dkkim73

Keep laughing until the EMP happens... I'll still be happily checking off chores.

As one old guy once said, "C'mon man!" I want clicky buttons...You kids these days.

Oh my, I really want one. That is not just cool, it's astronaut/nerd cool. I'll bet we could hack up a re-configurable one with an El Gato streamdeck or similar.

To be clear, I did buy the plane with a higher-time engine, and these cylinders are original. The internet would have you believe they should have departed the aircraft already, either quietly in a shop, or loudly frog-marched out by the laws of physics over the mountains of Idaho. On the spectrum of things, this seems like better performance and life. Other cylinders have been replaced, and I don't know how the plane was flown before I got it. If these were needing replaced it wouldn't seem like an unreasonable lifetime (?) Just realize the whole cylinder-management discussion is a matter of significantly different opinions and evolving practice (I think you mentioned you read Mike Busch... my take on his position is that cylinders should not be replaced too readily, but are nonetheless a "consumable item"... it's like some kind of Zen koan). And again, many of the planes mentioned use Conti's, so not a differentiator. Unless the thread is pushing you toward a Bravo The comment about "if it's not one thing it's another" is sage. We all wish there were a magic maneuver that would obviate the need for maintenance and surveillance, but as the reliability-centered maintenance analysis indicates there isn't really a magic bullet as replacing everything might shuffle new jokers into the deck.

When they recently lapped my two oldest cylinders' (1450+ hrs, original) exhaust valves, and ring flushed, they also replaced one of the rotocoils. I asked about prophylactically replacing others, but was advised to keep watching. BTW this fixed the compressions and greatly decreased oil consumption over the next 25 hrs or so. Recently, a cyclic oscillation with a 30 sec period and about 25F magnitude developed on one of these, with the replaced rotocoil. It became intermittent the next flight but Savvy were concerned about a sticking exhaust valve (maybe incomplete lapping). Subsequent borescope didn't show anything wrong (original abnormal valve heat pattern had disappeared), so advice was to keep watching. I think there is a fundamental question of how much to do prospectively vs. "on condition". I brought up just overhauling both of these cylinders pre-emptively, as I have 400-600hrs to go before considering overhaul "based on the #s", and maybe this would be insurance... (I had been warned in the abstract I might need to replace these cylinders at some point). However, two experienced, thoughtful A&Ps after reviewing data and scope pictures were essentially saying it was a difficult question at the current juncture, and keep an eye on them every 50 hrs or otherwise on condition was reasonable. DK

At 1.5M aren't we getting to a point where the OP can get a turbine and glance down at us from the mid flight levels and say "I wonder what those people are flying?"

I thought of doing that! Did you use the Headsets Inc. kit? I used that on my old DC 10-13.4 years ago, thought of doing it for the child headset eventually... Now my kids are old enough to not quite fit but haven't provided replacement small aviation enthusiasts yet.

Hi All, Descending today on an approach, while running lists, I saw a weird low fuel indication for the L tank on my G1000, then almost right afterward a red "X", which flickered then stayed. I didn't dwell on it since I had independent assessments of volume and I was on a new approach in mid-level IMC and some smoke (wildfires, not my plane). On the logs saw it drop to zero, go high, then back to what might be sane (though red X persisted). I would imagine it could be anything (sender, wires, connector on the back of the Garmin EIS unit, grounding, etc). Any sense what's likely... what to check first? Or advice on approaching. Thankfully, my home-repaired wing capsule gauge is still there. That and the compulsive totalizer tracking... DK

Same here, or with a 1/4"-20 mount, or anything standard to be usable! I'll bet you can get a ball that fits that thread, too...

They did my annual ending in February 2024. AFAIK they are still active with that, as well as Mooney parts manufacturing (I saw their parts cages during a tour), and contract parts manufacturing (for companies you would recognize).

Sounds like an excellent trip. Hey, those Red-and-Blue kids' Pilot USA headphones bring back some fond memories!

It's my understanding it's the same Continental issue that @philiplane mentioned. Gut is an important aspect. My wife actually voted for the non-parachute option due to the economics. She declined to let her preference sway my initial decision but subsequently was quite pleased with the Mooney cabin. Some of this has to do with economics, which is a delicate subject. If not as price-sensitive, seems like you would owe it to yourself and your family mission to try out a few options.. Someone above mentioned a G36 which is price-wise in a different stratum, similar or more as a good Ultra. I don't think you mentioned any bad planes, but @LANCECASPER already pointed out some issues with the Malibu (I've heard these also from several sources).

IIUC you are quite knowledgeable about Mooney maintenance. So this is an honest question: Is it not true that this has a lot to do with how they are flown? From going through the APS online course, lots of Busch videos, talking to other Acclaim flyers (e.g. @Schllc), the Savvy folks (incl. Paul @kortopates), it sounds like lean-of-peak operation, attention to cylinder peak spread, etc, can mitigate the reputation for cylinder-eating.

The FIKI turbo Cirri were going for $80-100K more than the non-NXi Acclaims when I was looking. The Ultras are a significant price bump. The market is shifting, so it's probably worth 1. doing some good searches 2. maybe chatting with brokers re: price points and trends. The engine parts issues seem to dog both Acclaim owners and SR22T owners from what I saw last year (TSIO-550, V-bands, etc). Having Cirrus a going concern seems like a non-trivial benefit, though I recall reading a lot of complaints about lead time regardless. I'd thought compositive would be cheaper but heard contrary the more I read. Parts going forward should ideally not be a problem, but supply lead time seems like an issue for many makes. I'm not trying to dissuade anyone, the plane has a lot going for it, wouldn't kick one out of bed for eating crackers. Just sharing my own thoughts towards the end of last year.

Let me add to the clinical, Spock-like description above: It is very fun and gratifying to fly, instills confidence, and is a "magic carpet" in many ways that have given me days of my own time back over the last few months... Also a very elegant design; all Mooneys gets compliments due to some intuitive aerodynamic je ne sais quoi... maybe it's that rakish tail

I am about 81 hrs into my Acclaim Type S (2009, FIKI w/ VNAV). Could write a book about some of the nuances but I think a lot of essentials have been covered above. The only "real drawback" in my mind (besides Mooney as a company in a holding mode) is the limited useful load. For my mission (commuting with high terrain, IMC, icing, need for wx avoidance) it has been a near-perfect fit. It is a very very efficient airframe with a strong wing, coupled with (IIUC) one of the more efficient (in terms of BSFC) powerful engines in the class (the TSIO-550G). The G1000 is dated but very well thought-out and provides immense capability. It is an outstanding commuting or "executive" airplane, for 1 or 2 people, over a pretty long range. For loading up more people, one has to defuel. OTOH my fuel on board today was about 6.5hrs, so "defueling" is relative. Cabin fit is a bit Corvette-like but I like it a lot. It is not a van. Looked at: Cirrus SR22T, T182T, T/P210, Bo's A36 and F33. Did not look at the TTx before buying but thought about it when I came across one. Bang-for-buck is hard to beat. I would have had to pay more for Cirrus for what I needed. Bo's can be pricey and I thought more variable in many ways, provenance, availability, FIKI-ish ness. You already have the plane I thought would be a simpler solution (I was transitioning to retracts and had a long GA hiatus). But finding FIKI T182 was harder and really not cheap anyway. TTx is impressive but I got the impression total cost of ownership for composite would be higher. The pressurized planes would offer that but higher cost, complexity, not really better safety records, more insurance PITA. Acclaim vs. Acclaim Ultra I can't really answer, as I didn't seriously consider Ultra (a person I thought helpful and credible said "if you can swing it, get the Ultra and don't look back"). But you can get most of the essentials in a Type S for much less. I did think a *lot* about the Ovation. But the turbo offers huge "outs" for where I fly (central and western MT). I did a lot of flying (completion primary training) in the Puget Sound, KBFI. Did instruments in the midwest but was very sensitive to the MEA's, icing etc in the Puget Sound. I would think a turbo (and FIKI) would be very, very compelling out there. Unless you are a fair-weather/summer pilot. However, 1. you already fly turbo 2. those are not fair-weather planes you describe for the most part. HTH, David

Hello All, I'm now somewhat used to my plane and in the great open desert of "what maintenance do I really need to do next?". At the annual-as-prebuy, the factory did not have the ability to do battery capacity checks. I had some intermittent cranky cranking on one battery a few weeks ago (could be anything really) and otherwise no real problems. Batteries above 24V at switches-on but not far. Alternating as taught between 1 and 2 for successive flights (unless learning how not to do hot starts So... is it more advisable or cost-effective to have shops do a capacity test, or should I buy a capacity tester and cowperson up? David

Are you in a Sopwith Camel? Or.... an Arrow? I would have assumed from your prior posts you could just bend the laws of physics or fabricate a workaround. I'll stop whining now.

I will say it's an inviting ambiguity in the POH (how hard would it be to say "no flap deployment above 110KIAS is permitted"?), but the lack of specific guidance gave me pause. Wishful thinking is the siren song of aviation. I will rely on the dive brakes and gear above the white arc...

John, I had thought of them reading your first post! They make outstanding gear. We used them in a series of startup machine vision experiments; very configurable and solid. Their regular tripods are also great. I wonder if that yoke/rod clamp might be too big for the Acclaim, where the gear lever sits very close to the yoke on the right. Do you happen to know the size vs. the RAM mount? I can do some digging as well. My RAM mount clears the lever but could cause problems if it drifts. I *really* like your idea of a custom split-ring; it could be installed tight and with a friction pad, could tap it for 1/4-20 threads, etc. I bet some 90% solutions are out there that would only need tapping. You are the 2nd person to suggest the MyGoFlight. Is that the one you happen to have, or do you favor it over the Pivot products? Thanks, David

That 137 KIAS number feels familiar. I kind of remember a "best speed to the FAF" approach in my transition training (we did it at 170KIAS), and I think I remember dropping the first notch of flaps not far below gear speed Vlo(down). However I can't find a good reference. Experimenting with approach reference speeds of 90 or 120 inside the FAF, as the math works well. With the trim change that flaps entail, I'm looking for a good rhythm that doesn't invove a lot of changes getting near minimums (ok in VMC but in IMC I'd rather front-load the config changes)... While the AP seems to do a good job of staying on GS/GP during changes, it doesn't feel as compartmentalized as getting "approach flaps" in earlier. And manually flying involves some juggling with the nose-down moment. And of course it's good to be able to fly the approach faster or slow based on need. It's not that I "need" to keep fast inside the FAF most of the time, but definitely times it is useful. Thx for the quick responses! David

Hi all, I looked for, but did not find POH guidance on whether the first notch of flaps can be extended above the top of the white arc on the Acclaim. All of the verbiage talks about full flaps. I'm trying to work out reference power settings and a "dirtying-up" protocol for different approach phases, and would appreciate any guidance here. Thank you, David

Perhaps: -try known good client -explore signal strength issue with xceiver in tail AFAIK G1000 Does not have separate Bluetooth radio. Presumably G1000 connected via Garmin data bus to GTX345R...

"Monsieur, does your dog bite?" "No." (Growl, snap!) "I thought you said your dog does not bite!" "I did not say that was my dog."

@exM20K Dan, do you climb at 2700 rpm all the way to cruise at, say, 17k? I'd always thought the main impetus for this STC was safety with short runways or airports with few ditching options. Didn't think about the climb aspect... Cruising in the high teens puts an Acclaim smile on my face and makes the commute quick.