N242RE Mooney Acclaim 3 fatalities Sparta, TN 4/26/2025

[Ragsf15e]

There might be fuel at the crash site and still be a fuel event… Ive forgotten to change to my fullest tank at the beginning of the descent before and landed with something like 2 or 3 gallons in the selected tank.  20 in the “not selected” tank.  I wasn’t happy with myself for that one. It’s right there on my checklist.

lose the engine or stall on the ILS and you probably won’t recover.

[IvanP]

8 minutes ago, Ragsf15e said:

There might be fuel at the crash site and still be a fuel event… Ive forgotten to change to my fullest tank at the beginning of the descent before and landed with something like 2 or 3 gallons in the selected tank.  20 in the “not selected” tank.  I wasn’t happy with myself for that one. It’s right there on my checklist.

lose the engine or stall on the ILS and you probably won’t recover.

Amen to that. I recall flying practice approaches with a friend some years ago. Intercepted localizer and glideslope on what appeared to be a "perfect" ILS approach only to have the engine sputter on short final. Quick switch to the other tank fixed it, but the "perfect" approach was totally ruined by the pucker factor. We refueled and one tank was completely dry. "Never Again" story that we are both lucky to be alive to tell. Not much time to fiddle with fuel switch this close to the ground. 

[exM20K]

12 hours ago, Ragsf15e said:

There might be fuel at the crash site and still be a fuel event… Ive forgotten to change to my fullest tank at the beginning of the descent before and landed with something like 2 or 3 gallons in the selected tank.  20 in the “not selected” tank.  I wasn’t happy with myself for that one. It’s right there on my checklist.

lose the engine or stall on the ILS and you probably won’t recover.

Maybe, but not likely.  In addition to the annunciator panel red fuel low warning, there is an indication on the G1000 MFD, and, most importantly, there is a blinking red master warning right above the master switches and just left of the PFD. It is deliberately annoying and hard to miss.

 

Regarding the evident steep dive on final:

There was a mishap in an acclaim during which the pilot reported uncommanded pitch trim activation. Final Report here, but the  investigators were unable to duplicate later.

If the NTSB does investigate, and I  hope they do, it is beneficial that the plane's wreckage didn't burn, and maybe there is something left to point to a probable cause.  If, for example, they find the carcass of a turkey vulture inside the cabin or the pilot's seat locks disengaged, maybe there can be some closure here.

-dan

[LANCECASPER]

3 hours ago, exM20K said:

Maybe, but not likely.  In addition to the annunciator panel red fuel low warning, there is an indication on the G1000 MFD, and, most importantly, there is a blinking red master warning right above the master switches and just left of the PFD. It is deliberately annoying and hard to miss.

 

Regarding the evident steep dive on final:

There was a mishap in an acclaim during which the pilot reported uncommanded pitch trim activation. Final Report here, but the  investigators were unable to duplicate later.

If the NTSB does investigate, and I  hope they do, it is beneficial that the plane's wreckage didn't burn, and maybe there is something left to point to a probable cause.  If, for example, they find the carcass of a turkey vulture inside the cabin or the pilot's seat locks disengaged, maybe there can be some closure here.

-dan

It will be interesting to see if this was complied with : https://mooney.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/SBM20-313A.pdf https://mooney.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/SBM20-314A.pdf

 - - - - 

This (M20-318) could have been the issue  on the 2012 report you reference, which was later addressed :https://mooney.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/SBM20-318.pdf  The serial number for the 2012 report airplane fits that range. It doesn't fit the one mentioned in this thread (31-0020).

[redbaron1982]

35 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

It will be interesting to see if this was complied with : https://mooney.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/SBM20-313A.pdf https://mooney.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/SBM20-314A.pdf

 

This could have been the issue  on the 2012 report you reference, which was later addressed :https://mooney.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/SBM20-318.pdf

I was not aware of this service bulletin, sounds bad. What's the logic to decide whether something is a SB or an AD?

Edited April 28 by redbaron1982

[Fly Boomer]

24 minutes ago, redbaron1982 said:

I was not aware of this service bulletin, sounds bad. What's the logic to decide whether something is a SB or an AD?

Manufacturer issues SB, FAA issues Airworthiness Directive.  Sometimes FAA creates AD because of SB.

[mike_elliott]

The Mooney Summit's Bill Gilliland foundation has reached out to Mrs. Braun to offer our help. Thanks Steffan for validating the info we needed. Thanks for all the generosity of the Mooney Community that enables us to do this.

 

[LANCECASPER]

Preliminary report - broken connecting rod

Report_ERA25FA187_200069_6_25_2025 8_09_38 PM.pdf

[natdm]

In a grim way, you secretly always hope it was pilot error so you can say “well I wouldn’t do that” and learn from it. But something like a broken rod, totally gutting. 

[Jeff Uphoff]

6 minutes ago, natdm said:

In a grim way, you secretly always hope it was pilot error so you can say “well I wouldn’t do that” and learn from it. But something like a broken rod, totally gutting. 

My first car, a '74 Dodge Colt, broke a rod. I didn't make it very far after that, either, though luckily I did drift into a 7-Eleven parking lot.

--Up.

[LANCECASPER]

10 minutes ago, natdm said:

In a grim way, you secretly always hope it was pilot error so you can say “well I wouldn’t do that” and learn from it. But something like a broken rod, totally gutting. 

Not saying that the pilot didn't do this, but if I have a catastrophic engine failure I hope I put into practice Bob Hoover's famous quote:

“If you’re faced with a forced landing, fly the thing as far into the crash as possible.”

 

[Ragsf15e]

That was a fairly new engine/airplane too. And under low power, although a crack in the rod had probably been propagating for a long time.  Manufacturing defect?  That’s just a horrible time for it to let go.

[LANCECASPER]

1 hour ago, Ragsf15e said:

That was a fairly new engine/airplane too. And under low power, although a crack in the rod had probably been propagating for a long time.  Manufacturing defect?  That’s just a horrible time for it to let go.

You would think that if it was a manufacturing defect that it would have come part sooner in the 1600-1700 hours that it flew.

You just don't hear about connecting rods coming apart on this engine. The two times it was listed for sale, the ads mention no damage history. Previous sudden stoppage (prop strike) would have seemed much more likely than a manufacturing defect that didn't show up for that long.

No logs on either of the ads, and no mention of prop time but you would certainly hope there wasn't an undisclosed prop strike somewhere along the line where there was no engine teardown. The first time I saw the most recent ad for this Acclaim a couple years ago it was obvious that whoever was selling it, was over-selling it, claiming top numbers of an Acclaim S and claiming that it had WAAS when all that it had was a WAAS transponder to comply with ADSB. The airplane was way overpriced and then eventually came down after a long time on the market. The ad sounded like it was written by a guy in a plaid jacket with slicked back hair. 

[mike_elliott]

18 hours ago, LANCECASPER said:

Preliminary report - broken connecting rod

Report_ERA25FA187_200069_6_25_2025 8_09_38 PM.pdf 719.17 kB · 63 downloads

This also happened to N113TN in AZ on short final, 

[LANCECASPER]

13 minutes ago, mike_elliott said:

This also happened to N113TN in AZ on short final, 

Mike, do you know when that one happened?

In an ad it shows that N113TN had a teardown inspection at one point. 

https://www.aircraft.com/aircraft/29077109/n113tn-2009-mooney-acclaim-type-s

[mike_elliott]

yea it was shortly after that.

[MikeOH]

Does a prop strike/teardown inspection usually include magnafluxing/checking rods?

[Schllc]

a slight tangent….
 

113tn had a very checkered history, no pun intended…

the owner who sold it auction years ago, In my opinion, was not honest. 
I was the one who won the auction, and subsequently found out about the engine failure that occurred in air, DURING the last day of the auction. 
he claimed to be a physician running multiple clinics while accumulating something like 5000 hours over three years in multiple airplanes. 
this plane had multiple prop strikes and so many misrepresentations, that I refused to compete the transaction. 

[201Steve]

2 hours ago, Schllc said:

this plane had multiple prop strikes and so many misrepresentations, that I refused to compete the transaction. 

Wow….

[LANCECASPER]

14 hours ago, MikeOH said:

Does a prop strike/teardown inspection usually include magnafluxing/checking rods?

Now hearing about two TSIO-550 engine failures due to connecting rods, it should include that. The reason for a teardown is to inspect for any internal damage. Carefully inspecting connecting rods really should apply to any engine involved in sudden stoppage. A catastrophic failure at low altitude doesn't give you many options.

No doubt there are other reasons besides a prop strike for a connecting rod to break. The experts on Beechtalk, where they have a lot more Continental experience, are mentioning rod bolts and hydraulic lock (over-priming the engine). Hopefully all teardowns also include new rod bolts. There are varying degrees of teardowns. I've seen some done at local shops. I've seen some shipped back to the Continental factory in AL - that seems to be the most thorough. If insurance is paying, why not? Continental would prefer that for many reasons. I'm sure they will be named in the lawsuit - even though they probably never saw the engine after it left them in 2006.

When the Acclaim was introduced in 2006 it was a market disrupter. People who had never flown a Mooney, some of whom had never flown an airplane, put deposits down. There was a good-sized waiting list. Due to no fault of the airframe, but a widespread lack of specific transition training, there have been a lot of the prop strikes in this airframe, as well as all other long body Mooneys. A pilot moving into this airframe, at the very least, needs someone who really knows how to teach landing the airplane. Especially the Acclaim though - with the prop used on this airframe, if you pull back power too abruptly it drops like a rock, which can lead to a bounce, a porpoise and then a prop strike. Done smoothly it makes better landings than any Mooney I've flown. Old school thinking in some circles is to do as little as you can get by with on a prop strike. I now see why insurance companies insist on a complete teardown. I wouldn't want to fly an airplane that had just a cursory teardown after a prop strike.

[Fly Boomer]

22 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

I wouldn't want to fly an airplane that had just a cursory teardown after a prop strike.

I have seen a few that were not torn down at all -- just checked runout on prop flange.  Scary.

[Jeff Uphoff]

32 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

A pilot moving into this airframe, at the very least, needs someone who really knows how to teach landing the airplane. Especially the Acclaim though - with the prop used on this airframe, if you pull back power too abruptly it drops like a rock, which can lead to a bounce, a porpoise and then a prop strike. Done smoothly it makes better landings than any Mooney I've flown. 

And how!

My three-bladed Ovation3 (STC upgraded from an Ovation2--by serial number the first Ovation2 built, in fact) drops like quite the rock, too, if you chop power all the way.

But it also lands smoother than any of the three Mooneys I've owned (previous were a C and a 231) when done well. Pure butter.

--Up.