"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...

"Dude" wrote:
I can see you point, but you are really stretching here IMO. First,
Mooney
now has a quality level similar to that of Beech.

Maybe so, but says who?


Me, I compared. Also a recent mag article agreed.

Second, there are
financially sound manufacturers who have left buyers in similar
situations
even without going TU.

Cite?


The only specific I can name by buyer is Art P who got a Cirrus lemon beyond
compare. However, we have all heard stories about C, P, and B leaving a
customer in a lurch. Here's an idea, call Cessna and ask a question about
recommendations on how to fix your plane. See if you like their "service".
I recently saw a new 182 with bad paint that the guy had to fight for 6
months to get fixed. Have you ever talked to people in the next hangar?


So the plane needs a new spar, that does not make the plane worthless.

I didn't say it did. Airplanes get parked for a lot less than total
loss.
What do you reckon replacing the main spar would cost? Even if the owner
bites the bullet and fixes the spar, he's still screwed for an awful lot
of
money. Plus, his airplane now has a major repair in the logs, which will
affect its value.


There are lots of bad things that can screw you out of lots of money that
are more likely to happen. Sit and worry if you will. BTW, did any Mooney
owners ever get burned on their warranties? I remember they were worried,
but do not recall if the new company cleared it up each time.


I suppose you are of the everything but Beech and Cessna is a cr*p
sandwich
variety?

Why do you suppose that? You're setting some kind of record for putting
words in my mouth.


Note the question mark. I didn't put words in anyones mouth. I have had it
up to hear with these attitudes, and they mostly end up being about the
same. Sorry if you don't quite fit the mold.



One day, barring a new design that is not forthcoming, those guys will
pull
out of piston planes for good.

Here, I agree with you.

If they don't manage to kill off our little
hobby (which they would do in a minute if they could sell more jets by
doing
it),

It's no secret that B and C are dubious about the pi


No, but you are worried about losing lots of money. Tried selling an orphan
lately? Furthermore, I believe they will do whatever they think costs least
in the long run. One day, some accountant in either company says they
should stop making parts, they will do it. CORRECT OR NOT!


what do you plan to do?

Are you willing to buy a Cirrus, Diamond, or Lancair?

I seriously doubt I'll *ever* buy a new airplane. If I were in the
market,
I would consider the above. Under no circumstances would I consider an
old
design from a company that had just emerged from bankruptcy.


Its nice to know there is hope for you. I can understand not buying new,
and I can understand being wary of a recent bankruptcy. What I don't
understand is your motivation to comment at all. Serious, if you are not
ever going to buy new, then where do you get off telling people that buy a
new Mooney they are stupid. What do you know about it all?

People who keep up the
"nuth'n but a Cessna" attitude are just killing GA slowly. I see them
running all over the alphabet organizations, including AOPA. It's so
disappointing.

Uh, Cirrus is selling 40 piston planes a month; that's more than Cessna.
So
tell me again: how is the "nuth'n but a Cessna" attitude killing GA?
--

40 is not enough to get the level of investment we need for real innovation.
Please compare to the hundreds a month levels of production from the days of
yore. New investors are looking at Cirrus, and have to be thinking that
they are nuts to risk so much money. Only aviation enthusiasts are going to
play, which may be a positive, but we really need to attract more pilots and
more money. Companies like Cessna exist in many fields, and they keep
investment down due to their sheer market presence. The difference between
Cessna and Microsoft is that MS has done something new in the last 10 or 20
years for its customers.