Mooney Acclaim & Known Icing

jdwatson

jdwatson

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
943
Location
Cary, NC
Display Name
Display name:
JDW
Is the Acclaim known-icing capable ? I couldn't find it on their website.
 
jdwatson said:
Is the Acclaim known-icing capable ? I couldn't find it on their website.
Click to expand...

I have it on good authority that it will be able to be equipped as K-Ice. I don't think they have any certifications on it yet.
 
whats the acclaim? is that moonys version of a k car?
 
Oh man, why did you all have to point me to mooney.com
Ok, i gotta have one.
 

Attachments

  • bgCabin1.jpg
    bgCabin1.jpg
    12 KB · Views: 32
  • valueChartAcclaim.jpg
    valueChartAcclaim.jpg
    16.3 KB · Views: 24
jdwatson said:
Is the Acclaim known-icing capable ? I couldn't find it on their website.
Click to expand...

The one I saw at Sun & Fun wasn't. It had TKS but not the KI version.
 
Ovation and Bravo are, don't see why the Acclaim wouldn't be when the certify. They only changed the engine.
 
Michael said:
whats the acclaim? is that moonys version of a k car?
Click to expand...
Like Lance said, the one at Sun-'n-fun (that I also saw) did not have KI certification, but may very well have in the future.

It was a pretty slick plane with a beautiful paint job:
DSC00040.sized.jpg
 
That picture is hilarious. I don't know if it is you, Jason, but the caption should read "BOW DOWN TO THE MOONEY!"
 
wangmyers said:
That picture is hilarious. I don't know if it is you, Jason, but the caption should read "BOW DOWN TO THE MOONEY!"
Click to expand...

Thats so you dont bang your head on the wing as you climb in. must be a cessna pilot.
 
wangmyers said:
That picture is hilarious. I don't know if it is you, Jason, but the caption should read "BOW DOWN TO THE MOONEY!"
Click to expand...
Or he just saw the price tag and is gagging over sticker shock.
 
wangmyers said:
That picture is hilarious. I don't know if it is you, Jason, but the caption should read "BOW DOWN TO THE MOONEY!"
Click to expand...

HAH! I got a kick out of that one, Ben. I thought it was funny too, when I took the shot.
 
wangmyers said:
That picture is hilarious. I don't know if it is you, Jason, but the caption should read "BOW DOWN TO THE MOONEY!"
Click to expand...

At first I thought maybe Jason had captured me on film since I had been inspecting something under the plane when I was there, but the shoes are the wrong color so it must have been someone else.
 
wangmyers said:
That picture is hilarious. I don't know if it is you, Jason, but the caption should read "BOW DOWN TO THE MOONEY!"
Click to expand...

Caption contest!!!????



"Sir, it isn't a Holy Relic it is just a Mooney!"
"OH! MY GOD LOOK AT THE STICKER PRICE!!"
"To the salesman: Is this the position I need to be in to buy a new plane?"
"Wow look at that, Made in the USA!!"
"And it comes with you own lineman to step on as you enter"
"Well they put the tail on backwards I wonder if this wing is on upside down"
 
I want to know when the upgrade kit will be available for ovation owners?!!

Go out and buy a 95-97 ovation with a run out engine for ~220k and put on the upgrade kit...lets say 50k and you would have a screamer!
 
Steve said:
wow...they just now caught up with 20 yr old technology...
Click to expand...

Yep it's like a new 911 turbo, they still make that crap out of metal...talk about a 100 year old design, why don't they just call it a model T. I'm so tired of the domestic car companies still making cars with 4 wheels. We all want new designs, lets make them with 10 wheels!

I myself like quality hand made things. I'm proud as heck to fly in a Mooney that has ~4,000 quality US manhours in it!
 
I admire your patience in waiting for the innovations made by the experimental segment of aviation wend they way into "certified" designs. I know the stockholders do, too.



Iceman said:
Yep it's like a new 911 turbo, they still make that crap out of metal...talk about a 100 year old design, why don't they just call it a model T. I'm so tired of the domestic car companies still making cars with 4 wheels. We all want new designs, lets make them with 10 wheels!

I myself like quality hand made things. I'm proud as heck to fly in a Mooney that has ~4,000 quality US manhours in it!
Click to expand...
 
Steve said:
I admire your patience in waiting for the innovations made by the experimental segment of aviation wend they way into "certified" designs. I know the stockholders do, too.
Click to expand...

Not really waiting for anything. I'm living life RIGHT now. What more do you need then they are providing right now?

I know for me...
1500nm range
13 gph doing over 180 kts
the best auto pilot in GA (225)
real time weather
know ice
20,000 service
a plane that I know will last 50 years

For me there is no such thing as an upgrade unless your talking about a PC12 (which you would call an old technology pos)

I know if I'm flying with people I care about I will not be doing it with unproven technology.
 
Hey its a Tiger that's grown up!
 
My folks live in the NorthEast. I figure that KI would be a given. I saw the ad in the latest rags and didn't see KI listed as an option on this aircraft. I would settle for 800nm with IFR reserves. 500nm is the minimum. My Bride likes space, but I keep telling her that room vs. GA == CO$T. :) Not to mention I've been a Cessna driver from hour .01, so I'd need some dual time to fly something really slick.

What I *should* be looking at is 20+ year old KI-twins, but a man can dream. Right ? Besides, Mega-Millions is up to $66M. That might get me a Mooney !
 
Last edited:
To be honest, the KI systems on GA singles often don't give you much (if any) more de-icing capabilities than the non-KI systems. They do give you some redundancy, and maybe more fluid. On some airplanes they may also cover the tail where the uncertified system doesn't.

Regardless, your typical single, even with known ice, is not meant to be a northeast weatherbeater. All either version of the system gives you is a little bit of comfort and some capabilities to help you as you flee (and I mean FLEE) the icing conditions.

In all the airplanes I've flown (from the TB-9 up the the C208B or the PC12), I've always treated any ice accumulation in solid IMC (meaning the tops or bottoms are more than a thousand feet away) as an urgent situation, and immediately request an altitude change from ATC citing ICE. When I've lost more than 10 KIAS, I _TELL_ ATC I need an immediate change, and if I don't get a satisfactory response I'd declare an emergency and change altitude on my own. It's never gotten that far, even on busy days here in the DC and NY centers the controllers have always given me options - the worst response I've ever gotten was "I'll have lower for you in 10 miles", which was only 4 minutes away and was OK at that point.

Someday when I'm flying something with lots of bleed air or electrical power (did you know that the B-787 doesn't use bleed air for anything except maybe engine start?), I'll treat ice as something to be endured.

This may be preaching to the choir - and I'll apologize - but it seems every winter I read about a few more examples of folks who die overestimating their known ice systems. As Dirty Harry said: "A Man's got to know his limitations".
 
TMetzinger said:
This may be preaching to the choir - and I'll apologize - but it seems every winter I read about a few more examples of folks who die overestimating their known ice systems. As Dirty Harry said: "A Man's got to know his limitations".
Click to expand...
I was talking to the president of Columbia about the KI issue at the AOPA Expo in Tampa last year. He said the Columbia's deice won't ever be KI because he doesn't want to insidiously tempt pilots into thinking it's anything but an emergency out.

Well, and plus there's the liability thing.
 
This is one of the reasons I went to the P-Baron.

In the A-36 there were seveal times where conditions merited giving the weather a try: lots of outs, no icing reported but conditions conducive, etc. Some of these forcasts are for multi state areas. geesh!

Had I encountered any icing and had issues arise, I was technically illegal. At least in the Baron, it would be careless and reckless, huh?

Dave
 
You won't get any arguement from me, Tim. I just think if you're flying in the NE from a long distance having KI seems to be prudent. I don't trust the weather up there after Nov 1st and until May. I used to live in NY, VT & MA.

Of course, a part of knowing your limitations is knowing your (and your aircraft's) capabilities too. Dr. Chien wrote a few great articles for Aviation Safety Magazine on icing (January 2002), snow (December 2003) and prepping (October 2003) for cold weather flight.

Ice & Thunderstorms are my two major fears in flight.
 
Dave Siciliano said:
This is one of the reasons I went to the P-Baron.

In the A-36 there were seveal times where conditions merited giving the weather a try: lots of outs, no icing reported but conditions conducive, etc. Some of these forcasts are for multi state areas. geesh!

Had I encountered any icing and had issues arise, I was technically illegal. At least in the Baron, it would be careless and reckless, huh?

Dave
Click to expand...

"I was technically illegal" - That's the difference. During the winter up here michigan has A LOT of ice days. The ice is often not that bad but a person that actually wants to use his or her aircraft and stay legal needs to have a KI aircraft. The ice system on the Mooney works REALLY well. You just need to be aware of its limitations. Of course like xm and thunderstorms you use this technology to push through the weak/avoid the heavy stuff and continue with the trip.
 
Ken Ibold said:
I was talking to the president of Columbia about the KI issue at the AOPA Expo in Tampa last year. He said the Columbia's deice won't ever be KI because he doesn't want to insidiously tempt pilots into thinking it's anything but an emergency out.
Click to expand...
Then why do their ads for it say "Simply push a button and let your worries melt away"? (AOPA Pilot, February 2006, p. 45) That sounds to me like a lot more than an insidious temptation -- more like an outright invitation to fly into icing without worry.:no:
 
Dave Siciliano said:
This is one of the reasons I went to the P-Baron.

Had I encountered any icing and had issues arise, I was technically illegal. At least in the Baron, it would be careless and reckless, huh?

Dave
Click to expand...

Either way, you're screwed.

I'm unaware of any part 91 incidents where icing was involved and the FAA came after the pilots if there was no accident or injuries, even if the pilot declared an emergency and got priority handling from ATC. Ron may know of some.

Of course, if you crash the plane, that's a different story.
 
I agree Timothy. The current policy is kind of no harm; no foul. It would be very difficult to write a regulation that could allow the wide lattitude and judgement that is necessary in many of these circumstances. The current policy (for part 91 as you so ably point out) is if it's forecast and you have a problem, it will probably be a violation. That's probably pretty good for us.

There is a flight instructor that had some pretty heated discussions on another board that condoned teaching folks to fly into icing conditions to get experience (non-K-ice planes). I understand he has requested a formal opinion be rendered on this issue. I don't like asking for formal written opinions unless I feel very strongly it will improve the current situation: don't have a good feeling 'bout this one.

Best,

Dave
 
Ron Levy said:
Then why do their ads for it say "Simply push a button and let your worries melt away"? (AOPA Pilot, February 2006, p. 45) That sounds to me like a lot more than an insidious temptation -- more like an outright invitation to fly into icing without worry.:no:
Click to expand...

Apparently the marketing folks produced their ads and the more conservative engineer types worked on the certification.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top