pmh,
Its new to me that the M in TBM700 is for Mooney, and the TBM700 was initially a Mooney301
this is indeed the case.
The Mooney 301 was the attempt to follow up on the M22 design, which had proven a disaster for the company. The M22 was the first pressurized GA Single and achieved quite noticeable performance, yet it was way too expensive for the time and did not meet customer demand. Still, some 20 of them are still operating, one of them pretty close to me at Wangen Lachen.
The 301 was basically the brainchild of Roy LoPresti. After reforming the aerodynamics of the “vintage” Mooney line, he wanted to have a go at a totally new airplane which once again was supposed to outrun the competition with a margin. The Mooney 301 first flew in 83 and reached about 250 kts @ 25000 ft during testing. The company was however sold once again in that time to a French Mooney dealer who then proposed to start a joint venture with Socata. Eventually, Socata bought the whole project but agreed to keep the Mooney name in the plane. The main difference between the M301 and the TBM is that the TBM is quite a bit larger and features a Turboprop engine rather than the TSIO540 which flew on the 301. However, a lot of Roy LoPresti’s design is still very visible in the TBM series.
Thanks Bobo.
Somehow Mooneys strike the right cord with me, I think that’s what it is all about. That’s the reason people won’t buy a Benz but prefer a BMW or the other way around. I commend Mooney for starting up again and I truely hope they make it.
Can only agree with what you say. The 252 is one of the best Mooneys ever built, even by some of their own’s taste. Bob Kromer used to say exactly that.
Reading it back, It has become a bit of a rant. Sorry.
I don’t blame you. One of the things which have gotten me quite miffed in recent years is the constant and balant negativism which rules many of the forums and airport round tables I tend to frequent. Sometimes the impression I get is that a lot of people get a kick out of failing projects, failing companies and destroyed dreams. I wonder why the aviation world is so bloody misantrophic at times.
We have a long standing traditional airplane company with a huge following emerge from a shut down and all we hear in this thread for over 500 messages now is how idiotic and outright stupid the investors were, how moronic it is to re-surrect a dinosaur airplane and how obstinate and beyond reason it is to even argue a chance for this company. And just wait for what they believe is the inevitable end of a traditional company and with it for thousands of people owning planes by that company, so they can gloat in the commercial failure and all the consequences it would have for thousands of owners. All this to prove that their **** is bigger?
Frankly, why there would be people who rejoice and speculate on other people’s misfortune just to prove that their own toys are better than others is a behaviour for which I have no explanation.
But maybe it shows a bit of how the European aviation scene has become what it is. A playground of bickering “experts” on all things and intolerance against other opinions.
Can we please make this thread a little less religious.
Just stick to factual postings as far as possible.
Amen :-)
The facts are that these are beautiful airplanes, and that there is no new product in sight and that nobody understands the new business model. And that does not mean we don’t wish it would work. By I, for one, am sceptical.
The 301 looks like a cool plane….wonder how the performance stacked up against the Malibu….
Interesting view by Richard Collins
What’s wrong with Mooney Pilots
Can we please make this thread a little less religious.
All I ask is to refrain from constant bad-mouthing and personal attacks both on posters but particularly on the people of any airplane company who make the airplanes we fly. If we can’t discuss different airplane makes anymore without being immediately shouted down it does not make much sense to even discuss any make or type in this forum.
I think you are exaggerating a bit. Nobody here attacked any Mooney pilot personally. But may we please express our opinion? And maybe, since none of us has any shares in any of those companys, we don’t have to take these things so personally? I personally don’t feel “married” to any of these companys, no not even Cirrus ;-) It’s just a product I bought and enjoy using.
Bobo,
(in post 509) you mention that your M20K doesn’t burn avgas? or have I dimly mis-understood you? could you expand on that please- surely not mogas or UL91?
and Mooney Driver- thanks for the 301 video post- fascinating!
. I think you are exaggerating a bit
You know very well what I am talking about. Just read your own posts. Expressing one’s opinion is one thing, but alleging that
- a company is using untrained and unsuitable staff to “put together” their products
- a company went bancrupt when it did not
as well as your Catonian mantra of repeating over and over that a company WILL fail no matter what
not to mention some other statements in this thread and others directed against people who have been supporting that company such as the Mooney Ambassadors e.t.c. has not much to do with an “opinion” but, at least in the two former cases can be seen as slanderous. Would you have dared to print such statements in the magazine you used to write for? Or rather, would they have passed the legal review any article has to go through? I doubt it and for a reason. So why do it here?
Maybe some people have a more eloquent way of saying it such as Silvaire did when he wrote
A lot of people will ‘logic and conform’ themselves (and everybody else!) right into misery given half a chance – it’s something I’ve observed but never understood. Freedom and individuality require no justification except cash payment.
General Aviation is in a bad enough state as it is. Any company who tries against often overwhelming odds to still keep the dream alive and produce airplanes despite all the naysayers and doomsday prophets at least deserve a bit of respect for their personal dedication. They do a lot more for our continued passion of being able to fly our airplanes than people who constantly will predict the end of everything that does not fit into their world view. And that goes for all the companies who still weather the storms all of GA has been going through in the last decades.
Jesus Christ ;-)
Yes, i could have written the same in any magazine or newspaper i have worked for. I know that’s not legal in every country – but until today i was sure that journalists even in Switzerland were free to write what they WANT (want!) to write.
This reminds me about a marketing employee of Thielert who called my boss when i wrote about the real performance figures of the Thielert 1.7 Centurion after i had taken the time for a climb to 10.000 feet. They said that they would cancel their ads in the magazine – especially if i mentioned that the engine was a “highly modified Mercedes engine”, because Mercedes was not enthusiastic about it. Guess what? All the information stayed in the article.
That’s the difference between journalism and marketing actually ;-) I know that most special interest and practically all aviation magazines only write what their advertising departments want them to write today. You will never find a bad review of a Nikon or Canon camera in a large magazine, no matter if the product is real junk. If it is really bad they will not test it at all, but they will never risk that full size ad from Nikon … And everybody who has ever worked for a magazine knows it’s true.
When was the last time you read something really critical in a MAGAZINE about a general aviation product? I go so far to say that “tests” of airplanes in magazines are more or less useless. Nice to read, fun, cool pictures, yes. A basis for buying a + 500.000 Euro product? No.
As i said: I feel no obligation to write what you want to hear. Personally i wonder what makes you react this way. I think it’s not very far from the truth that Mooney was (technically) “bancrupt”.
Don’t worry so much. If Mooney makes it we will all like that. We all here really like Mooney airplanes !
