago, 1980Mooney said:

 

 

Interesting ... "be able to prove your part meets or exceeds the original part if ever challenged by the FAA to prove it is an equivalent".   :"IF EVER" is a long, long time.......So if that OPP part that you "participated in" happens to fail for a future owner of the plane leading to an accident , incident or any kind of a claim, then YOU will still be liable to prove this in the future.  At that time you will have no interest in the plane, probably no records and certainly no insurance to protect you.  You may have to prove it to the FAA and if it is a claim for damages, perhaps you will need to prove it in court.

@MikeOH is right the devil is in the details and @cliffy is right that it depends upon how complicated the part is.  But the Dukes Gear Set is a good example.  If I bought a Mooney with a Dukes actuator which which happened to suffer a gearup due to failure of OPP ("owner participated in") parts/gears , then I would hire a lawyer and go after the past Owner that was responsible for those OPP parts.

Now when you sell your plane, you may disclose your "participation" in OPP parts you had installed and you may stipulate in the contract a written release of liability for your OPP parts from the buyer, but that only protects you with the current sale.  Some planes get sold every few years.  The next owner after that has no knowledge of your disclosure and certainly didn't release you from liability of your OPP part.  This is the sort of thing that come back and hit your estate.

 

There’s always someone taking it to the nth degree. The OPP parts will be documented in the logbooks if the owner is ethical and not trying to put a part in that he machines up with his Harbor Freight lathe in the garage. The point is that the OPP part meets or exceeds the original designed part and you won’t be looking for a lawyer. 
I briefly thought about the 40:1 gear sets and decided that I did not want the liability by producing them, not even PMA versions. 
There are plenty of parts on my Mooney that I would have no issue making my own parts for it. They would all be documented in the logbook so there would be no need to disclose it. If you don’t like it, go buy another Mooney. It’s really that simple. 

[Sabremech]

1 hour ago, MikeOH said:

While I sure like the sound of that...I would think the devil is in the details.

Namely:

So, it would seem this could get VERY tricky without an 'authority' such as a DER 'blessing' the 'new' design.  The Duke's landing worm-gear set comes to mind...first you'll need a NEW gear set to copy as you need original, NOT worn, dimensions. How do you establish tolerances? Then, you need to determine material, and hardening (and depth), maybe surface finish, etc.

Been there done this with the gear up and downlock blocks. Did the lab analysis for material specification etc. Had drawings made, machined a first article for test fit and function then finalized the part. This was not a new design, this was copying an original or PMA part. No blessing needed to do that. 
There are parts such as the Gear set that aren’t advisable to do as OPP parts. I chose not to do them! 

[hazek]

1 hour ago, cliffy said:

Question 8: How does the owner or operator get the approved data to make a part if the manufacturer and other sources are no longer in business?

But Mooney is still there and has all this data. So you're telling me we could produce these parts by participating in just one of those 5 steps of manufacturing the part and the part can be manufactured by literally anyone as long as we get the design data from Mooney?? What am I missing?

Btw I used AI to draft the necessary documents to participate in all 5 steps in literally 49 seconds. https://x.com/i/grok/share/oKiFudifIdBOOzVdbYYNUSBQH

 

[Sabremech]

1 minute ago, hazek said:

But Mooney is still there and has all this data. So you're telling me we could produce these parts by participating in just one of those 5 steps of manufacturing the part and the part can be manufactured by literally anyone as long as we get the design data from Mooney?? What am I missing?

Btw I used AI to draft the necessary documents to participate in all 5 steps in literally 49 seconds. https://x.com/i/grok/share/oKiFudifIdBOOzVdbYYNUSBQH

 

Answer: you do not need the approved data to manufacture an OPP part. If you have an original part, you can reproduce that part. 

[hazek]

@Sabremech My point is that if one has the approved data it is trivial, really absolutely trivial to put together the documentation to have it manufactured if really all it takes is for the owner to participate in just one of those 5 steps. You feed the approved data to an AI and it spits out the necessary documentation in the next minute. You go to any machining shop and ask for the part to be made according to your documentation. Presto, part done.

Or am I missing something?

[1980Mooney]

On 10/5/2025 at 10:49 AM, Fritz1 said:

So, instead of moping, who is ready to step in? 300 owners at $3000 a pop makes $900k, enough the get things moving funds to be released to Lasar and/or Mooney for inventory buildup by a board of the the 3 largest donors? The whole thing blows up, guess what fonds perdu as the French say.

In the end gotta pay the piper!

Whoever is interested in being part of the solution, please pm me. 

If it is so simple:

• Why didn't the US Financial LLC investors that supposedly bought 80% of Mooney put a measly $1 million of "get things moving funds" into Mooney and build inventory?  Certainly they have a vested interest.
• And the Mooney site lists 46 Mooney Service Centers.  Why don't the MSC's each purchase a measly $20-25K of Mooney parts to "get things moving" and build inventory?  Certainly they have a vested interest.
• So now it is why don't 300 Owners send money to Mooney.... so that only three (3) Owners can pick which parts they personally want built and stocked.

I think that is call the Greater Fool Theory....

[Sabremech]

19 minutes ago, hazek said:

@Sabremech My point is that if one has the approved data it is trivial, really absolutely trivial to put together the documentation to have it manufactured if really all it takes is for the owner to participate in just one of those 5 steps. You feed the approved data to an AI and it spits out the necessary documentation in the next minute. You go to any machining shop and ask for the part to be made according to your documentation. Presto, part done.

Or am I missing something?

My point is that Mooney is not going to give or sell you the drawing or approved data.

So, AI isn’t going to do you much good in producing the part. You’re missing quite a bit in making a part.

Who here commenting about OPP parts has actually made a part using the OPP rule? I have!

19 minutes ago, hazek said:

[1980Mooney]

16 minutes ago, hazek said:

@Sabremech My point is that if one has the approved data it is trivial, really absolutely trivial to put together the documentation to have it manufactured if really all it takes is for the owner to participate in just one of those 5 steps. You feed the approved data to an AI and it spits out the necessary documentation in the next minute. You go to any machining shop and ask for the part to be made according to your documentation. Presto, part done.

Or am I missing something?

And Mooney is not releasing the approved data (as @Sabremech said).

What is the value of Mooney now?  It is the engineering data, drawings, specifications, flight test data and Type Certificates, etc. - the Intellectual Property.  They are not giving that away. 

[hazek]

1 minute ago, 1980Mooney said:

They are not giving that away. 

So that's the real issue then. If they're not giving away the data, not even in exchange for money then yeah, we're on our own. Suckers we were that we bought from such a company that either can't or won't manufacture needed parts and likewise will not release the data so that we can do it ourselves.

Are you sure they're not giving the data away not even in exchange for money?

[Hank]

59 minutes ago, Sabremech said:

There are parts such as the Gear set that aren’t advisable to do as OPP parts. I chose not to do them! 

 

39 minutes ago, Sabremech said:

Answer: you do not need the approved data to manufacture an OPP part. If you have an original part, you can reproduce that part. 

Any reputable gear manufacturer would be able to replicate a worn gear to new dimensions, especially if you remake both mating gears. Just as with buying one set from Mooney, it will not be inexpensive, but if you can aggregate requests from 10-15 owners, the per set price will come down; if you can get requests from 50 people, the per set price may become attractive. 

But don't set yourself up to be seen as possibly selling the gear sets yourself! Each person will need to make a written request, and I e person send it off to the gear manufacturer, all attached to a single letter for the total order.

[Sabremech]

18 minutes ago, hazek said:

So that's the real issue then. If they're not giving away the data, not even in exchange for money then yeah, we're on our own. Suckers we were that we bought from such a company that either can't or won't manufacture needed parts and likewise will not release the data so that we can do it ourselves.

Are you sure they're not giving the data away not even in exchange for money?

Even for Money? Nope! 

[Fritz1]

If the installed base is 7500 airplanes and each is worth $100k that makes an installed base worth $750M. What percentage of the base does it take to fix the problem? 1%? 2%? The financials indicate that a solution will be found that keeps the fleet in the air

[1980Mooney]

1 hour ago, hazek said:

So that's the real issue then. If they're not giving away the data, not even in exchange for money then yeah, we're on our own. Suckers we were that we bought from such a company that either can't or won't manufacture needed parts and likewise will not release the data so that we can do it ourselves.

Are you sure they're not giving the data away not even in exchange for money?

 

1 hour ago, Sabremech said:

Even for Money? Nope! 

Actually I stand corrected.  If you bring enough money....bags and bags.....then YES - You can buy the Company and have access to everything!......

[Sabremech]

1 hour ago, Hank said:

 

Any reputable gear manufacturer would be able to replicate a worn gear to new dimensions, especially if you remake both mating gears. Just as with buying one set from Mooney, it will not be inexpensive, but if you can aggregate requests from 10-15 owners, the per set price will come down; if you can get requests from 50 people, the per set price may become attractive. 

But don't set yourself up to be seen as possibly selling the gear sets yourself! Each person will need to make a written request, and I e person send it off to the gear manufacturer, all attached to a single letter for the total order.

Once you tell said reputable gear manufacturer it’s for an airplane, most are going to say no thanks! Been there done that with machine shops. Most won’t touch anything that goes on an airplane. 

[1980Mooney]

1 hour ago, Hank said:

Any reputable gear manufacturer would be able to replicate a worn gear to new dimensions, especially if you remake both mating gears. Just as with buying one set from Mooney, it will not be inexpensive, but if you can aggregate requests from 10-15 owners, the per set price will come down; if you can get requests from 50 people, the per set price may become attractive. 

But don't set yourself up to be seen as possibly selling the gear sets yourself! Each person will need to make a written request, and I e person send it off to the gear manufacturer, all attached to a single letter for the total order.

 

20 minutes ago, Sabremech said:

Once you tell said reputable gear manufacturer it’s for an airplane, most are going to say no thanks! Been there done that with machine shops. Most won’t touch anything that goes on an airplane. 

@Matthew P went through this a year ago......."unfortunately, no manufacturer will give me a quote because it's a part to be used in an aircraft."

[LANCECASPER]

On 10/6/2025 at 4:46 PM, hazek said:

So that's the real issue then. If they're not giving away the data, not even in exchange for money then yeah, we're on our own. Suckers we were that we bought from such a company that either can't or won't manufacture needed parts and likewise will not release the data so that we can do it ourselves.

You didn't buy your Mooney from the company.  You bought it from a previous owner. Mooney sold each airplane once, many years ago to one end-user. It may have changed hands many times since then, but Mooney didn't make a dime on any subsequent transactions.

Expecting them to support the airplanes which are now 20, 30, 40, 50, 60 and 70 years old is crazy. Manufacturers have done it up until now, not to be nice to everyone, but in the hopes of making a profit. Now that it hasn't worked out, if you want to keep flying your airplane (whether it's Mooney, Beechcraft, Navion, Piper, Commander, Cessna, Grumman, etc) you'll have to get creative.  People who own classic cars such as Packards, Studebakers, Edsels, etc figure out ways to keep them going or they move on to something else. The FAA has the OPP provision, there are salvage airplanes, and yes there is now LASAR. So there are options. However, the vast majority of parts for airplanes don't even come from the airframe manufacturer.

[Hank]

1 hour ago, Sabremech said:

Once you tell said reputable gear manufacturer it’s for an airplane, most are going to say no thanks! Been there done that with machine shops. Most won’t touch anything that goes on an airplane. 

 

1 hour ago, 1980Mooney said:

"unfortunately, no manufacturer will give me a quote because it's a part to be used in an aircraft."

Just tell them it's for a low torque actuator on some old equipment whose original manufacturer closed years ago.

[MikeOH]

3 hours ago, Fritz1 said:

If the installed base is 7500 airplanes and each is worth $100k that makes an installed base worth $750M. What percentage of the base does it take to fix the problem? 1%? 2%? The financials indicate that a solution will be found that keeps the fleet in the air

I"m not following 'the financials' in your argument.  The total value of the fleet is irrelevant to the financial viability of making a particular part for the fleet.

The NUMBER of planes in the fleet is the key; and, I'm afraid, 7,500 just isn't that big of a number when you look at the percentage that need a given part in a given year.  It's a very tough business situation.

[MikeOH]

4 hours ago, Hank said:

 

Any reputable gear manufacturer would be able to replicate a worn gear to new dimensions, especially if you remake both mating gears. Just as with buying one set from Mooney, it will not be inexpensive, but if you can aggregate requests from 10-15 owners, the per set price will come down; if you can get requests from 50 people, the per set price may become attractive. 

But don't set yourself up to be seen as possibly selling the gear sets yourself! Each person will need to make a written request, and I e person send it off to the gear manufacturer, all attached to a single letter for the total order.

This seems like a VERY touchy legal situation to my layman legal mind.  Namely, a SINGLE aggregate purchase order is going to be from ONE individual; it's NOT going to matter how many contributed.  The alternative is to, somehow, get the manufacturer to accept multiple POs from individuals for a quantity of ONE, totaling to 50 parts.  As a manufacturer I would be very reluctant to do that without getting paid by EVERYONE, upfront, along with non-cancelable. Plus, they are going to be pretty suspicious...i.e. what are the odds that 50 people suddenly have the need for a 'low torque actuator for an old piece of equipment'

[hazek]

9 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

Actually I stand corrected.  If you bring enough money....bags and bags.....then YES - You can buy the Company and have access to everything!......

How much?

[Paul Thomas]

You'd think it would be easy to sell the most in demand parts that have long lead times, like an intake boot...

I just don't think Mooney/LASAR have it as easy as people think. While it appears from the outside they could be managed better, I also believe that they have people who are doing the best they can.

[Pinecone]

15 hours ago, Hank said:

Just as with buying one set from Mooney, it will not be inexpensive, but if you can aggregate requests from 10-15 owners, the per set price will come down; if you can get requests from 50 people, the per set price may become attractive. 

But don't set yourself up to be seen as possibly selling the gear sets yourself! Each person will need to make a written request, and I e person send it off to the gear manufacturer, all attached to a single letter for the total order.

You have to be very careful with making more than a part for YOUR airplane.

They group that tried this with the J bar locks ran into issues.