AvWeb Video Review of the New Acclaim

[Marauder]

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[carusoam]

Nice work, Lee!

Paul Bertorelli made that fun.

See if @c131fr is watching this...  

Reference made to Aviation Consumer Magazine... if anyone has a copy?

Best regards,

-a-

[Niko182]

anyone notice the m20t in the background.

[DualRatedFlyer]

"run the trim nose up during the flare"....

The CFI in me heard fingernails scraping against a blackboard when he said that.

[flyboy0681]

We can always count on Paul to give an honest to goodness review of anything aviation.

I just never knew that Jonah Hill worked for Premier.

[Joe Zuffoletto]

Nice successor to the Acclaim Type S. Here are my comments as a former Acclaim owner:

I'm disappointed they didn't bump the engine to 310hp. I had that mod on my Acclaim and it made an incredible difference in takeoff and climb performance. Not to mention it would give them another box to tick against Cirrus.

I chafe a little bit at the useful load criticism this plane always gets. I had 102 gallon tanks and never had a useful load problem. Why? Because these planes are so fuel efficient in the flight levels, especially LOP, that you rarely need to haul 102 or even 90 gallons of gas. I was able to get safely and comfortably from Napa to Orange County with just 60 gallons on board, and I'd still have an hour of fuel in the tanks when I landed. This allowed me to carry more people or more stuff if I wanted. The only times I topped off were for flights to/from Denver and the West Coast, or to/from Denver and Cabo. Even then I could still bring my wife and two carry-on sized rollie bags.

The lack of a pilot's side door never bothered me. It made the business side of the cockpit much quieter and less drafty than the passenger side when cruising high and fast in cold air. However, adding the door allowed them to add the FMS keypad, which is a big plus.

No need to trim the nose up in the flare - it's already there! The Acclaim is so nose-heavy at approach speeds that the elevator trim is nearly full aft at touchdown. This means you'd better be very careful in a go-around, or you'll enter a departure stall with the nose WAY up. My technique was to dial throttle in gradually until positive rate of climb was achieved, then raise the gear, slowly add more throttle and crank the trim wheel forward like a mad man until the plane is properly set up for climb-out. The trim wheel motor isn't nearly fast enough to keep up.

I've never owned a turbo Mooney without TKS, and after some of the icing encounters I've had over the Western US and mainland Mexico over the years, I never would. It adds tremendous dispatch flexibility and safety margin to the airplane.

I sometimes miss my Acclaim, but I'm grateful for the 7 fantastic years I got to fly it.

 

[ArtVandelay]

Given the restrictive plates just inside the air inlets I would think they could reduce the inlet size, make them more like the ovation?

I don’t like the look of the massive round inlets.

[gsengle]

Given the restrictive plates just inside the air inlets I would think they could reduce the inlet size, make them more like the ovation?
I don’t like the look of the massive round inlets.

I suspect that has to do with the airflow at FL250


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Greg Ellis]

The demonstration of the engine mounts and the movement of the engine was interesting.  I did not realize this about this airplane.  Is that style of engine mount just for the Ultra's (Ovation and Acclaim) or did it come before in the Type S and prior Acclaims and Ovations?

[ArtVandelay]

I suspect that has to do with the airflow at FL250

But they are restricting it anyway?

[gsengle]

But they are restricting it anyway?

The inlet size and shape provides the amount of air pressure going back. That’s back behind the inlets That just moves it up over the cylinders to then blow down through them all. It’s not restriction per se I don’t think.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WilliamR]

Ha, Jonah Hill. 

I've heard a couple of Premier sales people advocate trim up to flare.  SMH.  Also watched a new Acclaim owner use that technique at a Premier sale guys recommendation and then tried to go around.  Suddenly becomes more than a hand full.

Oh, and odd they didn't talk about range extending by running lean of peak.  Pulling the MP and RPM back and still running rich seems less than optimally efficient. 

Edited September 24, 2018 by WilliamR

[aviatoreb]

19 minutes ago, teejayevans said:

But they are restricting it anyway?

Seems like those open doors would make for a lot of drag.

[jackn]

34 minutes ago, Greg Ellis said:

The demonstration of the engine mounts and the movement of the engine was interesting.  I did not realize this about this airplane.  Is that style of engine mount just for the Ultra's (Ovation and Acclaim) or did it come before in the Type S and prior Acclaims and Ovations?

Made me want to go to my hanger and shake the prop up & down. 

[smccray]

54 minutes ago, jackn said:

 Made me want to go to my hanger and shake the prop up & down. 

I noticed that too.  I had a fair amount of vibration on my J- the 6 cylinder continental in my bonanza is a lot smoother than the J.  No comparison.  I suspect the 6 cylinder continental is part of the difference.

The practical performance table- 200 ktas @ 16K ft on 16 gph... that's pretty familiar performance/fuel burn coming from a guy flying a TN A36.  Surprised it's not faster.  I'm sure it climbs better than the A36, particularly at 2700 RPM.

[EricJ]

1 hour ago, smccray said:

I noticed that too.  I had a fair amount of vibration on my J- the 6 cylinder continental in my bonanza is a lot smoother than the J.  No comparison.  I suspect the 6 cylinder continental is part of the difference.

The first C-172 I ever flew had the six-cylinder Continental O-300 in it.   I had a fair amount of time in that airplane when I flew a C-172 with the four-cylinder Lycoming O-320.   I seriously thought there was something wrong with that airplane because of all the shaking.   It took me quite a while to get comfortable with the idea that that was "normal".

The Lycomings are great motors, but not so smooth, no. 
 

[aviatoreb]

2 hours ago, smccray said:

I noticed that too.  I had a fair amount of vibration on my J- the 6 cylinder continental in my bonanza is a lot smoother than the J.  No comparison.  I suspect the 6 cylinder continental is part of the difference.

The practical performance table- 200 ktas @ 16K ft on 16 gph... that's pretty familiar performance/fuel burn coming from a guy flying a TN A36.  Surprised it's not faster.  I'm sure it climbs better than the A36, particularly at 2700 RPM.

I know a fellow who flew an acclaim s.  He claimed 205tas at 11-12k on that fuel flow.

[jlunseth]

Its a beautiful aircraft and I want one.  But wait, a 400 pound payload and subtract 95 for TKS so 305, and then with 100 gallon tanks (that’s what;s on the website) instead of the 89 they talk about in the video, and that’s another 60 lbs. that comes off for the fuel, so 245, full fuel.  Either you won’t get two normal people plus bags into it, or you will have to leave fuel out and be limited to about 3 hours of flying time.  

[gsengle]

Its a beautiful aircraft and I want one.  But wait, a 400 pound payload and subtract 95 for TKS so 305, and then with 100 gallon tanks (that’s what;s on the website) instead of the 89 they talk about in the video, and that’s another 60 lbs. that comes off for the fuel, so 245, full fuel.  Either you won’t get two normal people plus bags into it, or you will have to leave fuel out and be limited to about 3 hours of flying time.  

Everyone thinks about it wrong, you almost never need that much fuel! 100 gallon tanks! Think how far you can go on 50! 30!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Joe Zuffoletto]

Has anyone read my post besides gsengle? 102 gallons is an option, not a requirement. Believe it or not, the plane will fly with much less fuel, depending on your mission. 

[Joe Zuffoletto]

7 hours ago, teejayevans said:

Given the restrictive plates just inside the air inlets I would think they could reduce the inlet size, make them more like the ovation?

I don’t like the look of the massive round inlets.

I don’t know if the Ovation had cowl flaps or not, but the Acclaim didn’t, probabably due to those big openings. That was a plus in my book. 

[Niko182]

Just now, Joe Zuffoletto said:

I don’t know if the Ovation had cowl flaps or not, but the Acclaim didn’t, probabably due to those big openings. That was a plus in my book. 

All long body mooneys exceot for the Bravo and The L dont have cowl flaps

[gsengle]

I don’t know if the Ovation had cowl flaps or not, but the Acclaim didn’t, probabably due to those big openings. That was a plus in my book. 

Neither have cowl flaps. But a high altitude turbo charged engine has much more of a cooling challenge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Joe Zuffoletto]

Maybe that look was a marketing decision, then. To differentiate it from the Ovation? I don’t know.

[gsengle]

Maybe that look was a marketing decision, then. To differentiate it from the Ovation? I don’t know.

No, it was a design that made 242kts possible.

High altitude turbo means...

More power (heat) together with thinner air.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk