Mooney furloughs entire staff and shudders plant

FlyingAccountant

Well-Known Member
There are so many reasons GA should be doing well these days. Fantastic facilities, strong training demand, new technology, world class ATC, but for some reason it hasn't. That means there's other barriers in place...corporate, legal, bureaucratic, or sociologic.
The barriers to entry are too high for most people who aren't doing it as a career. A PPL is, what, $10k-$12k these days? What's a basic, brand new 172 go for, $400k? It's definitely not a hobby for those with an average income.
 

WacoFan

Bigly
Our offices were in the same building when HOME | commanderaircraft closed. They were barely turning out single-engine recips, and Cirrus was absolutely overwhelming them with a new and superior product. That was 10+ years ago. Everyone has forgotten Commander.
I got my PPL, drank a Coke and the owner of the flight school wrote in a high performance endorsement, and then I hopped in a Commander 112 and flew to San Marcos (to get some Mooney parts from a guy that had a speed shop there modifying Mooney's). I loved flying that Commander and it was one of the low powered 112's, not the 114. Still a nice airplane and I would snatch up a 114 in a hearbeat.
 

WacoFan

Bigly
I flew a Colombia 400 for a while and yeah, it was a really cool plane.
Always seemed a cool plane as a contemporary of the Cirrus. I remember Cirrus selling the chute, the Lancair (at the time) selling a Sean Tucker designed unusual attitudes course that came standard with purchase. I never flew either, but in my mind that difference stuck in my head - Lancair is a pilots machine/Cirrus is for nervous SNOWFLAKES LIBERALS that want a chute.

Of course all of these airplanes, by virtue of horizontally opposed engines, are stupid toys and really not good or serious.
 

Richman

Well-Known Member
The barriers to entry are too high for most people who aren't doing it as a career. A PPL is, what, $10k-$12k these days? What's a basic, brand new 172 go for, $400k? It's definitely not a hobby for those with an average income.
This is a relatively recent phenomenon. In 1990, a private was $3k, or $6k in today’s manipulated currency.

There’s something weird about the accounting for airplane costs. A 60 year old design whose development costs have been fully amortized (several times over) shouldn’t cost that.
 

z987k

Well-Known Member
The math simply isn't there for ANY new airplanes these days. At 850K for a Cirrus, 400K for a 172, 1.6M for a Barron there isn't the value in any of these airplanes even for the upper class.

This is esspecially true when I can pick up an Avidyne SR-22 for 200, a nice 172 for 60K + 20 for a new panel, and a used Barron is a gas guzzler with two very expensive and MX troublesome engines.

Even if I hit the lotto, I doubt I would buy a brand new airplane.
We were just discussing this in another thread, but not all new aircraft are that much. A top of the line 260hp 1200lb useful load maule comes in 50k less than a 172. More comparable, a MXT7-180 comes in at a little over 200k, or roughly half the price of a Cessna. A brand new 210hp top of the line Scout comes in at 210k. Yes, that's still ridiculous, but only half as ridiculous.
 

CFI A&P

Exploring the world one toilet at a time.
This is a relatively recent phenomenon. In 1990, a private was $3k, or $6k in today’s manipulated currency.

There’s something weird about the accounting for airplane costs. A 60 year old design whose development costs have been fully amortized (several times over) shouldn’t cost that.
Lawyers ruin everything.

Fueled improperly and didn’t sump the tanks or insufficient fuel quality that led to a crash - sue the FBO for failures in PIC responsibilities.

Inadvertent IMC preceding the disorientation and crash - sue the manufacturer and flight school for poor aeronautical decisions made by the PIC.

Loaded over gross and out of CG - sue the manufacturer because of the PIC’s poor judgment.

Lawyers ruin everything. Okay, maybe just personal injury attorneys.
 
Last edited:

jtrain609

Uniting the black vote.
Lawyers ruin everything.

Fueled improperly and didn’t sump the tanks or insufficient fuel quality that led to a crash - sue the FBO for failures in PIC responsibilities.

Inadvertent IMC preceding the disorientation and crash - sue the manufacturer and flight school for poor aeronautical decisions made by the PIC.

Loaded over gross and out of CG - sue the manufacturer because of the PIC’s poor judgment.

Lawyers ruin everything. Okay, maybe just personal injury attorneys.
Clients ruin everything. Lawyers just do what they are told.
 

Richman

Well-Known Member
Friends tell me business insurance of all kinds went into orbit after 9/11 and never came back down.

It’s not just Textron, but everywhere you look. Everyone adds money to their product for it, but it’s not additive, it’s compounding. By the time you get to the end of the product chain, it’s absorbed %60 of the cost.

Like health care. You don’t think that cotton swab actually costs $10 do you? Someone is getting their cut.
 
Last edited:

Max Power

Well-Known Member
I think I’m the lone dissenter on the Diamonds. All of them were uncomfortable DA20,40,42. No seat adjustments, no headroom.
The DA/DV 20 was miserably hot in the summer. The katana was underpowered. The eclipse had an unreliable fuel injection system. The stall warning started blaring a good 20 kt before the stall. The brakes were awful. (Although, if airplane was landed and taxied at the proper speed not much braking was needed. Lacked a steerable nose wheel.
I did say they had their quirks and all statements you’ve made are true. The brakes took a ton of pressure, but it would stop. Problem was the small tires, narrow track and non steerable nose wheel made for unusual ground characteristics, especially going from Cessnas or Pipers. All that plus being hot since you couldn’t taxi with the canopy open were certainly quirks. But the handling of the plane was fun and I’m a sucker for good dynamic fun. It was a joy, even being miserable, compared to the staid and boring 172.
 

Crop Duster

E pluribus unum
This is a shame since I've always thought Mooney's were cool, but unfortunately they've just never been that comfortable, and when you're competing with something like a Cirrus for around the same money it's hard to justify. A Cirrus has to be, what, half again the cockpit width of a Mooney?

Here's a Mooney throwback lol:

@Boris Badenov knows all about this.
 

jtrain609

Uniting the black vote.
They don't have to

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
You're correct, and there are times lawyers are obligated to not follow the direction of their clients.

But otherwise an attorney is simple a conduit for their clients wishes, and it would behoove them to follow those wishes if they enjoy being able to afford their mortgage.
 
I'm gonna have to ask you to show your work ;). Perhaps I said that somewhere in some context, but that's not a universal belief of mine. The A321 wing today, and especially on the future LR/XLR, is pushing it's limits. Unless you're at sea level and have 2 miles of runway to play with, you're gonna struggle get off the ground at MTOW and you're gonna start cruise lower than the A319/A320. Make no mistake, unless the next generation of fuel-efficient engines gets smaller (and lighter), any further growth of the A321 series (beyond the XLR) will require a new wing. It's pretty much tapped out.

What I have said in the past is that (1) the 757's superior performance came from it's significantly larger wing, which is unfortunately also the cause of it's demise in terms of fuel burn vs. the A321/739, and that (2) the 737 does not need a new wing (it's larger than the bus) - it's problem is the short gear.

Edit: found this quote below from Jan 2018. Note how at that time, I said the A321neo could take 3-5T more in MTOW (above 97T) before hitting it's limit. Whaddya know, in 2019 they launch the XLR which added...4T ;)
What is 4T?
 

Lawman

Well-Known Member
Only one ‘r’ in Baron.

What’s you see here is typical corporate thinking. Textron isn’t interested in selling to me and you the way Dwane and Olive did. They’re interested in selling to ERAU and UND. Those two places are happy to pay 400 large a copy because they’re passing the cost to the sucke..., er, ah, students paying the wildly inflated tuition. They are financing their tuition and student loan outfits are only too happy because those loans are bankruptcy proof. Good as cash.
Point of order.

Riddle doesn’t buy those 172s, they lease them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Top