Musings on the Acclaim Ultra

[donkaye]

Due to insurance considerations I had not had the opportunity to extensively fly the Acclaim Ultra.  That changed last week when I had the opportunity to extensively wring it out over a period of 16 hours.  This involved extensive cross county flying in addition to checking out overall flight characteristics.

Since I was busy at the time, Mike Elliot did the initial transition training and helped get the plane from Florida to Texas where I was able to meet up with my student.  I had previously trained him in his Encore and we flew it from Florida to the West Coast.  In the following few years he upgraded that plane to have nearly the same equipment as mine, and we did a lot more training with it.

Since I had a lot of confidence in his piloting skills, I was willing to do this additional training with the insurance provided by my flight insurance coverage.

I have flown a lot of single engine piston airplanes, and I can easily say the Mooney Acclaim Ultra is the best of all of them.  It is a shame that it was not profitable to produce.  That is a real loss to the aviation community.

After practicing stalling the airplane to set a standard for landing approach speeds, we were fortunate, yesterday, to have weather to be able to practice landings on runways from 11,000 feet to 2,460 feet in length and widths of 150 feet to 40 feet with crosswind components up to 17 knots.  It was a piece of cake landing with full flaps and 17 knots direct crosswind.  I was happy to see the ease of landing with such diversity of runways and wind.  On the way from the Valley to Palo Alto, ATC cautioned to watch for traffic at your 10:00 position and that we had a 60 knot overtake speed.  We watched it rapidly moving backwards.

The GFC 700 autopilot is still the best of the Garmin autopilots that I have flown; smooth as silk.

On the other hand, the G1000 NXi was a bit of a disappointment.   We gave it a workout.  It is definitely an improvement over the G1000, but it lacks some of the capability and ease of use of the G500TXi/GTN750Xi/GMA35c combination.  I never could get the music input to work.  It doesn't have an approach plate overlay to the moving map.  It does have VSD (Vertical Display of topography) and Pathways.  I found the Pathways to be annoying and now understand why it has not been added the G500 TXi.  It's really a shame that all the new airplanes are forced to have the G1000s.   The touch screen units are so much easier to use.

All in all it was a great experience training with and flying in one great airplane.

 

[carusoam]

Great pirep on the Acclaim ultra, as usual, Don!

Thanks for sharing the details…

16hrs in an Acclaim… there has got to be more details….   

310hp or 280?

Best regards,

-a-

[FloridaMan]

Fuel burn, TAS?

[mike_elliott]

I met the new owner at St. Petersburg airport in Clearwater after this Ultra, SN 33-0006 was flown from Switzerland the day before. This was one of the few Ultras I have not flown or trained the owner in as of now, and honestly didn't think I would get to set foot in this one until I found out it was coming back to the States.

Being from California, the new owner was short on real weather IFR and training and this was high on his list to get accomplished. Summer rainy season here in the tropics didnt disappoint. We got in an number of approaches at Brooksville and St. Pete, along with enough landings that he was very comfortable in xwind and normal conditions. After 3 days here, we headed to his new to him home in Texas, where he now bases the plane in Fredricksburg. His energy management and ability to stay ahead of the plane allowed for a lot of time to be spent on systems when ceilings or thunderstorms kept us out of the air, which being new to the NXI, was required anyway. Fortunately, Sheltair had a GPU at our disposal for just such work.

Once in Texas, we had planned to spend the morning doing a few more approaches into KERV, his bad condition alternate, and some more at T82, but a 25G35 90 deg xwind won out and he correctly decided it is better to just sit that morning out before taking me to Austin for my return flight home where I had commitments the next day.

I did recommend he get with Don, myself and Kevin Kammer often, while his skillset is fine, his goal is to stay competent not just current. I am glad he spent some time with Don and Don got to fly in his great plane! I am sure he was as good with you as he was with me, Don. His attitude and ADM made it a pleasure to spend time with him and now call him friend.

Answer to a question 14.6 GPH 182 TAS at 10K  30 LOP, and this one is FIKI, If we wanted to burn 23 push over 29" and go up high, It would probably do upwards of 225 to 230, as thats what the other FIKI birds will do. Dan, what have you got out of yours? 

 

 

[exM20K]

@mike_elliott I run 16.5-17GPH, usually 16,000 or 17,000 unless there is a compelling reason to go higher or stay lower (winds, ice, etc).  I set power by fuel flow LOP.

I run the ForeFlight slider back 5% in speed and 2% in fuel burn and am usually dead nuts on at 29ish x2500 (or 30.5ish x 2400.)  That's 200 - 210 when adding back the CAS vs IAS errors.

Cruise is only part of the equation. Climb matters bigly.  The 310 HP will sustain 12-1500 FPM all the way up to the low flight levels at 120-130 KIAS.  Compare/contrast with any other piston.  I'll do a 120 KIAS climb out tomorrow tuesday on the way home in the afternoon with a full bag of fuel... assuming the WX is flyable in the AM.  Winds are a compelling reason to stay low in the AM...

Every time I fly my 310HP Acclaim "S," I'm amazed at how capable a plane it is.  I can only imagine the Ultra is even better.

Go Mooney!

 

 

-dan

Edited August 23, 2021 by exM20K

[Schllc]

I’ve got over a hundred hours in an ultra and many times that in regular acclaims. 
My ultra had AC, no fiki, and did not have the 310hp stc. 
The extra door is overrated, but the larger door is very nice. 
The panel layout is really slick, but the switch covers do not hold up well.  
The interior is very well thought out, from the headset plug layout to the usb plugs in the rear. I did not find the keyboard useful bc of the flight stream, and would prefer the room to the obstruction. 
I had a flap switch failure four times in a year, from what Mooney said it was a 4K part, I had to pay the labor, even though the plane was under warranty.  They claim to have this fixed, but they said that between #3 and #4..
The windows mount from the outside, bedded in sealant, held by countersunk screws, and those broke twice as well. 
I heard some have had windshield issues but I didn’t have that problem. 
The best upgrade on the nxi for me was the flight stream. 
with regard to performance, I think the ultra is net heavier than the old acclaim. 
I did not find it any faster, or more fuel efficient, than my other two acclaims. 
I did really enjoy the plane, and would absolutely consider owning another one, but I don’t see the advantages for the price as quite equitable.  
 

 

[aviatoreb]

Is the performance (speed, fuel flow, handling) different than the other earlier Acclaim TN's type S?

[mike_elliott]

It depends on the particular plane. Handling not all that different. Speed, the fastest Ultra I have been in was 33-0012, the fastest type S was 31-0001. They also were both about the same TAS and fuel flow. Anyone want to care to guess why 31-0001 is so fast?

There were a few aero tweaks to the Ultra's which should make them inherently a bit more efficient.

Personally, the extra door is nice. Both are larger and the ability to get out quickly from the pilots' side just may save a life sometime. They are a bit tricky to get adjusted to close correctly when new, and perhaps this would have been a non issue for the factory if they were carbon fiber vs fiberglass. Once they are dialed in, they are great. And while im dinging the new Ultra, a qwerty keyboard would have been a nicer touch if Garmin offered one. While I think it is great to be able to plunk in freq's etc from the keyboard vs twisting a knob or having to have an IPAD to flightstream things, I still find I hunt a bit on the keyboard as is, while a qwerty would have been natural. The seats are much more comfortable for longer hauls like KPIE to T82 than their older sibs, but stops in KNEW for some Lagniappe also helps cure any fatigue  And if they would have put a trim switch on the right side, thats where I would fly it from when flying solo, simply because my muscle memory of thingamajigs are better on that side right now, not owning my own

 

 

[aviatoreb]

1 hour ago, mike_elliott said:

It depends on the particular plane. Handling not all that different. Speed, the fastest Ultra I have been in was 33-0012, the fastest type S was 31-0001. They also were both about the same TAS and fuel flow. Anyone want to care to guess why 31-0001 is so fast?

There were a few aero tweaks to the Ultra's which should make them inherently a bit more efficient.

Personally, the extra door is nice. Both are larger and the ability to get out quickly from the pilots' side just may save a life sometime. They are a bit tricky to get adjusted to close correctly when new, and perhaps this would have been a non issue for the factory if they were carbon fiber vs fiberglass. Once they are dialed in, they are great. And while im dinging the new Ultra, a qwerty keyboard would have been a nicer touch if Garmin offered one. While I think it is great to be able to plunk in freq's etc from the keyboard vs twisting a knob or having to have an IPAD to flightstream things, I still find I hunt a bit on the keyboard as is, while a qwerty would have been natural. The seats are much more comfortable for longer hauls like KPIE to T82 than their older sibs, but stops in KNEW for some Lagniappe also helps cure any fatigue  And if they would have put a trim switch on the right side, thats where I would fly it from when flying solo, simply because my muscle memory of thingamajigs are better on that side right now, not owning my own

 

 

Was 31-0001 a demo plane for demonstrating capabilities for bragging rights for advertising?  Did they skip most of the antennas, no tks, no ac/lighter and maybe go the extra mile in forming/smoothing the shape of the wings?

How fast was 31-0001 and 33-0012?  And how about the slowest of the breed?  (so how much variability?)

[mike_elliott]

Close guess, 31-0001 was the development plane for the Acclaim, known as "captain Mikey's plane". It was tweaked as well as it could be. Here is a before and after pic, and a shot of N218TA's speed for those whos BS detectors are mis calibrated

 

[Schllc]

I’d like to see the mfd on that 213tas, that’s hauling butt, but I’m betting it was 33”mp too ...

I would put money that none of the acclaims as delivered will do 242tas, at any altitude, under any conditions. 
you may get 235 if you firewall everything,  alone, with no seats, no ac, no fiki, fresh wax, ideal conditions, and absolute min fuel but otherwise 242 is just not realistic. 
I only wrung out two of mine to see what I could get, and 233 was tops on one, and 228 on the other.  Both at 25k. 

[Will.iam]

Hey who was the mooney that took off out of Kerrville this morning? It was red and silver? I was dropping off my mooney at Dugosh for it’s annual when i saw it take off. I wanted to go see the mooney factory but had to catch a flight back home.  It looked empty and deserted from across the airport and was partly why i was surprised to see a mooney taxi from over there and take off from runway 12. 

[mike_elliott]

1 hour ago, Schllc said:

I’d like to see the mfd on that 213tas, that’s hauling butt, but I’m betting it was 33”mp too ...

I would put money that none of the acclaims as delivered will do 242tas, at any altitude, under any conditions. 
you may get 235 if you firewall everything,  alone, with no seats, no ac, no fiki, fresh wax, ideal conditions, and absolute min fuel but otherwise 242 is just not realistic. 
I only wrung out two of mine to see what I could get, and 233 was tops on one, and 228 on the other.  Both at 25k. 

Nope, 29" 2400

Like I say, it is the fastest one, about 8 kts faster than N711PP Ray.

I KNEW there would be some pushback, unfortunately, I dont have a pic of MFD, but suffice it to say, I dont run a clients plane at 33" except during the first 1K of altitude. You know that, we talked about it  But dont take my word for it, call up Troy Harrell former owner or better yet, Lee Drumheller. Lee was in the right seat when this was taken!

 

 

 

 

[aviatoreb]

14 minutes ago, mike_elliott said:

Nope, 29" 2400

Like I say, it is the fastest one, about 8 kts faster than N711PP Ray.

I KNEW there would be some pushback, unfortunately, I dont have a pic of MFD, but suffice it to say, I dont run a clients plane at 33" except during the first 1K of altitude. You know that, we talked about it  But dont take my word for it, call up Troy Harrell former owner or better yet, Lee Drumheller. Lee was in the right seat when this was taken!

That is stupid fast!  I can only do that with the nose pointing downhill.

why do you figure this one is extra fast?

[Schllc]

Parasitic drag is the only explanation. But that is a solid 12-15 knots faster than the average acclaim at the same altitude. 

[exM20K]

31 minutes ago, mike_elliott said:

Nope, 29" 2400

Nah, brah.  You had the alternate static open lol

First plane I ever owned (as a partner) N8122Hwas the world’s fastest archer.  Thing would show 135+ on the true ring of the ASI.  Yay.  This was before GPS and the 3 or 4 leg test.  Didn’t believe it for a minute.

-Dan 

Edited August 23, 2021 by exM20K

[mike_elliott]

yep, here they come  Dan, I only cheat in racing :), not chest pounding. This plane probably had about 12 hrs on it when this pic was taken. People are told not to believe their eyes nowdays, so I'll refer you to lee Drumheller as my witness. This plane lives in Florida now so it probably has slowed down about 30 kts from corrosion if it is even still airworthy

They are all hand made and some are just a bit straighter than others. 31-0001 is also stupid fast, but it had 10 years of test pilot tweaking done on it, 33-0012 just flat fell off the line hot, was painted by plane schemers in Gadsen and that paint job was impressive from a laminar flow prospective. It also was very light when it was re-weighed after we took it to KERV from paint. I dont know where Jonathon got the ultra light weight paint, but Stacey weighed it and just shook his head.....something like a 9 lb gain over naked.

 

[PJClark]

Holy bejeesus that's fast!

I run my rocket at 65% in cruise--which is 198 HP.  If you're a 280 HP Acclaim and that power setting is 75%, that's 210 HP.  But at 10k' I'd see maybe 185KTAS, and probably 151-154 KIAS:  you're almost 30 KTAS and KIAS faster! Freaking incredible!

Never been that close to an Acclaim but from pics I thought I could see much, much smoother surfaces all over than my mid body. Has to be parasite drag, and what a machine it must be!

 

[Brandt]

On 8/23/2021 at 8:28 PM, mike_elliott said:

yep, here they come  Dan, I only cheat in racing :), not chest pounding. This plane probably had about 12 hrs on it when this pic was taken. People are told not to believe their eyes nowdays, so I'll refer you to lee Drumheller as my witness. This plane lives in Florida now so it probably has slowed down about 30 kts from corrosion if it is even still airworthy

They are all hand made and some are just a bit straighter than others. 31-0001 is also stupid fast, but it had 10 years of test pilot tweaking done on it, 33-0012 just flat fell off the line hot, was painted by plane schemers in Gadsen and that paint job was impressive from a laminar flow prospective. It also was very light when it was re-weighed after we took it to KERV from paint. I dont know where Jonathon got the ultra light weight paint, but Stacey weighed it and just shook his head.....something like a 9 lb gain over naked.

 

I find mine generally about 8 kts below book. But it has both steps, tie down eyelets, A/C, and usually pretty full 100 ga tank.  Still blazing fast.  And fuel flows are a little lower than book with GAMIs.  Oh, and the door can be a little challenging. The A/C is pretty weak.  Overall, it is simply a fantastic airplane.

[Danb]

On 8/23/2021 at 5:30 PM, Schllc said:

I’d like to see the mfd on that 213tas, that’s hauling butt, but I’m betting it was 33”mp too ...

I would put money that none of the acclaims as delivered will do 242tas, at any altitude, under any conditions. 
you may get 235 if you firewall everything,  alone, with no seats, no ac, no fiki, fresh wax, ideal conditions, and absolute min fuel but otherwise 242 is just not realistic. 
I only wrung out two of mine to see what I could get, and 233 was tops on one, and 228 on the other.  Both at 25k. 

That’s still kicking ass

[exM20K]

Fairly typical summertime cruise for my Type "S" FIKI plane: 16,000 16.5GPH ~70*LOP (to keep #3 50* LOP) gives 198-200 KTAS typically.  The POH power charts are mostly useless to me, but extrapolating as best as I can between rows and columns, it looks like 16.7 GPH should give 210 KTAS at that altitude, so I'm fine with all that.

It looks like #6 EGT probe has entered the "Reading Low" stage of the failure sequence.  This engine eats EGT probes like they're free.

-Dan

 

Edited August 27, 2021 by exM20K

[exM20K]

Because every knot counts....

Edited August 27, 2021 by exM20K

[philiplane]

I've flown Bravos, Acclaims, and both the T and TN versions of the Cirrus SR22. Remarkably, they are all fairly close in performance and payload.  I was surprised that the Acclaim was not much faster than the SR22TN when it first came out. I got 234 KTAS at FL210, but the engine was hot and there's no way it would live long at the power setting required. Backing it off to 70 percent cooled it to normal temps, but the speed dropped off to 215 KTAS. 

Typical SR22TN speed at FL250 is 213 KTAS on 17 GPH. The SR22T has the 315HP TSIO-550K, which is very similar to the Acclaim engine. It is slightly less efficient, you get the same speed, but on 18.5 GPH. These applications use the Hartzell 3 blade composite prop for better bite in the thin air at FL250. 

I think the Acclaim has cowl inlets that are too large, and it probably slows the plane a bit. The Cirrus inlets are much smaller, and yet the engine will do 85 percent power all day while the CHT's are well below 400. Most of the time they are in the 360-380 dF range. I have to give credit to the Cirrus engineers for the cowl. It is the best one on any light airplane for durability, and ease of servicing. 

[Schllc]

5 hours ago, philiplane said:

I've flown Bravos, Acclaims, and both the T and TN versions of the Cirrus SR22. Remarkably, they are all fairly close in performance and payload.  I was surprised that the Acclaim was not much faster than the SR22TN when it first came out. I got 234 KTAS at FL210, but the engine was hot and there's no way it would live long at the power setting required. Backing it off to 70 percent cooled it to normal temps, but the speed dropped off to 215 KTAS. 

Typical SR22TN speed at FL250 is 213 KTAS on 17 GPH. The SR22T has the 315HP TSIO-550K, which is very similar to the Acclaim engine. It is slightly less efficient, you get the same speed, but on 18.5 GPH. These applications use the Hartzell 3 blade composite prop for better bite in the thin air at FL250. 

I think the Acclaim has cowl inlets that are too large, and it probably slows the plane a bit. The Cirrus inlets are much smaller, and yet the engine will do 85 percent power all day while the CHT's are well below 400. Most of the time they are in the 360-380 dF range. I have to give credit to the Cirrus engineers for the cowl. It is the best one on any light airplane for durability, and ease of servicing. 

Those temperature issues are not typical with the acclaim. 
I have also flown turbo and non turbo sr22, and with similar fuel flows didn’t see anything close to ovation or acclaim speeds.  
In my ovation I could do 174-178, 14.5gph at 10k. The sr22 was 160-164 at 17gph. 
I suppose “close” is relative. Over a two hour trip it doesn’t make a huge difference, but I would say 15knts in aviation is not close. 

[philiplane]

7 minutes ago, Schllc said:

Those temperature issues are not typical with the acclaim. 
I have also flown turbo and non turbo sr22, and with similar fuel flows didn’t see anything close to ovation or acclaim speeds.  
In my ovation I could do 174-178, 14.5gph at 10k. The sr22 was 160-164 at 17gph. 
I suppose “close” is relative. Over a two hour trip it doesn’t make a huge difference, but I would say 15knts in aviation is not close. 

You must have flown the world's slowest SR22 then, since even the FIKI n/a models will turn in 174+ KTAS on 17 gph at 9000 feet. The clean wing models will top out around 180 at 7000 feet. For reference, 1000 + hrs in all models of SR22, 22T, 22TN, and M20M through Acclaim. Have not flown a V yet.

Edited August 28, 2021 by philiplane