Mcstealth Posted August 15, 2010 Report Posted August 15, 2010 "To me the Acclaim seems like a great airplane if you value raw speed over other considerations: climb rate down low, pleasant handling characteristics, conventional pitch and yaw trim systems, larger cabin size or lower stall speed. I've flown Mooneys; their cabins make Glasairs seem big. You have to wonder what Mooney could do if they employed a longer-span, higher aspect ratio wing like Cessna and Piper did to their airplanes a generation ago. That change could lower their approach speeds and let the plane climb better —especially up high. Well-placed/-sized winglets could offset the higher induced drag of such a wing and would have more space on the trailing edger for more effective ailerons and larger flaps. I do not know if it is the case with recent Mooneys, but a 'C' model I flew had a full-time wing leveler which made roll control very annoying in turns. The Mooney handles like a Seneca, which is probably good for hard IFR but it becomes annoying if you don't have an autopilot. Another consideration is price. For the cost of a shiny new Type S you can buy a 2003, all-glass Lancair 4P (see controller.com) and have enough left over for a modest home, an automobile and $$$ for fuel. The '4' will blow the doors off the Acclaim up high in ISA conditions and should be competitive in the mid-teens as well. It also offers much better useful load: it carries four normal-sized occupant, full tanks and full baggage without operating outside its C of G envelope. Whatever, er, floats your boat... A quick note of feedback to Robert Goyer. Airspeed control is important for good landings in ANY aircraft.! 800FPM doesn't seem that impressive near sea level, but certainly does up high. I've never flown an Acclaim but I did fly a '201' at near MTOW and was able to fly approaches with power at 75-80 knots into a 2100 foot strip in fairly smooth air. I had little trouble making acceptable landings, which I value over greasers anyway. Perhaps it is your technique, rather than something inherent in the Acclaim, that gives you trouble landing it. Once you've reduced to final approach speed, try retracting the speed brakes; you won't need to use as much power to stabilize the approach" Quote
flight2000 Posted August 15, 2010 Report Posted August 15, 2010 It dosen't surprise me at all. Sounds like another case of "I heard about this Mooney thing and don't get it" type comment. There is a huge difference between a "C" model and an Acclaim. What was this guy really after with his "constructive" comment. I'd submit a rebuttal but don't feel like registering for the Flying website. Bad enough I get the magazine already as a gift from last Christmas..... Brian Quote
Magnum Posted August 15, 2010 Report Posted August 15, 2010 a) He has never flown an Acclaim He compares prices between a new and a 7 year old aircraft. Quote
rob Posted August 15, 2010 Report Posted August 15, 2010 First he says: I do not know if it is the case with recent Mooneys, but a 'C' model I flew had a full-time wing leveler which made roll control very annoying in turns. Then he says: I've never flown an Acclaim but I did fly a '201' at near MTOW and was able to fly approaches with power at 75-80 knots into a 2100 foot strip in fairly smooth air. So if he's flown a 201, he should know that it didn't have a full-time wing leveler, shouldn't he? Quote
HopePilot Posted August 15, 2010 Report Posted August 15, 2010 There are actually people who go to Chick-fil-a and go, "meh." I don't know, maybe they didn't use the Chick-fil-a sauce (fyi: order the chicken strips with fil-a sauce and a shake [the sandwich bread only hides the flavor]). The world is full of people who don't get it. Quote
roundout Posted August 15, 2010 Report Posted August 15, 2010 Probably owns a fraction of a Cirrus. FWIW, Goyer does too. Quote
mooniac58 Posted August 15, 2010 Report Posted August 15, 2010 Wait, so what website/magazine was this quoted from? Quote
flight2000 Posted August 15, 2010 Report Posted August 15, 2010 Quote: mooniac58 Wait, so what website/magazine was this quoted from? Quote
Theo Posted August 15, 2010 Report Posted August 15, 2010 Quote: flight2000 Going back, I see someone already posted a rebuttal... http://www.flyingmag.com/pilot-reports/pistons/mooney-acclaim-type-s Brian Quote
roundout Posted August 15, 2010 Report Posted August 15, 2010 I bet you $5 that he is an active member of this site. Quote
BaronSmith Posted August 15, 2010 Report Posted August 15, 2010 I really enjoyed that rebuttal! It will be interesting to see if the first commenter responds back... Quote
Skywarrior Posted August 15, 2010 Report Posted August 15, 2010 RJBrown is Randy Brown. Randy owns a 201. Chuck M. Quote
RJBrown Posted August 15, 2010 Report Posted August 15, 2010 Guilty as charged. I hope he responds also. Quote
Jeff_S Posted August 16, 2010 Report Posted August 16, 2010 I couldn't get to the link. Can you try to repost it? Quote
flight2000 Posted August 16, 2010 Report Posted August 16, 2010 That was weird. I fixed the link and it should work now. http://www.flyingmag.com/pilot-reports/pistons/mooney-acclaim-type-s Brian Quote
scottfromiowa Posted August 16, 2010 Report Posted August 16, 2010 Thank's for re-posting. Brown's comments were "spot on". The other guy...well his tag says it all "Usedtofly"... Quote
fantom Posted August 16, 2010 Report Posted August 16, 2010 "Most people who bad mouth Mooneys are just like gossiping old ladies. Repeating misinformation as if it were fact." Quote
tony Posted August 16, 2010 Report Posted August 16, 2010 I thought they were just jealous....... Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.