Mooney Company sold

[peppy]

What 4 are you talking about?

I think he means G1,2,3,5. Yep, no 4.

G1 to G2 had redesigned fuselage. G3 brought redesigned wing and wheels. G5 had 200 lb useful load increase and increase in 50% flap extension from 119 to 150. The latter is a big deal since it helps on approach a lot.

The SR22 has changed a lot over the years.

On another subject, Mooney tilted heavily towards efficiency and this gets brought up a lot by Mooney owners. They are justifiably proud that their "old" airframes beat the snot out of newer ones when it comes to efficiency. As I thought about it though I wondered if 2-3 GPH doesn't matter a lot more to a guy buying a $70K airplane than to one spending $700K. Remember that used sales don't help the company much. The question is what sells NEW planes. On the other hand, single door, no step to get up on the wing (Acclaim) etc. in the name of efficiency might be a negative at the $700K price point. Just a thought.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Actually, it pretty much is, other than the avionics upgrade that every other manufacturer got as well. 1993's M20M TLS is pretty much exactly the same plane as today's M20TN Acclaim, but with an updated avionics package (everybody has it), ten more HP, very minor aerodynamic tweaks and a different prop.

And that's the sort of tweaks that Cirrus and every other airplane manufacturer does as well.

Now, obviously Cirrus has changed more than Mooney in the last 20 years, as Cirrus didn't even have a certified airplane 20 years ago. That they're young also gives them a lot of opportunity for improvement (ie fixing everything they got wrong originally), so I would expect an increased pace of improvement from them, and I wouldn't expect Cessna to be doing much with the 172 and 182 beyond the type of tweaks you mentioned.

Just because they've had more that needs fixing on their plane in the past 20 years doesn't mean they're more innovative, it just means that they had more opportunities for improvement.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

The SR22T is a good example. They had a NA SR22, but people wanted a turbo. So they made a deal with GAMI to engineer and install a turbo normalized system. They offered it as a factory option vs. making people take it there aftermarket, people liked that. Then Continental came up with a true factory turbo so they changed to that, all inside of a decade. I don't think it's the same thing as just throwing a turbo on it.

What's the difference? It still has to be certified, and the same amount of effort goes into that no matter how it's done. What Cirrus did isn't all that different from Mooney going from the 201 (N/A) to the 231 (turbo) to the 252 (much-improved, intercooled turbo), or in the long body going from the Bravo to the Ovation, in which case they actually went from turbo to normally aspirated - It's not as simple as just taking the turbo off, either.

I think we're differing on the definition of model, I just mean there are 4 generations of SR-22 within 14 years. Each version has significant differences well beyond paint and a giant G whatever on the tail.

Again, more opportunity for improvement due to the newer airframe.

 

[rbridges]

But a significantly slower one. The Mooney is built the way it is for a reason. Efficiency. It is this efficiency that has allowed them to stand out from the rest. More doors, bigger doors, wider cabin... pretty soon you have a Piper.

I agree with the nay sayers. The market has already shown that the M20 airframe has passed it's prime... unless, they can dramatically reduce the cost to manufacture and bring the price down. A BRS system would help too.

I believe where we left off in 2008, the Mooney cost significantly more than an SR22. So with the nicer cabin, two doors and a parachute, the Mooney's speed and efficiency just wasn't resonating with buyers. Particularly with wives I imagine. Adding a chute and lowering the cost gives it a fighting chance... for a little while. Ultimately, there needs to be an all new Mooney.

I do wish that my plane had a pilot's side door. I can't imagine that it would have involved a whole lot more weight or cost at the time it was designed.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I think he means G1,2,3,5. Yep, no 4.

Weird. Wonder why they did that (no 4)?

G1 to G2 had redesigned fuselage. G3 brought redesigned wing and wheels. G5 had 200 lb useful load increase and increase in 50% flap extension from 119 to 150. The latter is a big deal since it helps on approach a lot.

The SR22 has changed a lot over the years.

Most airframes change a lot in their first 15-20 years, because they learn lessons from the first ones out the door.

Mooney went from 150 to 180 to 200 hp, stretched the fuselage, changed from wood wing and tail to metal, did a fixed-gear trainer version, increased gross weights, and made many aerodynamic improvements in their first 20 years.

Cessna's 172 went from straight to swept tail, added a rear window, electric flaps, new engine, and changed numerous other things (they were up to the M model by the time it had been out for 20 years).

Diamond's DA40 has been out for only 12 years, but they've upped the landing weight and the gross weight (separately), re-done the landing gear, significantly changed the interior (panel height/position, electric rudder adjustment, 3 versions of the cargo compartment, ventilation, etc), changed the rudder, certified 3 engines and at least 6 props, etc.

I guess that's why I don't see Cirrus as being particularly innovative. Compared to where other aircraft manufacturers have been at a similar point in their history, they're pretty close. The main things Cirrus has brought about are the chute and the level button.

The question is what sells NEW planes. On the other hand, single door, no step to get up on the wing (Acclaim) etc. in the name of efficiency might be a negative at the $700K price point. Just a thought.

No step? Where do you get this stuff? I even went looking at the for-sale sites to verify, and every Acclaim that has a pic where you'd be able to see the step has a step.

Besides, if it was that big of a deal aerodynamically, they'd simply retract it. Earlier Mooneys had retractable steps, either via a hand crank in the cockpit or a pneumatic auto-retract that ran off the vacuum pump and retracted the step when the engine was started.

 

[peppy]

Weird. Wonder why they did that (no 4)?

New owners. Four is unlucky to the Chinese.

No step? Where do you get this stuff?

From idiots like me. I went and read several articles again. I found the other changes I remembered. However, I am totally wrong about the step and for that I apologize. i hate it when other people spew garbage and now I have become part of the problem. Crap!!!!


You talked about other companies improving their airframes. I think those companies were innovative in their day. When Mooney and Beech were at their peak and improving their designs regularly they were innovative. When the SR22 cane out in 2001 it competed with those fully developed airframes and outsold them. It has continued to evolve while the other planes haven't.

What is needed for a real major change is an engine revolution. I don’t see anything there until batteries approach the energy density per gram of gasoline. Li-air can theoretically do that but they are a LONG way off from being practical.

 

[Johann]

New owners. Four is unlucky to the Chinese.

I'm pretty sure there won't be a number 6!

In Chinese tradition, certain numbers are believed by some to be auspicious (吉利) or inauspicious (不利) based on the Chinese word that the number name sounds similar to.

Number 4 (四; accounting 肆; pinyin sì) is considered an unlucky number in Chinese because it is nearly homophonous to the word "death"

Six in Cantonese which has a similar pronunciation to that of "lok6" (落, meaning "to drop, fall, or decline") may form unlucky combinations.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numbers_in_Chinese_culture#Unlucky_numbers

 

[flyingcheesehead]

New owners. Four is unlucky to the Chinese.

Huh... Not what I was expecting, though I'm not sure what I was expecting.

From idiots like me. I went and read several articles again. I found the other changes I remembered. However, I am totally wrong about the step and for that I apologize. i hate it when other people spew garbage and now I have become part of the problem. Crap!!!!

Doh!

I don't think the Piper Comanche has a step... Maybe you were confusing 'em with Mooneys?

You talked about other companies improving their airframes. I think those companies were innovative in their day. When Mooney and Beech were at their peak and improving their designs regularly they were innovative. When the SR22 cane out in 2001 it competed with those fully developed airframes and outsold them. It has continued to evolve while the other planes haven't.

But, what is truly unique about the Cirrus airplanes?

I guess I still look at the Level button and the chute as the big ones. There really isn't that much else that Cirrus has brought to the aviation game except for marketing, which they're damn good at.

What is needed for a real major change is an engine revolution. I don’t see anything there until batteries approach the energy density per gram of gasoline. Li-air can theoretically do that but they are a LONG way off from being practical.

I think that some relatively minor changes (well, minor unless you're the FAA) would go a long way here. FADEC, including electronic ignition, being the big one. Electronic fuel injection for easy starts would be another.

 

[Henning]

I think that some relatively minor changes (well, minor unless you're the FAA) would go a long way here. FADEC, including electronic ignition, being the big one. Electronic fuel injection for easy starts would be another.

Continental has the engines ready to go....

 

[peppy]

But, what is truly unique about the Cirrus airplanes?

I guess I still look at the Level button and the chute as the big ones. There really isn't that much else that Cirrus has brought to the aviation game except for marketing, which they're damn good at.

Alan Klapmeirer once said he thought the wide AI was a bigger deal than the chute but what does he know.

It all depends on how you define innovation. The BRS system was on other aircraft prior to Cirrus. Cirrus just put it on a certified aircraft.

 

[Dav8or]

From idiots like me. I went and read several articles again. I found the other changes I remembered. However, I am totally wrong about the step and for that I apologize.

Don't beat yourself up too bad. The late model steps are easily removed and many people do to go faster. The step does create measurable drag. I personally like my retractable step.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Continental has the engines ready to go....

Yeah, for the low, low price of only double what a non-FADEC engine costs...

Until the certification/liability/etc. costs get under control, FADEC in single-engine pistons ain't gonna happen.

Though, I am surprised Cirrus hasn't jumped on it. That seems to be the kind of thing they'd add.

 

[housefly]

That's exciting news,considering I'm living about 30 miles from Kerrville,retired from my old job w/pension,looking for a great new job and have mechanical and electro-mechanical assembly in my work history, student pilot doesn't hurt,I think I'm going to be in Kerrville next week putting in my application. I happen to be back in Dallas this weekend,attending my Local's service awards dinner,getting the gold retirement watch for 27 years of work.But hey,I'm only 60 years young,still got a few good years left !

 

[jonnyjetprop]

The problem that both Mooney and Beechcraft have is that while their have been many improvements, it is prohibitively expensive to redesign the basic airframe shape. Both are compromises in comfort.

Cirrus found a way to market a wide, comfortable plane that can compete with the others. The market has spoken and Cirrus won.