Seth Posted January 4, 2013 Report Posted January 4, 2013 I'm curious and did make a poll, if Al Mooney never made the M20, what would you own/fly? I'd probably still be in the single market, and probabaly own/fly a Cessna 182, maybe a Bonanza, maybe a Saratoga. Just curious - I would fly rather than not fly if there were no Mooney aircraft, and the Mooney is by far my choice. Even if you want to pick multiple choices, think hard at what you'd proably own. For me, it may actually have been a 182 Fixed gear. Though I may quickly have ended up with a Bo or a retract 182, or 210. I picked Cessna fixed gear (even though I like the wings down low, I admit the 182 is a great airplane). If you have specific model in mind, please note it: 182 (fixed and retract) Bonanza Saratoga -Seth
Dave Marten Posted January 4, 2013 Report Posted January 4, 2013 Given the X-C mission, I'd go back to a Beech 35/33. Used to own an old '56 V-tail. The Bonanza is great airplane with solid owner support through their type-club. Nothing against the venerable high-wing Cessna, but they just don't appeal to me. Besides, a 30 yr old Bo is about all alternative plane this pilot can afford and still get from pt A to pt B with smile! Thanks Al for your Mooney, I'll take good care of it!
BigTex Posted January 4, 2013 Report Posted January 4, 2013 I'd have to go with something like a RV-10. 2
fantom Posted January 4, 2013 Report Posted January 4, 2013 IO-520-BB Tornado Alley Turbo Normalized F-33... 1
Dave Marten Posted January 5, 2013 Report Posted January 5, 2013 Well said Mike. Seth, you asked the question. BL: I love flying, I like my Mooney. If there was no Mooney I'd be in something else. Anything else vs. the alternative of not flying.
carusoam Posted January 5, 2013 Report Posted January 5, 2013 Whatever the fasted, affordable, American factory built, four seat, N/A, single would be... Sorry, Al, it's the mission more than anything else. Fortunately my mission hasn't changed much over the last 13 years... Best regards, -a-
M016576 Posted January 5, 2013 Report Posted January 5, 2013 <blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="fantom" data-cid="85975" data-time="1357341469"><p> IO-520-BB Tornado Alley Turbo Normalized F-33...<br /> <br /> <span rel='lightbox'><img src='http://pikespeakflyers.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/images/F-33A.185131314_std.jpg' alt='Posted Image' class='bbc_img' /></span></p></blockquote> Yes please!
jetdriven Posted January 5, 2013 Report Posted January 5, 2013 IO-520-BB Tornado Alley Turbo Normalized F-33... That is IT, man!
jetdriven Posted January 5, 2013 Report Posted January 5, 2013 Tough to say. Maybe a Cardinal RG, or perhaps a Tiger or a Cheetah with long range tanks. Or a Commanche 180. An old low horsepower V tail perhaps. Jim The old E-185 / E-225 Bonanzas return almost the same fuel economy as a 201 like yours, Jim. They are really cool old machines.
Sabremech Posted January 5, 2013 Report Posted January 5, 2013 Experimental all the way if there wasn't a Mooney to own! 1
jetdriven Posted January 5, 2013 Report Posted January 5, 2013 I know. Just more expensive to maintain, I think. A little less efficient than the 201 and I'd have to insure that the CG envelope would allow full use of the available useful load. I love those old polished aluminum unmolested Bonanzas, though. True works of Art Deco beauty, at least to my eye. Jim 100% agree. A rich man buys a new Bonanza. A truly wealthy man buys an old Bonanza. 2
OldGlassMan Posted January 8, 2013 Report Posted January 8, 2013 Probably a 180 Commanche or if not that, them an older Sierra (the faster one). For me, it is bang for the buck, and although I admire the Debbie, the six can engine is just to costly to operate. Lower cost of operation == more flying for me. RFB
Hank Posted January 9, 2013 Report Posted January 9, 2013 I'd probably just fly whatever other efficient, low-maintenance aircraft he made. There were many predecessors to ours, including some that had "normal" tails. Had Al never gone into aircraft design, surely someone would have thought about fuel efficiency; just because Cessna, Piper and Beechcraft ignored it doesn't mean that Al was the only one who cared about it. Lots of low-volume aircraft were made in the 20's and 30's; lots of one-offs may have succeeded without Al's competition. But Bo's are too pricey to operate and maintain; 182's suck too much fuel. I was looking at aircraft that I could afford and was not happy with what I was hearing about fuel burn. Then I stumbled across my Mooney completely by accident, never having heard of the line before. I'm good now.
Jeff_S Posted January 9, 2013 Report Posted January 9, 2013 I'd probably be in the best Beechcraft F33 that I could afford. If not that, then likely I'd search around for a really nice RV-x two-seat touring, or maybe even someone's tricked out RV-10 if they were selling.
Seth Posted January 7, 2015 Author Report Posted January 7, 2015 I'm bumping this topic in light of the recent topic. I'd still go Bonanza or Saratoga. Maybe a FIKI twin I'd also own an experimental 2 seat tail dragger or a Citabria/C-140/Champ -Seth
Mooneymite Posted January 7, 2015 Report Posted January 7, 2015 Experimental all the way if there wasn't a Mooney to own! Me, too. In fact, sometimes I contemplate selling my Mooney and replacing it with something that doesn't need an IA sign off. I'm presently flying my second experimental airplane; both have been very easy on the wallet to own. I'm pretty much done with certified. The experimentals out there are pretty impressive and buying parts for them is much more reasonable. The guys in the neighborhood flying the glasairs blow the doors off my Mooney. The Mooney is a great airplane, but, let's just say the part 23 re-write can't come soon enough. 2
bonal Posted January 7, 2015 Report Posted January 7, 2015 I almost forgot, A Globe Swift its like a mini P40
aviatoreb Posted January 8, 2015 Report Posted January 8, 2015 100% agree. A rich man buys a new Bonanza. A truly wealthy man buys an old Bonanza. That is really funny. This one is a keeper. I think I will be repeating it...
mpg Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 Im surprised more of you arent picking the one plane that is most Mooney-ish... The piper Comanche, in three flavors,, 180, 250, 400... Guess who designed it for Piper.... Al Mooney!
Guest Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 Im surprised more of you arent picking the one plane that is most Mooney-ish... The piper Comanche, in three flavors,, 180, 250, 400... Guess who designed it for Piper.... Al Mooney! The Comanche is a Mooney designed for our typical body size, and payload requirements. Clarence
aviatoreb Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 The Commanche 400 is a 200knot airplane at 8000 ft so I read. Quite impressive beast with that 400hp 8 cylinder IO720 on the nose.
PTK Posted February 2, 2015 Report Posted February 2, 2015 I'd be in a Bonanza or an Arrow. As for twins I could also see myself in a Baron.
Recommended Posts