Glenn, I'm looking at it the other way: China's regulatory process is probably so inept and corrupt that anyone with enough cash to grease the right communist palms can get an airplane certified, and they can build it with labor that costs next to nothing.

Mooney's parent company is Chinese, where they have a new and rapidly growing need for GA. Those two factors alone probably have as much to do with the fact that they're certifying it there as anything else.

If the Chinese people fly like they drive it better have a parachute.

If the Chinese people fly like they drive it better have a parachute.

:bugeye:

You think its different here? What do all those lobbyists get paid to do?

Do you think its a coincidence that Buf!fet owns flight safety and the ATP rules change? How about the crucifying of corporate owned flight departments and the transition to Net Jets?

That War!ren sure is lucky. At least things are getting built in China. We should be partnering with the Mexicans and competing with the Chinese.

I think the huge success of Van's RV aircraft (over 8,000 completed and probably 2-3 times that many kits out there in garages/hangars) is a testament to what is wrong with General Aviation in the USA. Government regulations/licensing and litigation killed it. It is not the costs of gas or dying WWII pilots. Yes, that all has some effect but the expense and stiffling of invovation created by the FAA killed it. Whew...there I feel better.

Van's RV is a good looking aircraft. That Mooney traineer is a good looking aircraft. At a price point in the $300,000-$400,000 range with a simple glass panel/gps/autopilot (like homebuilders install), those things would sell at a nice clip. Maybe not like planes in the 1970s but they would sell at a healthy pace. Cirrus went to effor to certify and there is a limited market for $700,000 single engine airplanes. I am not sure Cirrus has ever truly made a "profit".

Man - Mooney has worked real hard to have every photo online for this plane vaporized.

I'm glad to see any new plane from a US-based company. No matter what market its designed and sold in.

Third seat is for an observing student. Seems to be common practice among the large 141 academies serving Asian customers.

A day late, and a dollar short. Mooney have done a good job scrubbing the internet of this.

You mean the Chinese Military Internet Bureau has..........

You mean the Chinese Military Internet Bureau has..........

It might surface again this next week, with more detail.

So, the cat is officially out of the bag today. The two new Mooney Models were unveiled at a Chinese airshow. No details about cert or production plans, unfortunately. I'm very curious.

http://www.mooney.com/news/mooney-inter ... ey-models/
http://www.wcarn.com/news/39/39074.html
http://dzynetech.com/mooney-internation ... hnologies/

The M10 was an Ercoupe. I wonder if they're building this on that old CAR3 type certificate.

I'd say there is no possible way for them to use that old cert for this plane... the aerodynamic and structural changes would negate that possibility. I think the M10 name is just a marketing decision to position it "below" the M20 line in current production.

Boeing strong-armed the FAA to build the current generation of 737's off the original CAR 4 cert, but at least it was still aluminum and roughly the same architecture. (there were LOTS of changes, though)

I like it. Will it be made in US?