Mooney Driver, you are comparing aircraft types flying at different speeds. I would suggest the only reason 20C gets a lower USG/NM than the 201 is its lower speed.
Peter Garrison once suggested USG/NM pr. knot as a meaningful measure. Or turned the other way, use NM/USG * KTAS as a measure of efficiency. And then try to put the published numbers for the Panthera into that formula. (It is the same as KTAS squared divided by GPH)
Nice photo, Mooney Driver, and a neat aircraft :-) the Swiss flag on the tail always looks good to my eyes. After you made your comment about market value, I looked at Mooneys on Barnstormers and here too there are some nice ones for sale at good prices.
There are so many nice, older aircraft available now and in real terms they are cheaper now than they've ever been. Young aviators are in an enviable position from that point of view - it's never been cheaper to buy a nice used aircraft, as older pilots retire and younger ones take their legacy and carry it forward. I see it as a privilege. A hint to them might be that if you want lots of cash, to own an aircraft and fly it, marry for the first time in your 40s :-) You'll build an attractive life experience, you'll be less likely to endure a costly plane-removing divorce, and your choices in mate will actually be greater then, not less! Try not to get fat, that helps too.
I imagine the two EASA guys that Pilot DAR describes might be typical. Those two sound like government-fed space cadets, with a view of turbine engines in GA that would've been appropriate in 1971. I think somebody above said something about European regulators predictably creating a view of progress as fewer, "nicer" aircraft flown by an ever more restricted elite? :-)
Peter - I actually remember very well when TBs were selling in volume in the US, Cirrus didn't exist, and pundits predicted the French taking over the US market. The same could happen for the new Pipistrel, but my estimate of between 50 and 200 per year was for the world not just the US. The market for that type of new aircraft is not huge, anywhere.
A hint to them might be that if you want lots of cash, to own an aircraft and fly it, marry for the first time in your 40s :-)
Why marry at all?
It has little meaning if you both have significant/comparable assets - unless you are going to have kids, which at 40+ is unlikely.
And if you are marrying a woman with few or no assets then your expensive hobby is going to go out of the window fast anyway, unless you are really loaded.
You'll build an attractive life experience, you'll be less likely to endure a costly plane-removing divorce, and your choices in mate will actually be greater then, not less!
Very much agree 
I could never understand why so many men get together (or worse still marry) women who don't support their chief leisure activity.
Try not to get fat, that helps too.
This could get really controversial
but my estimate of between 50 and 200 per year was for the world not just the US
It's reasonable. Socata sold ~ 2000 TBs between 1980 and 2002.
And they had a labour intensive production facility. Partly because of it's workforce (every time I visited their factory, I saw a bunch of people taking life very easy) and partly due to outdated processes. They had a lot of tooling and jigs (a big plus) but the whole plane was wired by hand whereas one should get a standard harness made in China and just drop it in, etc.
In the price of a TBM, you can lose those working practices, but not in a TB.
However it's difficult to guess at the potential, given the current economic climate. If Pipistrel get this right, and achieve the very significant performance increment, they will have a nice product for those who are currently paying 6 figures for anything from a used TB20GT to a new SR22.
BTW the Panthera doesn't compare with a Mooney for comfort. Try getting into the Pantera at Friedrichshafen (I did last year) and try getting into a Mooney. The Panthera is very much easier to get in and out of. The two doors completely transform the comfort equation.
BTW the Panthera doesn't compare with a Mooney for comfort. Try getting into the Pantera at Friedrichshafen (I did last year) and try getting into a Mooney. The Panthera is very much easier to get in and out of.
That could be important (seriously) to the old guys that are the likely market. Looking at existing aircraft, its not easy to make an aircraft that is both efficient and easy to get into and out of. The Lancair 4 is a good example, ungodly fast in the cruise but mounting up is a 'procedure'.
Why marry at all? It has little meaning if you both have significant/comparable assets - unless you are going to have kids, which at 40+ is unlikely. And if you are marrying a woman with few or no assets then your expensive hobby is going to go out of the window fast anyway, unless you are really loaded.
You marry in your 40s because (speaking for myself you understand!) you'll soon enough be in your 60s and less attractive. The train leaves the station and you can no longer run! Its always possible she might love your hobbies, have some assets, dislike excess in housing etc, and she might have an immigration issue too ;-)
The experimental market... it is the FAA's way of saying "leave us alone and do what you want" in the GA sector as well as circumnavigating the horrendous liablility laws. Thankfully, the FAA plays the game and lets you fly these great airplanes properly
It was the people telling the FAA to leave us alone, diplomatically of course, circa 1953. Paul Poberezny (a great 'politician') and Steve Wittman (a great engineer/experimenter) were at the forefront . In the 80s, with Burt Rutan doing his thing, the FAA seemingly decided that if you can't beat them (down), embrace them.
http://sierra5.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1865&Itemid=1
There is an 'english' button as well.
If you look at the picture of the plane during landing, the sleek forms really become apparent. The windshield angle and the nose angle are almost the same. You probably have to land her very flat to have any kind of forward visibility.
Anybody who has flown a Monocoupe will have no trouble at all :-) They were fast too, for at least one of the same reasons. Pilots are less draggy when hidden behind an engine.
Can you slip down an ILS?
Silvaire,
yes, I had to chuckle a bit when I read the bit about the small turbine, yet there is a serious bit in it, insofar as it may well be that EASA will consider future GA to be from a jetprop type of plane up for those folks who are wealthy and influential enough to cause them trouble and then the UL / VLA scene for the pedestrian kind of folk... leaves out the very bit we are talking about, 4 seat tourers.
There are so many nice, older aircraft available now and in real terms they are cheaper now than they've ever been. Young aviators are in an enviable position from that point of view - it's never been cheaper to buy a nice used aircraft, as older pilots retire and younger ones take their legacy and carry it forward. I see it as a privilege.
True. I never even imagines that I might ever own a Mooney. And in the years leading up to me buying it, I noticed that planes then were for sale for YEARS before anyone picks them up and then at a very much lower price. One sample, a guy was trying to sell a lovely PA28-140, which is a very nice budget tourer for youngsters as it is cheap to operate. This one had newer radios, mid life engine and even a 2 axis AP. I first considered it for myself and he asked around £30k, which was way too much for me. Then they came down slowly when I told them I could have an Arrow II for £20k, but still were adamant they wanted that new amount, even though the plane was not flying. They still own it, it has not flown for 6 years by now and they will now sell at £10k, but it will need work now to get it back up. Prices of planes like that have virtually imploded. That Mooney 201 which was sold for about £30k the other day had a brand new engine and prop, KFC200 AP and an old King Radio suite, but it was according to the MAPA evaluation worth about double that much! Yet he had tried for 6 years and nobody bites.
What worries me in my function as someone who tries to encourage airplane ownership is the overwhelmingly negative attitude people face from within the pilot community! It's really enough to get anyone discouraged, with horror stories about maintenance, taxes, fees e.t.c. which are widely excagarated and hugely "word of the mouth" amplified through dozens of would be's who never got the courage to get a plane purchase past their significant other. Equally, clubs discourage ownership as they don't want to loose customers.... whom they loose anyhow but who simply hang up flying.
Peter,
BTW the Panthera doesn't compare with a Mooney for comfort. Try getting into the Pantera at Friedrichshafen (I did last year) and try getting into a Mooney. The Panthera is very much easier to get in and out of. The two doors completely transform the comfort equation.
That is true almost of all 2 door planes as opposed to one door. Cessnas are hard to beat to get in and out of. Pipers and Mooneys are ok if you get used to it, I did try Lancairs once and could not even get in, equally I tried some other designs at Friedrichshafen which did not work too well either. I am considered "fat" by my flight suregon, so when I told him I fly a Mooney he thought I was joking.
Yet. When I first went to fly it, yes, it is a bit cumbersome to get in until you are used to it, but once seated i found no difference to the Arrow I'd been flying a week before that and even to a Bonanza in terms of cabin width. Yes, you sit close up to the panel and if you have bi-focals this is one place to use them, yet one has to compromise on some things. I can own this plane because of what it is and how much it costs to operate, so I am quite happy that there are planes out there which let a normal earner like me fly a 150 kt cruiser at the price of a Cherokee 180, that is much less than I'd pay for current rides at a club.
I think Silvaire has a VERY valid point that the fact that prices are so low now is a huge chance for youngsters to get into ownership. Exactly for that reason, the retrofit market for engines and props will be enormeous, if taken on correctly and if not hindered unduely by EASA and their merry rulesters.
Recently, I had some information out of Continental about the TD300 that they actually see it as a direct replacement in the future for the whole series of engines starting from the O360 up all the engines up to 230 hp and will agressively try to market it that way. I know of someone in the US who has approached Continental about equipping a Mooney 201 with it and they told him they are working in the direction to offer STC's for all the common models around. So they are going the Thielert way in that sense, also talking about differently rated engines based on the same base engine.
My own plan at the moment with a less than 200 hour old engine since overhaul is to fly it as long as possible and then, if the Diesel conversion becomes available, to go that route if possible, trading in the remaining value of my current engine. For me, if I look at the data and specs, this could mean quite a performance increase (180 to 230 hp) at less fuel consumption, realistically an airplane which will make about 160 kts to 180 kts higher up @ 6-8 gph Jet A1, increasing my range at 52 USG available considerably, from now 650 NM to about 1100 NM.
The same think could happen with the Panthera, which is exactly in this power range. Reducing fuel flow from 10-12 GPH to 6-8 with the exactly same tanks but 30 hp more, the Panthera could give the Ovation a run for it's money. I'd be very surprised if they don't at least explore that way.
Best regards Urs
it may well be that EASA will consider future GA to be from a jetprop type of plane up for those folks who are wealthy and influential enough to cause them trouble and then the UL / VLA scene for the pedestrian kind of folk... leaves out the very bit we are talking about, 4 seat tourers.
Oh, I don't think there is any question about that.
I wasn't really interested in aviation before I could buy the aircraft I was to fly, with cash and no partners. That might be why I'm not a Brave New World kind of guy.
I wasn't really interested in aviation before I could buy the aircraft I was to fly, with cash and no partners
That's a completely reasonable policy
