The Airplane That Caused Mooney To Bankrupt

2023 ж. 23 Там.
102 039 Рет қаралды

Aviation history is filled with tales of triumphs and innovations that have shaped the way we travel and explore the skies. However, not every aircraft design has managed to fly to success. In this video, we will delve into five aircraft that fell short of their intended goals: the Piper Jet, Pipistrel Panthera, Mooney M10, Cessna 162, and Cessna TTx.
1. Piper Jet
The Piper Jet was intended to be a game-changer for the general aviation market. Piper Aircraft, known for its popular line of small aircraft, ventured into the realm of business jets with the Piper Jet. Unfortunately, the project faced numerous setbacks, including technical challenges and financial difficulties. The aircraft's development was plagued by delays, and the company struggled to secure the necessary funding to bring the project to fruition. As a result, the Piper Jet never made it to full-scale production, leaving it as a promising concept that never took flight.
2. Pipistrel Panthera
Slovenian aircraft manufacturer Pipistrel aimed to create an efficient and sleek general aviation aircraft with the Panthera. Promising impressive fuel efficiency and advanced avionics, the Panthera garnered attention for its distinctive design and claimed capabilities. However, production delays and challenges with obtaining necessary certifications hampered the aircraft's progress. The company also faced difficulties in meeting its performance targets, which led to further skepticism within the aviation community. Despite its initial potential, the Pipistrel Panthera failed to establish a strong foothold in the market.
3. Mooney M10
Mooney, a well-known name in the world of general aviation, embarked on an ambitious project with the Mooney M10. The M10 was envisioned as a technologically advanced single-engine aircraft with a sleek and futuristic design. Mooney aimed to revolutionize the market with its innovative features and materials. However, the company struggled with production delays and challenges related to the M10's unique construction and design. As costs escalated and the project faced obstacles, Mooney eventually had to shelve the M10 program. The aircraft's failure to materialize showcased the difficulties in bringing groundbreaking concepts to life.
4. Cessna 162 Skycatcher
Cessna, a renowned aircraft manufacturer, introduced the Cessna 162 Skycatcher as an entry-level aircraft aimed at revitalizing the pilot training and recreational flying markets. The Skycatcher boasted modern features and technology, making it an attractive option for new pilots. However, the aircraft faced criticism for its performance limitations, build quality issues, and a relatively high price tag compared to other training aircraft. These factors, coupled with a challenging economic environment, led to the discontinuation of the Skycatcher program. Cessna's attempt to tap into the lower end of the market didn't yield the anticipated results.
5. Cessna TTx
The Cessna TTx, a high-performance single-engine aircraft, was designed to provide speed, style, and sophistication. With its sleek lines and turbocharged engine, the TTx aimed to capture the attention of pilots seeking both luxury and performance. However, the aircraft faced difficulties in finding its niche within the market. The TTx came with a premium price tag, positioning it in competition with more established aircraft brands and models. Despite its impressive specifications, the TTx struggled to gain a strong foothold and eventually faded from production./
Become A Commercial Pilot in 9 months lookupflightacademy.com
Learn how to make money on KZhead: mojocreatives.com/huddle
Used airplanes for sale www.aeroavion.com

Пікірлер
  • I kills me the Mooney m10 ate the dust, such a beautiful plane

    @pumarolz@pumarolz6 ай бұрын
  • It's insane about the M10. Diesel motor, Mooney, two gull doors, composite, newest avionics, if it carried the same no maintenence gear, Sold, Sold, SOLD!!! Heartbreaker

    @NT4XT@NT4XT6 ай бұрын
  • The Cessna Skycatcher was doomed when they announced that it would be made in China.

    @jimarcher5255@jimarcher52556 ай бұрын
    • The Cirrus is Chinese owned…and it dominates the market. The problem with the Skycatcher was not China…it was too expensive to buy and operate for flight schools.

      @tz6516@tz65164 ай бұрын
    • It did annoy (anger) their potential customers when they announced it.

      @PRH123@PRH1234 ай бұрын
    • I don't know man, 737 max isn't made in China yet it kills people

      @donniebunkerboi9975@donniebunkerboi99754 ай бұрын
    • If I'm not interested in a Chinese car, let alone Chinese "scooter" that only goes 30 mph, I'm certainly not interested in riding in a Chinese aircraft. Unless I have no choice and forced to. Scary! lol

      @johannjohann6523@johannjohann65234 ай бұрын
    • ⁠@@tz6516but still manufactured in the US, Duluth MN

      @NE14MX@NE14MX4 ай бұрын
  • The insurance on the panthera is probably due to the retractable landing gear. It would’ve been a cirrus killer

    @bowzist@bowzist8 ай бұрын
    • one of my favorite nu planes

      @AlanMydland-fq2vs@AlanMydland-fq2vs2 ай бұрын
  • Click bait title Mike… Mooney went on to develop the Ovation Ultra and the Acclaim Ultra, separately from the M10 project. There have been more changes of ownership… but, bankruptcy wasn’t the issue…. 😃

    @AC-jk8wq@AC-jk8wq8 ай бұрын
  • It's thanks to the piper jet that we have the vision jet

    @ferrarikingdom@ferrarikingdom8 ай бұрын
    • They were developed at the same time. Both 2006. Only one made it.

      @jimpenney5508@jimpenney55085 ай бұрын
  • I would own a Panthera without insurance if it’s that expensive. That Mooney M10 does look like an awesome plane too.

    @Tommy-B.@Tommy-B.8 ай бұрын
    • Panthera was $ 500K plane, then Textron bought the company, now it is $1M plane

      @altergreenhorn@altergreenhorn5 ай бұрын
    • If you could afford a $650k to $1M airplane, there are only 3 options: 1- you could certainly afford to insure it 2- you'd be a fool to own/fly it uninsured 3- you were so wealthy that loosing a million + any liability isn't a concern.

      @justsomejoe3632@justsomejoe36325 ай бұрын
    • @@justsomejoe3632 Buying insurance is like playing video lottery terminals, you never win; the VLTs and the insurance companies ALWAYS win.

      @elliottdiedrich3068@elliottdiedrich30685 ай бұрын
    • @@elliottdiedrich3068 They always win as long as nothing goes wrong. But if you don't have it and something goes wrong, you're totally f'ed. That's the point. That's what insurance is. That's why you pay a little knowing in all likelihood you'll get nothing back. Astounding how many people don't understand risk and consequences. Well, given the state of our society, I suppose it's not at all surprising.

      @justsomejoe3632@justsomejoe36325 ай бұрын
    • @@justsomejoe3632 The insurance companies ALWAYS win, including when things go wrong for you. First, they will try to find a loophole to avoid paying, but even if they do pay, it is part of the big plan. They need to pay a little bit out here and there in order to justify taking in the vast sums everywhere else. You would be money ahead if you put aside your premiums for when something does go wrong. Without insurance forced upon us, many things would be significantly cheaper. For instance, many years ago, the cost of a compressor disc on a Bell 206 was well above $30,000.00. Significantly more than half of that cost was to cover liability insurance on the disc in case it broke, yet I've never heard of anyone collecting because of a failed compressor. The insurance companies ALWAYS win and the world would be much better off without them.

      @elliottdiedrich3068@elliottdiedrich30685 ай бұрын
  • The Aerostar Jet would have been awesome. Looks like a mini 737

    @AviationJeremy@AviationJeremy8 ай бұрын
    • Always loved the way the Aerostar looked, something super clean about a straight mid wing. Don't think it needed twin jets though, the market for that category is pretty well Textron/Cessnas domain.

      @garytill@garytill5 ай бұрын
    • loved this bird a aero star on roids😅

      @AlanMydland-fq2vs@AlanMydland-fq2vs2 ай бұрын
  • You did not say why Piper pulled the plug on their jet.

    @wernerdanler2742@wernerdanler27428 ай бұрын
  • Nice job Mike.

    @bhamm96688@bhamm966884 ай бұрын
  • I absolutely love your videos.

    @Praterphil@Praterphil4 ай бұрын
  • Its weird to see the TTx on the list. It may just be because my airport has a Van Bortel dealer, but I see TTxs so much, freaking drowning in them! And many I see also aren’t always in for the dealer.

    @air-headedaviator1805@air-headedaviator18058 ай бұрын
  • The Skycatcher @ 3:50 (N6029G) flies out of one of the other locations that the flight school I'm attending operates out of!

    @FlamingTomatoAviation@FlamingTomatoAviation8 ай бұрын
  • Back in the 80’s McDonnell I think it was had a single on the boards a single pilot tandem seated that they called the Eagle prior to the fighter. I think it was exploratory… saw it on one of the flying mag way back when…

    @bayanicustodio3998@bayanicustodio39988 ай бұрын
  • A friend of mine owns a skycatcher. He loves the little plane, it has been good for him.

    @johnmajane3731@johnmajane37314 ай бұрын
  • Thanks for your information. I am looking foward to get my pilot license.

    @jacontreras04@jacontreras048 ай бұрын
  • @mojogrip great video! So what would be the drawbacks for someone that buys a cessna 162? Will they be grounded? Or will servicing them become too expensive? Thank you for your time.

    @favbal2450@favbal24508 ай бұрын
    • Operating costs and replacement part availability makes the C162 a poor purchase. It’s crazy but a 50+ year old C152 is a better flight school airplane, with a lower acquisition cost and operating costs.

      @tz6516@tz65164 ай бұрын
  • Interesting to know of...

    @leanbean8376@leanbean83768 ай бұрын
  • When I see a new plane being announced, I don't know what the cruising speed, consumption or range will be, but I already know that it will be very expensive, so I'm not even interested. It's easier to dream about what already exists on the market like a good used Piper or Cessna.

    @alessdre@alessdre8 ай бұрын
  • 5:11: No. The TTX was not the fastest single engine production airplane. That title belonged and still belongs to the Mooney Acclaim. The TTX was the fastest non-retractable single engine production airplane.

    @johnmohanmusic@johnmohanmusic2 ай бұрын
  • I'm just learning about the smaller personal aircraft market, but the Mooney M10 with a diesel engine that only puts out 155 HP? Diesel engines are generally reliable, or more reliable than gasoline engines, but they produce torque, not horsepower generally for towing items. Seems odd choice for aircraft.

    @johannjohann6523@johannjohann65234 ай бұрын
  • Excellent Video! 💯

    @Desire123ification@Desire123ification8 ай бұрын
  • One of the reasons planes are hard to sell, is lack of pilots with the money and time to buy and fly them.

    @renegadeflyer2@renegadeflyer24 ай бұрын
  • i thought you were going to say, the BBJ 787-ER

    @ytlongbeach@ytlongbeach8 ай бұрын
  • Panthera is still experimental that’s what makes it expensive to insure. There are no updates on the FAA certification which was supposed to be received this year.

    @susansticazsky9787@susansticazsky97877 ай бұрын
    • I thought it was slated for next year? All articles I've seen say 2024.

      @TheJoesenOne93@TheJoesenOne937 ай бұрын
    • Look like the new owner Textron doesnt care about certification

      @altergreenhorn@altergreenhorn5 ай бұрын
  • Mike today I enjoy the jet you show me I will buy one,I will call you soon.

    @salifuosman9101@salifuosman91017 ай бұрын
  • What I want but I can’t find anymore is a canard ultralight. 😂

    @batymahn@batymahn8 ай бұрын
  • Thankfully, only 5 small planes failed. 5 out of a million small planes is a pretty good statistic.

    @rob379lqz@rob379lqz8 ай бұрын
  • Guess I don't understand all I know. I remember that Mooney bought the rights to the old ercoupe(alon) then took away the twin tails and replaced them with a single Mooney tail. To my recollection, they called it a Mooney 10 cadet.

    @leonmills6867@leonmills68675 ай бұрын
  • It's to bad Piper Brass didn't say, hey, let's co=make this jet with another company or two. Maybe they would have sold a lot of Piper Jets. You could have a jet for a subdivision or group of owners in say Naples, Florida.

    @markseifried3959@markseifried3959Ай бұрын
  • I wish I could fly at look up academy

    @omokefegeorge1132@omokefegeorge11326 ай бұрын
  • Why was the Panthera so expensive to insure?

    @Repairman87@Repairman878 ай бұрын
    • Probably because its foreign made. That kinda double certification for that level of plane must hike up the liability

      @air-headedaviator1805@air-headedaviator18058 ай бұрын
    • It is not a certified design. It is experimental.

      @tz6516@tz65164 ай бұрын
    • Maybe because currently it's only available in the experimental category and not as a certified aircraft.

      @karldunnegan2689@karldunnegan26893 ай бұрын
  • If you come to buy Panthere in EU you can take it for 600.000$, but the problem is that it's just experimental.

    @matijacej7811@matijacej78118 ай бұрын
  • Very good

    @gilmarsampaio9566@gilmarsampaio95668 ай бұрын
  • crowded market😢

    @AlanMydland-fq2vs@AlanMydland-fq2vs2 ай бұрын
  • Where do you find diesel fuel at the field??

    @donzioldbuddy@donzioldbuddy8 ай бұрын
    • Jet-A is winter Diesel.

      @fliteshare@fliteshare8 ай бұрын
    • Jet A is more available (and often less expensive per gallon) than 100LL av gas.

      @tz6516@tz65164 ай бұрын
  • wow a lot of good-looking planes that are obsolete.

    @bigguy5155@bigguy51556 ай бұрын
  • Carve ?

    @hieulengotran5093@hieulengotran50938 ай бұрын
  • I like videos, from Malawi. I hope some day we will fly together.

    @omegamkandawire3576@omegamkandawire35768 ай бұрын
  • If the Piper single engine aircraft cost around the same as a 2 engine jet aircraft, yeah not a good idea to market that plane at all. I'm all for redundancy in aircraft! lol

    @johannjohann6523@johannjohann65234 ай бұрын
  • The TTx was never the fastest certified single. The Mooney Acclaim is significantly faster.

    @brandthershman4088@brandthershman40882 ай бұрын
  • No true about ttx I have 3 Cessna provide plenty parts as any Cessna as you know Cessna has airplane even not in production since 60 years and still you have the part in 24 hrs send it to you any where in the plane make … so please research more before

    @yurimoros@yurimoros8 ай бұрын
    • Really?? So you are saying there are parts? The TTX is a beautiful bird.

      @zutrue@zutrue8 ай бұрын
    • @@zutrue I own a 2006 Columbia 400 and a 2017 Cessna TTX. Getting parts and support from Cessna is not a problem at all.

      @carlrossi7989@carlrossi79895 ай бұрын
  • What's weird to me about the Panthera is it's touted as being a very modern, safe, and easy to fly airplane. It's a retract which doesn't help that cause, but so are a lot of other planes that are easier to insure. My only guess is there aren't a lot in the air so the insurance companies are keeping the requirements high until there is more data available.

    @JabariHunt@JabariHunt8 ай бұрын
  • intersting but mistotled cast.

    @joepiloto@joepiloto4 ай бұрын
  • I love aviation and its sad. "The best way to make a million dollars in aviation is to start with a billion."

    @coastalbbq1@coastalbbq14 ай бұрын
  • Flying is now out of reach of all but the wealthy. It costs more than $500,000 for a new Cessna 172; if a primary trainer costs more than a nice house, forget it.

    @privateer0561@privateer05613 ай бұрын
  • The 162 behaves like a mosquito in the wind that was a bad experience, do not fly that one in any wind conditions.

    @federalagenciesarecourtesans@federalagenciesarecourtesans4 ай бұрын
  • It's spelled Panthera but pronounced Pahn-Tera...

    @AntonioPerales-bb8pm@AntonioPerales-bb8pm3 ай бұрын
  • I always disliked the 162 with great hatred I just don't like how the thing looks it looks like a toy.

    @its_whack@its_whack8 ай бұрын
  • None of these planes offer a B R S .

    @bernarddeneau6678@bernarddeneau66784 ай бұрын
  • I wish Elon Musk would apply his manufacturing techniques toward making an airplane. It would revive the industry.

    @mafp22w@mafp22w5 ай бұрын
    • In a recent interview Elon said he has an airplane design in his head…but said he doesn’t have the time to pursue it right now.

      @tz6516@tz65164 ай бұрын
    • You're both right. The Cybertruck has bulletproof glass that isn't, it cannot climb a curb in the Tesla parking lot and it was rescued by a Ford Pickup when it diverted off a trail. A big bonus is not retrieving anything in the bed from the side, the way you can on every other Pickup.

      @arcanondrum6543@arcanondrum65434 ай бұрын
    • Manufacturing techniques would not solve the insurance/liability problems.

      @brentsutherland6385@brentsutherland63854 ай бұрын
  • China was involved in Mooney too wasn’t it?

    @azcoyote007@azcoyote0074 ай бұрын
    • And Cirrus.

      @tz6516@tz65164 ай бұрын
  • Skycatcher: Made in China. There's the reason it failed. I would never fly something made in China.

    @gnagyusa@gnagyusa3 ай бұрын
  • Compare the C162 with a Tecnam 2008 and you will understand why nobody want that "sitting duck" poor looking, china made aircraft. What at Cessna had in their mind when they started this project?

    @antonioiozzi9171@antonioiozzi91715 ай бұрын
KZhead