AOPA to Quiz Prez
Candidates on GA

Now that we have the two candidates and their running mates selected in the presidential horse race, how those four politicians will view GA is on the top of all of our agendas right now.

The latest addition to this dance card is of course Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska, who AOPA says is a friend of GA. She is also the least qualified vice-presidential candidate ever, but when you consider her GA street cred, she does appear to be one of us. From aopa.com:

"Considering that GA is the primary form of long-distance transportation in the forty-ninth state, it’s not surprising that Gov. Palin has taken a stand on the user fee issue. In May 2007, she signed a resolution in opposition to the FAA’s plan to increase avgas taxes, impose user fees, and slash airport funding. AOPA and the Alaska Airmen’s Association had worked together to move the resolution through the Alaska legislature. There is a family connection as well. Palin’s husband, Todd, is an AOPA member and Super Cub owner."

AOPA has thrown down the gauntlet this week, trying to prod the two campaigns into telling us their views on GA issues:

"Neither presidential campaign has yet published a position on general aviation issues. So, AOPA has sent each candidate a questionnaire. Responses from Sens. McCain and Obama about FAA funding, air traffic control, GA security, the environment, and their personal experiences with GA will be published in the November issue of AOPA Pilot. (Don’t worry, the magazine will be in your mailbox weeks before you cast your ballot.)"

AOPA does not endorse candidates per se, but they do have a very long history of doing stellar work presenting the GA positions of those candidates. To perform their due diligence, they are asking both Obama and McCain, the following:

"1. What is your experience with general aviation? How have you personally used general aviation?

2. As an elected official, can you cite actions you have taken to support general aviation?

3. General aviation airports are an important part of the national air transportation system but are often faced with the threat of closure or limits on access. How will you support general aviation airports as part of the national airport system?

4. Airlines and the current Administration have proposed replacing the current system of fuel and ticket taxes to fund the FAA with a user fee-based system assessing fees on each component of a flight. What is your view of how to fund the aviation system?

5. Recognizing that both aviation users and the general public receive significant benefits from a safe and efficient air transportation system, Congress has funded the FAA through an appropriation that combines funding from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund (aviation taxes) and the General Fund. Do you support continuing to fund approximately 25 percent of the FAA’s budget with General Fund dollars?

6. Industry observers, think tanks, and some airlines have proposed a variety of management structures for the FAA’s air traffic control system. Do you believe air traffic control is a fundamental government function or should be spun off to the private sector?

7. There has been a lot of discussion about aviation and the environment. Given that pilots are very sensitive to anything affecting the cost of flying, how would your environmental policy address these concerns?

8. On the issue of homeland security, the challenge facing policymakers is finding the right balance between security, individual rights, and the economic viability of the general aviation industry. What are your views on general aviation security?

9. What specific qualifications will you look for when nominating a FAA Administrator?"

All very valid questions. And when the answers come out, we will have to start up the ol' crap-o-meter and sift through them to find out what part of their schtick is genuine and what part of their answers are canned responses that obviously pander to the pilot community to secure votes.

Neither Obama or McCain should underestimate the GA voter, because a candidate that supports user fees and does not address the sad state of FAA will not get our support no matter how cute many perceive their "hockey mom" VP choice to be.

Will President Obama Be Good for GA?

It's over. Goodnight Irene. Slammed and dunked. The Fat Lady has sung...all the worn out clichés in the book. This presidential election ended today the moment George W. Bush v2.0 picked a completely unknown woman from Alaska to be his VP selection.

I know this is an aviation blog, but consider this:

They say Barack Obama is taking the high road, that he spends too much time on the issues instead of punching McCain in the face. But why would Obama need to throw blows to the jaw when the Rove/GOP/BushCo political machine is so good at shooting themselves in the foot with major mistakes like the Sarah Palin choice? I get giddy thinking about how hard it will be for the right-wing spin machine to turn this into something positive. Oh wait, Rush just called her a babe...and she hunts MOOSE! I guess in their world those two traits make her qualified to stand one heartbeat away from the Oval Office.

After the rousing speech Obama made last night, and now this magnificent McCain blunder, we can all sit back now and watch "Big Mo" propel Obama straight to the White House. So that means we all need to start doing our homework on what that'll mean to GA. We won't know today what a Obama presidency will affect the aviation community, but one thing we know for certain now is this:

McCain is toast...Palin will be his Eagleton.

FAA:
Please Reboot

Our airspace system went straight to hell this week, causing major delays nationwide, reports CNN and others:

"Every major airport in the United States was experiencing flight delays Tuesday afternoon because of a communications breakdown at a Federal Aviation Administration facility, the administration said. Flights at Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport were delayed Tuesday afternoon. The facility south of Atlanta is having problems processing data, requiring that all flight-plan information be processed through a facility in Salt Lake City, Utah. On the FAA's Web site, delays were being reported at all 40 airports located on the administration's flight information map." [see image at top right of his post]

The administration said there have been no radar outages and they have not lost contact with any planes. Reuters is reporting the total number of flights affected as 5,825. A major weather system – remnants of Tropical Storm Fay – is also pounding ATL, adding to the misery of 1,000s of travelers.

CNN says "The problem appeared similar to a June 8, 2007, computer glitch that caused severe flight delays and some cancellations along the East Coast." I say, dump whatever Windows-based system the FAA is using and get a couple of hundred Macs. Not only will they have little to no major failures like this, all the pretty pictures the FAA people look at will be beautiful.

I am joking of course about the Macs, because we all know Macs are just for kids to listen to music on...and Windows boxes are BIG and POWERFUL and...oh wait, they crashed again. Damn.

UPDATE @ 2P on 08.27.08: I just got this money quote from a controller who shall remain anonymous: "Windows? Heck we're still running MS-DOS 5.0 on one of the systems at the Tower/TRACON where I work!!"

What Happens In Vegas
Hopefully Stays in Vegas

The "traditional media" in Las Vegas has delivered yet another example of shock aviation journalism following the horrific crash of a Velocity 173RG that killed two occupants of the plane and one person on the ground.

A local Vegas TV station turned one of their "investigative reporters" loose on the story, and the result is classic:

"The plane in Friday's tragedy can be ordered over the Internet in a do-it-yourself kit. It runs about $30,000. Last year, experimental homebuilt planes accounted for more than 12-percent of plane accidents nationwide. They are a $30,000 do-it-yourself dream -- sleek planes built from the ground up in garages and backyards."

Yes, any Goober with a computer and thirty large can order up one of them homebuilt contraptions and duct tape the damned thing together in his backyard...at least that's what the reporter wants you to believe. Read that at face value and anyone not knowledgeable with the EAA and experimental aircraft could think these are cobbed-up junk slapped together by amateurs.

This is some of the worst reporting on aviation I have seen in a while. What makes this report so off the mark is that in the very same story, the same reporter blows his whole "ordered off the Internet and built in the backyard so they must be crap" argument right out of the water:

"Even though they are built by hobbyists, the planes have to be physically checked by the FAA or certified inspectors before the first flight and every year after that. Yes, it was built by an individual and not on a production line, but it is built to FAA standards."

So wait, let's break this down shall we? A certified production aircraft comes off a production line and is inspected by the FAA and deemed airworthy. A similar experimental aircraft is built in some dude's basement, but STILL INSPECTED BY THE FAA and deemed airworthy. But because some reporter is claiming these "Internet phenomenons" are somehow unsafe, he has whipped up such a fever that now the county aviation brass responsible for North Las Vegas Airport are claiming the sky is falling and it's all the fault of experimental aircraft. Here is a look at that development to this story, from ANN:

"Following the tragic fatal crash of a Velocity 173RG in Las Vegas, NV, a local official from the Clark County Aviation Authority is grabbing some headlines. The Aviation Director, Randy Walker is apparently calling for the banishment of experimental aircraft from the North Las Vegas Airport. Despite the fact that there is a long history of problems revolving around Las Vegas Airports, for a number of reasons, Walker is reacting to the one accident that occurred this week as the specific reason to forbid the flying of experimental-amateur built aircraft from "busier" airports."

Man, this just stinks in so many ways on so many levels. It makes me wonder just HOW the HELL all those "Internet phenomenons" managed to arrive at Oshkosh this summer without killing massive amounts of innocents on the ground. You would think that some of that BAILING WIRE would have came loose sending flaming homebuilts into the Wisconsin countryside.

Back in the days when I was a reporter, we had these growling people looking over our shoulders called EDITORS that fact checked a story before releasing it for printing. Had this story been looked over by a actual editor, the fact that this Velocity that crashed was inspected by the FAA same as a production aircraft could not have been overlooked. That fact would have killed this story, and the flames of discontent that have now caused a call for a ban on experimentals at VGT would never have been fanned.

Great Idea, as
Long as I
Don't Fly it!

I ran across this interesting project today, and thought it deserved mention:

A group of model airplane enthusiasts will fly a battery powered Radio Controlled (RC) airplane designated as a parkflyer in all 48 contiguous United States. A parkflyer is a small RC plane typically flown in a field such as a local park or soccer field. The name they have given this adventure is Wings Across America 2008 or WAA-08 for short. What sets this project apart from all the others ever attempted or completed is that the pilots will hand deliver the plane from pilot to pilot. The plane will never be shipped by mail to its next destination. This method will be creating a "chain" of pilots that personally fly, then hand off the model to the next pilot, all across the continental United States. In the end, the model airplane will have flown in all 48 states and cover a distance of over 14,000 miles along the way. It will end its journey at home field about 12 months after it made its maiden flight in eastern Virginia. Currently, over 250 pilots have registered to take part in this history making project.

As my regular readers know, I have attempted to fly park flyers many times, with horrible results. I have lost track of the number of park flyers I have murdered, but here is a capsule summary of those I can remember:

In a stiff wind, I let my first park flyer drift too far downwind over a shopping center. As the speck in the sky got smaller, radio reception ended, and the speck disappeared into the distance. On my second attempt, I had one park flyer literally break apart in mid-air, the V-tail departing company with the little fiberglass stick that was the "fuselage." Park Flyer #3 is still hanging high in a tree near the Willamette River in Eugene, and many MANY attempts to hurl objects towards it to dislodge the plane have failed.

So if you want to see how serious model aviators do it, check out the WWA-08 site here. The goal is to increase public awareness of park flying, and I think these guys have a solid program going. They should achieve their goals as long as I stay far, far away from the controls of their Stevens Aero SQuiRT 400 model airplane.

A Serious Flaw in
Our Elections System

I am not the only person out there that has noticed how OLD John McCain looks these days. He acts dazed and confused on camera, and I wonder how he could put together complete sentences on his own without the help of a team of speechwriters.

This month, McCain turns 72 years old, which means that if – God forbid – he was somehow to win this election and then convince a majority of dumbed down Americans to vote him back into the White House, he'd be 80 at the end of his second term, provided we all live that long with BushCo v2.0 holding the 'football'.

Now I have nothing against our senior citizens, they deserve the respect they have earned. And like you, I know more then a few seniors in their early 70s who are still very much together. Can they lead a productive life, absolutely. Can they lead the most powerful nation on this planet, I'd say no, based on this from AOPA:

"President Bush on Dec. 13, 2007 signed into law a new mandatory retirement age for pilots. Now commercial pilots can stay on the job until they’re 65. The Fair Treatment for Experienced Pilots Act allows both the pilot and copilot to be up to 65 years old on domestic commercial flights. However, commercial pilots flying internationally must still abide by the International Civil Aviation Organization standard set in 2006. This requires at least one of the pilots to be under age 60."

Herein lies the problem. The same government that says a human being is too feeble at age 65 to safely guide a pressurized tube full of souls through the sky also says a grumpy old white guy seven years older than that is fine to lead our country. What kind of bulls**t is that?

Don't think for a minute that the FAA made this change in the "Age 60 Rule" lightly either. They spent years consulting many, many medical experts who concluded that today's human starts to lose it when they cross their 65th birthday. So what clown concluded that John McCain at 72+ can handle the White House?

Maybe instead of that stressful office, he might think about joining the U.S. Foreign Service Officer (FSO) since his GOP supporters continually tout his massive amounts of foreign policy experience. If he enlists as an FSO, you can expect this from usdiplomacy.org as his daily routine:

"Foreign Service Officers (FSOs) are part of a professional service that implements the foreign policy of the United States at embassies, consulates and diplomatic missions at nearly 265 locations worldwide, as well as in Washington, D.C. They use their specialized knowledge and skills to advance specific objectives, protect U.S. citizens abroad and support American business interests. FSOs below the senior ranks serve in one of five cones: political, economic, public diplomacy, consular and management."

Oh, wait, forget that. They also have a mandatory retirement age of 65...a milestone Maverick passed way, way back when we were all still worried about Y2K.

Now THAT would be fun, have McCain explain Y2K...what was supposed to happen, and how it would have effected our country's Internet if millions of computer systems crashed as predicted. Maybe when he stumbles and fumbles for an answer, he can pull out his old school cell phone and call his fratboy pal George Bush, and he can use 'the Google" on any one of the many Internets in GOP-world to solve this Y2K riddle.

It just boggles my mind that out of all the sharp, intelligent GOP business men and women in this country well under 65 years old, the best they can field is a grouch who would get laughed out of his first interview at PoeDunk Airlines.

This Magazine
Just Drips
Testosterone

All my life, there has been one magazine I have serious trouble putting down. And you'll be surprised that it's not a flying magazine either. No, it's Popular Mechanics, a publication that breaks down the world of "guy stuff" in a way that nobody else can touch.

Yes, of course women read Popular Mechanics too. That is, if they are interested in the kind of material as shown below, found recently on the PM web site:

Top 8 Tools for Backyard Summer BBQs
9 Questions About Robots in Space
2010 Mercedes-Benz GLK350 Test Drive
Olympic Video Shows Bandwidth Weakness
Top 8 Most Innovative Pinball Machines of All Time
NASA Not Ready to Give Up on Martian Life
2009 Harley-Davidson CVO Test Drives
Garmin Astro Helps You Find Your Dog

Of course, me being me, I always get a charge out of the detailed way PM covers aviation. Their long and very complete articles leaves no fact unreported, and their analysis of flying machines and their performance is phenomenal.

In the current issue, their writer, Mark Huber, has returned from EAA Airventure at Oshkosh, calling it "a melding of wonderful and weird flying machines", and has selected his "Top 10 Best Planes" from the show. Here is his choices:

10. Lancair Evolution
9. Robert Noll's Van's Aircraft RV-9A
8. Sbach 342
7. Boeing's 747-LCF "Dreamlifter"
6. Rocket Racing League's Velocity Rocket Racer
5. John Travolta's Boeing 707
4. Quest Kodiak
3. ICON A5
2. Cessna 162 Skycatcher
1. Cirris SJ-50 Vision

Since this is PM, you will need to block out several hours to digest the entire article. So go here and begin the adventure, it will be a good read, I promise you.

Oops, Wrong
Turn...Boom,
You're Dead.

I'm not even sure they have TFRs over in China, and from the looks of their GA community as outlined in this China Daily news report from 2006, they really may not even need them:

"China, which has the second most air traffic in the world, now has 570 general aviation aircraft, 235 more than in 2002."

Wow, they sure must have a mess of big jet planes if they in fact have the "second most air traffic in the world". But as we head into the 2008 Summer Games in Beijing, security is being ramped up in China, including a massive amount of airspace protection around the main Olympic venues. Here is a report from the South China Morning Post that ought to scare the hell out of the tiny handful of Chinese GA pilots:

"Beijing has deployed anti-aircraft missiles in the vicinity of the centerpiece Bird's Nest stadium in its latest effort to boost Games security. The move was in line with standard security procedures at other major sports events, said Ma Xin, who advises Games organiser Bocog on anti-terror tactics. Mr Ma declined to reveal the exact model or number of missiles deployed but pictures of a launch pad on the fringe of the Olympic Green – an area covering 2.91 square kilometres that is home to venues like the Bird's Nest and Water Cube – have been posted on many websites. Some have identified the missiles as Hongqi 7, or Redflag 7, a Chinese-made short-range ground-to-air missile designed to intercept low-altitude targets."

Let's just hope you-know-who doesn't see those missile launchers while on his trip to the Opening Ceremonies, because I'd sure hate to see the DHS take a play out of the Chinese Homeland Security playbook.

Ought to be an interesting next few days, as the world peers behind the Chinese curtain and sees just how friendly – or not – a commie government can be when handling the few dissidents and protesters that you just KNOW will show up. There are only two words to describe the way past Chinese authorities have treated those who aren't in lock-step...two words we would all love to forget for the next 16 days:

Tiananmen. Square.

UPDATE@627P ON 08.07.08: Right on cue, the weirdness begins. And if you're going to try and piss off the American press, maybe the fastest way to do that would be to screw with their minds immediately upon touching down in Beijing. Oh, those silly communists, they really know how to stir up the pot.

Our Oil
Addiction is
A Good Thing
...to Some

While we continue to drive mega-trucks and gigantic SUVs just because the people next door drive one and GOD FORBID you don't, our dependence on foreign oil just keeps making our citizens poorer while the Saudis and other Middle Eastern oil barons get filthy rich.

Meanwhile back at the ranch, the cowboy in charge of the United States looks the other way while Big Oil companies reap record profits. The pillaging of our economy by these back-slapping cronies is pathetic, but what's even more pathetic is that we've let them do it to us for so long.

And in Omaha, soccer moms with a laid-off husband and a crap mortgage have to choose between gas for the minivan or food for their children. This is in stark contrast to the scene we find in places like Dubai where the mega-rich get to fly in lavish new Emirates A380 flying palaces. This week, Wired.com laid out exactly what air travel is like for those who have become deliciously wealthy courtesy of us oil-addicted Americans:

"The world's biggest jetliner brings back the golden era of air travel when flying was an event so grand men wore ties and women wore furs - if you've got $14,000, that is. That kind of cash buys a first-class ticket on Emirates airline's new A380, a 489-seat behemoth where the 14 people rich enough to sit in first-class enjoy hot showers, massaging chairs, 1,000 channels and seven-course meals served on china and linen. Oh - there's also a bar with a waterfall."

A waterfall? In an airliner? Now if that isn't 'in your face' I don't know what is. Oh wait, this might be:

"It's also more ostentatiously over the top than anything in the sky. If Steve Wynn built airplanes instead of Vegas casinos, they'd look like the Emirates A380. First class passengers sit in leather seats that fold flat at the push of a button. They watch first-run movies on 23-inch flat-screens. Their private suites - seats are so plebeian - are trimmed in polished wood and brass. There are two showers with faux marble floors, fluffy towels and the biggest assortment of shampoo this side of a Beverly Hills salon."

So that is what you get to fly in when you can charge whatever the hell you want to for the crude oil pumped out of your deserts. So why am I so cranky about Big Oil's Middle Eastern buddies flying in such lavish flying machines?

BECAUSE AVGAS IS NOW $5.45! A GALLON!

Ask yourself this one question, and see if you don't feel the same way I do:

Would any of us be all that bummed if say the Swedes or even a few French billionaires were to fly around in flying palaces? Along with so many other Americans, I am disgusted that this country has been ran into the ground while a few select oil producing states encircling the Persian Gulf can afford waterfalls in their planes. While they roll around in piles of cash that BushCo has gladly sent their direction, our citizens must endure rising gas prices and the sell-off of our jobs to China. Add in high unemployment, a deteriorating infrastructure, and a financial system that is in severe disrepair, and it is just sick to see what we've become.

Please remember all of this when you head into the voting booth on November 4th...because McCain = Bush = more of the same. They get rich, you get screwed, our factories close while they poop in solid gold airliner lavatories.

It just isn't right.

UPDATE @ 1204P: If you think the closing in this post is funny (or sad, you choose), you will LOVE this site.

Gizmodo Gets 'Right Up In It'

In my daily travels through cyberspace, I always make a couple of stops at Gizmodo.com, a really fun and rather snarky site covering anything that us gadget freaks think is way cool. While there are a few "gizmo" sites out there, I believe the quality of the writing on gizmodo.com sets the bar pretty high for the others.

Their writing and editing team stays up on any "breaking news" in the gizmo/gadget world, and delivers items like the following to keep what I suspect is a mainly male demographic happy:

"Nissan's Eco Gas Pedal Fights Back To Help You Save Gas
[Detroit News via Jalopnik] - I'm all for exploring new technologies that help us save gas, but I think Nissan has gone a little too far with their "Eco Pedal." This new technology calculates the most fuel efficient rate of acceleration and then fights back against the driver's foot when it feels that rate has been exceeded. Nissan claims that the system can improve fuel efficiency by as much as 10 percent, which is why they plan on implementing it into their cars next year. As asinine and unsafe as all of this sounds, at least Nissan had the good sense to implement an on/off switch."

I like how gizmodo.com often drops in an aviation-related story among their usual fare. And one of their writers – Mark Wilson – somehow managed to actually get strapped into and "fly" the Martin Jetpack at his first visit to Oshkosh. His story on the experience is top-shelf and I highly recommend you go here and check it out because of descriptive prose such as this:

"Then it was time to mount up. The pack’s design is a bit odd in that it appears to have a seat, but there’s nothing really holding your butt in. Instead, a body harness straps you to the machine á la parachute so tightly that you simultaneously half-sit and half-stand. The only thing supporting the majority of the pilot’s weight is the jetpack itself, which has well-balanced built-in support legs. “It’s uncomfortable now, but you won’t notice in the air,” an engineer assured me, referring to a set of straps quickly invading my crotch."

So what was it REALLY like to actually be one of the very few among us who gets to try out the Martin Jetpack? Again, we pick up Wilson's story with the engine fired and producing thrust:

"I am flying. I rise about a yard and instinctively kick back the throttle. The system responds just as I expect—somehow I cut the gas just the right amount to hover perfectly. And then I "stand still" in the air, dumbfounded, not sure what to do and not necessarily wanting to do anything else. The sensation is not as I’d expected. I don't feel pulled up, but it isn't weightlessness either. I simply rise. I have an impulse to cut the throttle and bring her down, but remember that a small squadron of experienced engineers were there just to prevent me from breaking myself (or their only working prototype)."

Wilson says in an email "I did not fly it without people holding the device," and expressed glee that they did not let go. This further build my interest in finding video of the Jetpack flying far, far away from the firm grasp of a ground crew. I want very much to jump on this bandwagon, so if anyone comes across the video I seek, click the feedback button at right and let me know where to find it.

Mooney Jumps
Ahead of the Curve

There can be no disputing the fact that as fuel prices rise due to supply, demand, environmental and greed issues, the future availability of the 100LL that our flying machines crave will grow increasingly cloudy.

Throughout the world, engineers are searching for a Holy Grail replacement for 100LL, and many – including me – think that will be good ol' Jet A. Reason is, it can be burned in any number of current and future diesel aircraft engines, or it can be spun up to ridiculously high RPMs and lit off in a turbine. I really love the sound of the latter, but who except a very few seriously wealthy pilots can think about buying and flying a turbine...unless we spend well north of a million on a new PJ and way more then our budgets can stand on transition training and insurance.

But Mooney has leaped out into the GA turbine arena big time, when they announced the following late this week at EAA's Airventure at Oshkosh:

"Mooney Airplane Company announced today that the company has entered into a joint engineering project with Rolls-Royce. The scope of the project will include exploration of using the RR500 as an alternative fuel (Jet A) power plant to complement the current Mooney product line. Mooney believes that an affordable turbine-powered four-place aircraft is an important segment of the market that is being overlooked. Such an aircraft configuration fills two growing voids in the market. First, a four-place turboprop represents a logical step for the tens of thousands of pilots now flying high-performance piston aircraft because the transition to flying a small turboprop will require no special type rating or unusual insurance requirements. Second, a Jet-A powered turbine provides the basis of a product that has global appeal."

When you think about it, this makes perfect sense. I've always been among those who believed that we would someday see smaller turbine engines start providing the power for more and more GA planes on the lower end of the price envelope, and this Mooney/Rolls partnership certainly moves that theory along nicely.

One point that Mooney makes very clear on their web site is the savings to be had if you take advantage of the Section 179 and Bonus Depreciation made possible by the 2008 Economic Stimulus Act. That's the same act that delivered those wonderful $1,200 checks to lots of mailboxes across America (Best Buy got my check for a new 37" 1020p TV, and YES, I did try without any success to buy a U.S.-made TV first...it is just not possible).

Here is a taste of what you can gain when buying an airplane now, from the Mooney site:

"The Section 179 raised cap is significant for Mooney buyers in that the previous cap was $562,000 - which meant that a Mooney buyer acquiring an aircraft with a total cost of over $562,000 was unable to take advantage of any of the Section 179 expensing. This also means that Mooney buyers can elect to write off over 70% of the cost of their airplane in the first year. Assuming a buyer is in a State and Federal tax bracket of 38%, this would equate to a first-year tax savings of between $140,000 and $175,000, not including the interest write-off also available from financing the aircraft. This bill will significantly lower the buyer's tax bill for 2008."

These tax savings obviously don't just apply to Mooneys, but in a quick glance at the Cirrus and Cessna sites, I did not see this news displayed in a prominent manner like it was on the Mooney site.

I have always liked Mooneys, and have admired their management team, their perseverance, and of course, their amazingly well-built product. And with the addition of a turboprop to the sales floor, you can just see the stock of this company climbing about as fast as...well...a turboprop Mooney!