All Activity

Things to remember… Solenoids and relays are names for the same device… an electro magnetic switch… they last for decades before failing… they have key details in the part name… normally open and normally closed…. NO NC. they are wired in an interesting way with the avionics relay… this provides the avionics to work in the event the avionics relay fails…. It will fail closed. take a look at how your strobes are wired… if your relays are original… you may have three that are very similar… carry a spare of each the NO and NC… Start, master, avionics… plus a few more… PP thoughts only, not a mechanic… Best regards, -a-

I believe the KX-200 IS a slide-in replacement for the KX-155/165 Oh, and some KX-155s DO have built-in Glide Slope receivers. Depends on mod/version.

KX165 has glide slope… KX155 does not… fancy panel from 1994 has both… let’s invite @Alan Fox to this conversation… Alan is my preferred supply of pre-flown avionics… Keep in mind… the newer BK avionics are rebranded devices built by somebody else… it may be interesting to find out what a KX200 really is… that may explain why it isn’t a slide in replacement… Best regards, -a-

I carry a spare master solenoid with me

A KX-165 is not a direct replacement for a KX-155. One has a resolver (155) the other doesn’t. You’ll probably need a different nav indicator. Just a heads up for those looking at this.

The install cost alone plus the inconvenience of having to rip apart panel that I am fairly happy with strongly favors KX200 option. While I like Garmin products, I am not obsessed with brand loyalty to the point of incurring unnecessary expenses just to have all Garmin panel.

These still working? I might need to make some. Lasar doesn’t have any real ones and my new plane needs them.

I don't know the timing of the company transitions but the KY 197s were original in the plane from 1980 (1979 actually as my plane is a 1980 model year but the airworthiness cert is from 12/1979).

Thanks, I watched that part (starts at 40:00), as expected UND were abusing their engines…even with 100LL they would have the exact same problem (they did not even run 50% vs 50% of fleet on 100L vs UL94) Definitely not aromatics as Lycoming suggested, I did run the same Archer with same engine on UL91 (Avgas available in Europe, basically 100LL without TEL and no aromatics) and many times using SP98 auto-fuel (full of aromatics, sort of EN228/AKI93 with even lower MON 87 octane rating), however, I flew richer than 100ROP and I swear, I never ever let CHT slip above 380F, that Archer still fly using Mogas with no issues ! Swift claimed no one else had valve recession problems using UL94 in the last 10 years, except UND (they have engines replaced regularly on warranty anyway even with 100LL )

My suspicion is that the KY-197s were designed AFTER King was sold off to Allied Signal and Bendix. The KLN-94 was an even later (circa 2000) design...might be even after Honeywell bought them?

The new solenoid in your pictures on the crossmember next to the inline fuse is not powering the main bus, I don't think. It would need to have the big 2 gauge wires going to it. It's powering something else, and I can't tell what.

For clarity, if your F is wired like my K, and it looks like it is, this one is your master relay/solenoid, mounted on the rear of the battery box where you have to lean way into the tailcone to see / work on it:

the aircraft spruce link you provided was for a solenoid. the solenoid pictured above IS less than or around a year old, but it is not what the arrow is pointing to. the arrow in pic 1 points to the inline fuse and the arrow in pic 2 points to the relay, which has been there since I've had the plane. I'm question if the RELAY is part of the problem, not the solenoid.

@eman1200 My parts catalog calls it a relay. It could also be called a solenoid. Pretty much the same thing. The solenoid with the arrow pointing to it in your photos does not look less than a year old. There is another one mounted on the crossmember that is not present in my plane that looks new, and also like it should have some protection over the terminals to prevent accidental arcing. I suspect someone has done something non-standard with your wiring that may be contributing to your situation.

Maybe I'm in the minority but I switched to a Garmin panel 18 years ago when both of my KY 197s failed within a month of each other and my KLN 94 started to overheat. Haven't had a single issue since.

Yeah, that's the excellent question, isn't it? Thankfully, my KX-155 is still soldiering on (I have one segment in one of the seven-segment displays out) but at some point I'll be faced with this decision. The KX-155 has gone well beyond being a proven design...it's pretty much the gold standard in a great, reliable radio. So, having it repaired and upgrading the display is pretty compelling. OTOH, there's not much of a guarantee of how much additional life I'm going to get for my $2.5K. Thus, the KX-200, at $5K becomes a possibility. It's new and shiny and has a warranty. Thing is, it has NOT been field proven by any stretch of the imagination (think beta tester when you buy), and it is $2.5K more money out of my pocket. Keep in mind that the Bendix-King that designed the venerable KX-155 is most definitely NOT the same company that has designed the KX-200. I'm not convinced they're now a better company than they once were. So, at the moment, it is pretty obvious I'd go with the repair/refurb option. But who knows when mine dies enough time may have elapsed that the KX-200 has become well established, and Ed may no longer be fixing KX-155s! I'll wait and see.

Swift discusses the UND issue

Sounds a little bit like „Hotel California“: “You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave“ ..

Will need to replace the Aspen with a G5, GI275, or G3x system for the GFC500 autopilot. If you are wanting to keep the Aspen your choices drop down to Aerocruze 100, S-Tec 55x/3100. Also, is the navigator a GNS430W? You might have some limitations if the GPS navigator is not WAAS.

I found these two examples looking only a week back. Are you beginning to see my point?

Likely another one: https://asn.flightsafety.org/wikibase/542908

He is looking for 6041H53 (14 v)...not 6046H53 (28 v) He has one of the last 14 volt M20J's made in 1985. Ser no 24-1524

1979 Mooney M20J 201 for sale in Sweden - Winglist Accident Mooney M20J 201 SE-GXI, Friday 5 September 2025 SE-GXI - Mooney 201 [24-0844] - Flightradar24 UPDATE: Private plane crashes into lake in Norrtälje, Sweden, during exercise - Both pilots died - Aviation24.be Perhaps European MS members know more and can translate better. Sweden Volunteer Air Corp - Welcome to the Volunteer Air Corps - FFK - Volunteer Air Corps - FFK UPDATE: Private plane crashes into lake in Norrtälje, Sweden, during exercise – Both pilots died By André Orban -6 September 20250261 A Mooney M20J 201 single-engine propeller plane from Sweden’s Volunteer Air Corps crashed into Lake Limmaren near Norrtälje Airport (ESSN) on Friday afternoon during a training exercise. The aircraft registered SE-GXI, carrying two pilots, went into the water while attempting to land near a lakeside runway. The plane went down near the Görla airfield, just short of the runway. A major rescue effort involving helicopters, divers, emergency services, and police was launched, but both men on board, experienced pilots, could not be saved. The plane is reportedly almost fully submerged. Police have opened a criminal investigation into the cause of the crash and have begun questioning people who can provide information. Sweden’s Accident Investigation Authority will take part in the inquiry. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- At 6 p.m., the two men who had been on board the plane were found. A few hours later, the police confirmed that both had died in connection with the crash. Relatives have been notified. "They were both very experienced pilots and appreciated members of FFK. Our thoughts now go to the relatives, friends and colleagues in the county," writes the Volunteer Air Corps on social media. "The runway is right on the beach, so instead of landing on the runway, the plane ended up in the water," said Ola Österling, press spokesperson at the police command center.

I've been kind of "back burner" concerned about this fuel situation, but this is reassuring.

Dead attempting the turn back: https://asn.flightsafety.org/wikibase/543251 According to the article at least, they had engine problems after takeoff and attempted to foolishly turn back. I checked on google maps if there were options to land straight ahead. I marked the crash site with an X: But maybe they didn't bank steep enough? Or maybe they should have practices this maneuver more? p.s.: I will now post stories of deaths due to a turn back in this thread