New Mooney Acclaim

jkgoblue

jkgoblue

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Sep 16, 2008
Messages
338
Location
Sands Point, NY
Display Name
Display name:
John K.
Wow. Never would have thought they would do that.
 
Nice. I would hate to see the price tag though.
 
One nice looking bird.like the pilots side door.
 
I'd buy a Mooney over a Cirrus any day. Way more fast for the same money? I'm there.
 
That just made the top of my list for if I ever win a stupid amount in the Powerball.
 
It needs tip tanks and a bubble canopy.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20150416_114656_resized.jpg
    IMG_20150416_114656_resized.jpg
    163.1 KB · Views: 97
This may be the kind of change which can be made because the essential fuselage structure is welded steel, rather than aluminium monocoque. I think it's a grand change, and I would not expect Textron to do anything in the Beech line (or, for that matter, Cessna) to address it. If asked, they'd claim the CessnaLumbia is their answer. It ain't, but that's life...
 
SCCutler said:
This may be the kind of change which can be made because the essential fuselage structure is welded steel, rather than aluminium monocoque. I think it's a grand change, and I would not expect Textron to do anything in the Beech line (or, for that matter, Cessna) to address it. If asked, they'd claim the CessnaLumbia is their answer. It ain't, but that's life...
Click to expand...

Cessna's single engine piston line all have 2 doors already anyway. Beech definitely won't do it and I think you're right about why it's easier for Mooney to do it.
 
This is a pretty amazing redesign of a solid, classic airframe. I love the way Mooney's fly and I think these changes will help keep them relevant in a tough GA market. Hope to get a peek at one of these soon.
 
BrianNC said:
Cessna's single engine piston line all have 2 doors already anyway. Beech definitely won't do it and I think you're right about why it's easier for Mooney to do it.
Click to expand...

I meant a high-performance single.
 
SCCutler said:
This may be the kind of change which can be made because the essential fuselage structure is welded steel, rather than aluminium monocoque. I think it's a grand change, and I would not expect Textron to do anything in the Beech line (or, for that matter, Cessna) to address it. If asked, they'd claim the CessnaLumbia is their answer. It ain't, but that's life...
Click to expand...

Not really, its just pure laziness. There is an STC out there to add an additional door to the Cessna 206, while expensive it was still done by a third party company.

MROs redesign cabin floor plans every day in biz jets often requiring substantial modifications to the floor structures, seat rails, headliners, sidewalls, oxygen boxes, wiring, placards, emergency equipment location, you name it.

Bottom line is that if Beech or Piper really wanted to add the proper number of doors to an airplane, it could be done pretty easily. Some of these one-door wonders don't even have much equipment on the wall to worry about.
 
rbridges said:
as I mentioned in mooneyspace, it will be in most of our price ranges in about 45 years. Just gotta be patient.
Click to expand...

That's true for pretty much any new aircraft.
 
The rubber doughnuts in the gear just seem silly to me.
 
bnt83 said:
The rubber doughnuts in the gear just seem silly to me.
Click to expand...

I would love to get rid of my Oleo struts in favor of rubber donuts a la Mooney.
 
466 pounds useful load with 89 gal in the tank. That is two people and a small bag!!
 
teejayevans said:
Why??
Click to expand...

Because the hockey pucks are basically MX-free, and very satisfying when you land a greaser. The oleo struts will blow O-rings and then you can't retract the gear. Inevitably, they blow O-rings when you're not at your home airport.
 
Scott@KTYR said:
466 pounds useful load with 89 gal in the tank. That is two people and a small bag!!
Click to expand...

That's enough fuel to take your two people over 700 nm. How far do you usually travel? How much fuel will be required? Add the unneeded fuel at 6 lbs/gal to the load. This will not be the plane to top off the tanks after every flight, you'll actually need to think . .

When I travel, it's generally 300-400 nm, or in this plane, call it half tanks. So add 40 gallons = 240 lbs (a third person with generous baggage) to the Useful Load. I don't think I've ever traveled more than 1-1/2 hours with more than two people, and that far only once (4 adults, filled to 34 gallons).

So now the Load goes up to 706 pounds going 400 nm. If you fuel for a 400 nm trip, how much can you carry? My Vintage Mooney will easily carry 660-700 lbs that far, but much much slower.
 
That's nice but let's get real.

I can't think of all the used aircraft that you could buy and fuel it, maintain it, hangar it and insure it for the rest of your flying career for that money.

Think twin Baron. Or C421. Or ????. So much more plane for a fraction of the cost. GA is going to kill itself.
 
bnt83 said:
Not really, its just pure laziness. There is an STC out there to add an additional door to the Cessna 206, while expensive it was still done by a third party company.

MROs redesign cabin floor plans every day in biz jets often requiring substantial modifications to the floor structures, seat rails, headliners, sidewalls, oxygen boxes, wiring, placards, emergency equipment location, you name it.

Bottom line is that if Beech or Piper really wanted to add the proper number of doors to an airplane, it could be done pretty easily. Some of these one-door wonders don't even have much equipment on the wall to worry about.
Click to expand...

Word.

Fact is, a good engineering team (like, two good guys) could design it in a few days.
 
Hank S said:
That's enough fuel to take your two people over 700 nm. How far do you usually travel? How much fuel will be required? Add the unneeded fuel at 6 lbs/gal to the load. This will not be the plane to top off the tanks after every flight, you'll actually need to think . .

When I travel, it's generally 300-400 nm, or in this plane, call it half tanks. So add 40 gallons = 240 lbs (a third person with generous baggage) to the Useful Load. I don't think I've ever traveled more than 1-1/2 hours with more than two people, and that far only once (4 adults, filled to 34 gallons).

So now the Load goes up to 706 pounds going 400 nm. If you fuel for a 400 nm trip, how much can you carry? My Vintage Mooney will easily carry 660-700 lbs that far, but much much slower.
Click to expand...
At 242 KTS what fuel burn are you projecting for these numbers. I suspect the range to be quite substantial. Probably burns ~15-17GPH LOP cruise or ~22GPH ROP.

I'd figure a 800nm range in go fast mode.
 
Hank S said:
That's enough fuel to take your two people over 700 nm. How far do you usually travel? How much fuel will be required? Add the unneeded fuel at 6 lbs/gal to the load. This will not be the plane to top off the tanks after every flight, you'll actually need to think . .

When I travel, it's generally 300-400 nm, or in this plane, call it half tanks. So add 40 gallons = 240 lbs (a third person with generous baggage) to the Useful Load. I don't think I've ever traveled more than 1-1/2 hours with more than two people, and that far only once (4 adults, filled to 34 gallons).

So now the Load goes up to 706 pounds going 400 nm. If you fuel for a 400 nm trip, how much can you carry? My Vintage Mooney will easily carry 660-700 lbs that far, but much much slower.
Click to expand...

I like my Toga. We travel with 4 adults and 100 pounds of baggage and do 2.5 to 3.5 hour legs on our travels. We do 1100 miles one way on our vacations.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Because the hockey pucks are basically MX-free, and very satisfying when you land a greaser. The oleo struts will blow O-rings and then you can't retract the gear. Inevitably, they blow O-rings when you're not at your home airport.
Click to expand...

That, and and the struts always deflate when you aren't at your home airport as well.
 
Sac Arrow said:
That, and and the struts always deflate when you aren't at your home airport as well.
Click to expand...

Yep. Lots of benefits to the Mooney system.
 
I like it. I can't afford it, but it's nice to see they are continuing to develop and come out with new features, however big or small they may be.

Unfortunately the price is pretty high. There's clearly a market for it or they wouldn't be making them and selling them still.

Hank S said:
That's enough fuel to take your two people over 700 nm. How far do you usually travel? How much fuel will be required? Add the unneeded fuel at 6 lbs/gal to the load. This will not be the plane to top off the tanks after every flight, you'll actually need to think . .

When I travel, it's generally 300-400 nm, or in this plane, call it half tanks. So add 40 gallons = 240 lbs (a third person with generous baggage) to the Useful Load. I don't think I've ever traveled more than 1-1/2 hours with more than two people, and that far only once (4 adults, filled to 34 gallons).

So now the Load goes up to 706 pounds going 400 nm. If you fuel for a 400 nm trip, how much can you carry? My Vintage Mooney will easily carry 660-700 lbs that far, but much much slower.
Click to expand...
You have a C model, right? What year?

Scott@KTYR said:
I like my Toga. We travel with 4 adults and 100 pounds of baggage and do 2.5 to 3.5 hour legs on our travels. We do 1100 miles one way on our vacations.
Click to expand...
Is yours a turbo? What speed do you average?
 
Is the back seat removable ? If you fill up the tanks, it's a two seater.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top