philiplane

Do you have Champion spark plugs, and/or Slick magnetos? If so, there is a possibility you have a developing ignition problem you don't want to ignore.

No. This lamp is not part of the PMA'd or STC'd Whelen aviation lamp series. The best lamp right now is the Teledyne Alphabeam. It has width and depth, is brighter than the Whelen LED, and is the best option if you are not ready to drop $500+ on an HID.

They are not legal. You need a PMA to manufacture and offer replacement parts for TC'd aircraft. Yes even for the lowly 4509 GE lamp. Which, by the way, is produced under an FAA PMA by GE.

It's on the inspection checklist- check engine controls for full travel in both directions. You want it to idle correctly so you don't eat up runway upon landing, and you want it full open for takeoff to develop max power. That said, a problem with travel INSIDE the carb is highly unusual. Normally it's simply a misadjusted or slipped control cable. There is also more than one throttle lever arm available for the early carburetors. The arm holes are drilled at different lengths and can present a problem if someone puts a long arm where a short one was or vice versa. It will also not make full travel.

Running at high power LOP during a break in is risky business in this particular engine. Better to go ROP until the rings are seated, and then explore LOP without the burden of possibly ruining one cylinder. You can run LOP on the IO-550N series used in the Bonanza and Cirrus because they are well tuned from the start. On the other hand, as a mechanic, I am more than happy to fix something once it's already gone wrong...

The Teledyne Alphabeam has more depth penetration than the Whelen, by about 30-50 percent. It also has the same spread, so you get the best overall lighting available without going to an HID. I've done field approvals for cowl and wing mounted XeVision HID lights in Mooneys. They are a good solution if you want the most light available for the money.

Tempest prices only went up because they ran out of the iridium wire they had bought at the old price. Iridium wire is one of the world's most expensive materials, at around $1000 a pound.

In some cases air oil separators are just as Mike describes, "like putting a hose from your butt to your mouth." Those are the cases where temperatures are low enough that you are returning oil, water, and acids back to the case. Warm engine compartments don't do this, and those are typically found only with turbocharged engines. Four cylinder Lycomings probably suffer more harm from separators because they run too cool. And if you have a separator, only the Airwolf is worth anything. The M-20 is virtually useless IMHO. FWIW, I have managed fleets flying over 10,000 hours annually with both types of separators, and maintained dozens of customer planes of all types in addition to the fleet work.

The HSI is just a display for the remote gyro. If the heading is erratic, the problem lies in the KG-102 remote gyro. They are well known for hiccups like this.

I am a former Mooney ASC Director of Maintenance, mechanic, avionics tech, and flight instructor, that installed & proofed the first Acclaim retrofit heat system back in 2007. That was in Norwood, Massachusetts just before Mooney went on life support in 2008. I've done HID landing light Field Approvals, Powerflow exhaust installs, one piece side windows, etc. I'm now in Fort Lauderdale and do annuals, pre-buys, and flight instruction by appointment at KFXE. Glenn Juber

In your case the factory OH or reman will get you the latest updates, that you will NOT get aftermarket. No matter which option you choose, you get far more new parts than you would expect. When you exchange you get roller tappets, and the roller tappet engines have new cases automatically, so that's a $6000 upgrade. I have an IO-540 Cherokee Six engine in my shop now. The customer elected to send his original 1976 engine in for OH, and in return he got a new case, new crank, new fuel injector lines, flow divider, pumps, mags, all new accessories, induction tubes, etc. I think he got his data plate back and maybe the accessory case. Everything else is brand new, even the flywheel. Yet he only paid about $3000 more than for any of the popular shop overhauls. As far as support goes, I have seen Lycoming step up to the plate even for engines well out of warranty. Especially for metal issues and oil leakage. Go straight to the Lycoming regional rep for problems in or out of warranty.

one more detail, from our Friendly Aviation Advisors: Who Needs A PMA? a. General Requirements. Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) § 21.303(a) requires any person producing replacement or modification parts for sale for installation on a type-certificated product to get a PMA. A PMA is a combined design and production approval for replacement parts. Also we may use a PMA for the production of modification parts from supplemental type certificates (STC). The prior STC approves the design and installation of these modification parts in products. However, if any replacement part alters a product by introducing a major change, then 14 CFR § 21.113 requires an STC for the approval of these parts. See FAA Order 8110.4, Type Certification, for STC procedures.

Here's the killer. These lamps are supposed to replace NAV lamps, but, and I quote from the manufacturer: "When these lights are in strobe mode, do the red & green nav lights still illuminate between strobe flashes? Per the supplier: No. There is no light output between light bursts. Do these satisfy the anti-collision beacon requirement for night VFR? Per the supplier: My strobe lights do not meet the requirements for anti-collision lights. They are only a replacement for the standard navigation or position lights, with the additional strobe feature for safety." ********************** So you no longer have nav lights when the strobes are on. That's a deal breaker, since nav lights are required for night flight, and they do NOT meet the requirements for strobe lights. So you've now lost your nav light function (intentionally to boot), which is a Part 91.205c, violation in addition to the Unapproved Parts that made your airplane Unairworthy the moment you installed them. Although you might install them on a homebuilt without approvals, you can't use the strobe function at night since it kills the position lights, which are required.

Let me clarify. First of all, changing one lamp to another is not even a minor alteration. It is maintenance. That is where the IA first went wrong. Second, anything on a Type Certificated aircraft has to have both a certification basis, and an installation approval through one of several channels. If your IA thinks these LED's are legal, he is wrong. No shade of gray here. There is no room for opinion on the subject, only facts. Fact #1, NavStrobe does not possess a PMA for the manufacture of aircraft parts. Stop here, do not pass GO, do not collect $200. Fact #2, TSO'd parts are REQUIRED by regulation to be clearly marked with the applicable TSO and or PMA number, or STC information. NavStrobe lights have none of these markings. Fact #3, nav lights are REQUIRED by regulation, and the nav lights required by reg have a certification basis. Nav lights HAVE to to conform to a TSO. The parts that comprise a nav light assembly are TSO'd. Remove the existing TSO'd 7512-12 lamp, install a NavStrobe lamp, and now you have an Unapproved Part performing a required function. Simple as simple can be. Fact #4, these lights combine two normally separate functions. The controls for the functions have to be clearly marked, so the switch needs appropriate placarding to describe the functions and how to select each mode. That alone rules out your standard parts argument, since the lamp functions differently depending on its' mode of activation. I think these lights could be a winner, but absent any approvals, they cannot be installed legally on a Type Certificated Aircraft. The approval can be as simple as a Field Approval. Or as complex as a TSO'd part produced under an FAA PMA. Or equally complex as an STC'd part. People are confusing this as a standard parts issue and it is not. The bulb is not the same as the lamp it replaces so it cannot hope to meet the definition of a standard part. There are NO standards for LED replacement lamps, therefore there are NO standard LED lamps. All LED approvals so far have been as entirely new assemblies, such as Whelen and Aveo are producing. Those assembles use multiple LED's carefully arranged SPECIFiCALLY to meet the field of view requirements that an LED replacement lamp could not.

Please post the 337 so others can have a basis for a follow on Field Approval. Thanks

The FAA doesn't care so much about the nav lamp assembly as a structure, they really care about the light it emits. They are primarily focused on the lamp, not the holder. There are several varieties of standard parts, some are accepted as relics from the pre-FAA and pre CAA days (before 1938). Others meet TSO's developed since then. You are correct that the 311 does not have a TSO, because it does not perform a function that requires one. But GE and others have PMA for aircraft lamps, some TSO'd some not. All are subject to FAA audit of the QC system. However, we are talking about external nav lamps, which must meet brightness, color, and beam spread incorporated into a TSO that is referenced by the CFR that governs navigation position lights. Those particular lamps must be manufactured IAW the TSO by a PMA holder. You absolutely cannot substitute any lamp into a nav lamp holder that does not conform to the TSO C30c. You talked about installing an equivalent, which you can do, provided the equivalent meets the same TSO and is an approved part. These LED's are not equivalents because they have not been tested & accepted by the FAA, nor has the maker applied for PMA approval or STC. Fit Form and Function rules governing standard parts do not apply when the subject part is required by regulation, and the regulation specifies a standard to be met. Strobe, beacon, and nav lamps must conform to a TSO, because they are required equipment for certain Kinds Of Operation, and there are defined standards for them. The FAA doesn't care if you can see your charts or engine instruments in the dark, but they do want to be certain that you can see other planes and they can see you. Thus the external lighting standards. The hazard with LED's is the very narrow beam of each LED. You'll notice that any certified LED nav lamp has multiple LED's arranged in several directions. They may also incorporate mirrors to aid in spreading the light around. Traditional incandescent lamps do not suffer from narrow beams and use a reflector to help intensify the light, and an external lens to increase the spread even more. The faster an object moves, the wider the spread required for it to become visible and remain visible as it passes an observer. Here in busy South Florida, you really want to be able to pick out and maintain contact with the many other planes you come across at night. The FAA is way behind the developments in lighting, but that's how they function. Someone has to spend a lot of time and money to get new technology to the market. Let's hope the Part 23 rewrite actually helps. I was an early adopter of HID lighting and installed many XeVision lights through the Field Approval process for myself and customers. I did the 337's that got HID's on Cessna Citations in 2005. Those have morphed into a full product line for an aftermarket supplier. It wasn't easy working with the FSDO at first, but they finally saw the light...

No one has mentioned CG yet. Manufacturers optimize the CG when doing tests. You can find 3-7 knots on most planes by simply moving your CG back to 3/4 to 7/8 of the allowable envelope. All the way forward slows it down, and all the way back slows it down too. Two people, full fuel, and bags means the CG is pretty far forward.

Let me simplify. The lamp holder does not emit light, so there is virtually no concern about it in the lighting TSO. Anything you put into the lamp holder must maintain the original TSO. That means lamps and lenses must comply. The lamp itself is the subject, and anything that replaces the original lamp MUST be built, tested, and accepted by the FAA under a TSO. AND, the manufacturer MUST apply for and receive a PMA from the FAA that approves the manufacturer's Quality Control System. If the manufacturer does not maintain the conditions of the PMA, it is revoked. NavStrobe has no PMA and therefore no Authority to manufacture parts for Type Certificated Aircraft. They also cannot make any claims to "meet a TSO", since they have not applied for one, don't possess one, and by the way, there is no TSO that covers a combination lamp such as this. It's still an innovative product, but we can't install it on anything but Experimentals so far. The fastest route at this point is to obtain a Field Approval but I haven't been able to put together an acceptable data package yet.

It's almost always the transducer connector causing this fault. Remove the connector, check for distorted pins & sockets, correct as needed, then apply Stabliant 22 to the contacts and re-install. Very common problem on anything with this style transducer. Cirrus, Mooney, and Beech use it.

The TSO for lighting really doesn't concern the light assembly since it governs the light output, color, and degrees of coverage. So it focuses completely on the lamp, not it's housing. Many companies make replacement lamps (and other parts) for aircraft. But only the ones who have applied for and received a PMA can sell them as aircraft parts. There is no grey area here, you either have a PMA issued by the FAA or you don't. There is no such thing as simply "meets the TSO" in aircraft parts, whether we're talking navigation lamps, or crankshafts, or tires. Parts is parts. This is where folks have to ask the right questions about replacement parts. The person ultimately responsible for the airworthiness of the aircraft is not the mechanic, or Aircraft Spruce, or Jim Bob's Genuine Aircraft Parts Company, it's the pilot.

As a pilot and aircraft owner, I only use Bendix mags on my own plane. As a mechanic, I'm fine if people want to use Slick mags. I have one kid still in college and Slick mags keep me busy....

the 500 hr is not a big deal. A competent mechanic can do each mag in 1.5 hours, plus R&R time. Unless the mag has been neglected, the first two 500 hours rarely require parts changes. That's the whole purpose, to catch and correct things before problems arise. This applies ONLY to Bendix mags. Slick mags rarely go 500 hours without problems, since they forgot how to build mags in 2006. With Champion now owning Slick, the problems are worse. 250 hours is the new recommended inspection interval for Slicks, due to a host of problems such as bad: carbon brushes, point cams, distributor block bushings, intermittent coil tabs, loose rotor tangs, and so on. This is compounded if you are using Champion's spark plugs, which have unstable resistance values. Or the fine wires that have unstable, increasing resistance, pllus cracking electrode insulators.

The antenna problem has been known since 2009, in a variety of forms. It is not limited to WAAS antennas. There is a condition where an installed XM receiver can produce the same phenomenon. It will lock out reception of all GPS units within 30 feet of the airplane. Pulling the XM breaker instantly cures the problem. This can happen with the stand alone XM antenna, or with the combo XM/GPS antennas. It is a reradiated signal, which you'd think would be impossible from a receive-only GPS antenna. It also can happen when the XM or GPS coax coupler is not fully seated into the antenna. I had this happen with several customer's 2005-2008 Mooneys and 2005-2009 Cirrus with dual 430's and Heads Up XM weather receivers installed.

The NavStrobe kit is a great idea but has one major problem. It is not approved for Type Certificated aircraft. So it's currently only for the experimental market. The manufacturer does not possess a PMA to manufacture this product in accordance with a TSO. It's a two step process if your product fulfills the Fit Form and Function tests of a duplicate or improved version of an existing TSO'd product. You design a product as a direct replacement (which this mostly is, but at the same time is not, because it adds a strobe function to the nav lights), then apply to the FAA for a PMA, and if your product is proven to meet the TSO, you get a PMA to produce it. There is no such thing as "making it to the standard" and just selling it. Because this product combines a strobe function, the TSO is not just for the nav lamp. It is also for a strobe light, and there is no TSO that combines the two. It will be complicated under the current rules, which is unfortunate. They will probably need an STC unless Transport Canada agrees to combine the nav and strobe functions under a single, new TSO, or issues approval for both functions under existing orders. That will include placarding to explain the system function at the nav light switch. Someday this will be simple and we'll get great products with less hassle. But not today. Bottom line, if you install this on your TC'd plane today, you've rendered it unairworthy due to installation of Unapproved Parts.

While the NavStrobe is a great product, it is still not legal to install on Type Certificated aircraft. The company is pursuing a Canadian PMA, which the FAA will recognize. Until then, you would need a Field Approval to install them. You will also need special placarding for the nav light switch to describe the operations of the new system. The company claims that the lamps meet the TSO requirements of the FAA, but that is less than half the battle. Meeting a TSO qualifies a part as aircraft quality, and then you need a Parts Manufacturing Approval to sell a standard (TSO) product as an approved part. Under our current regs these are only for experimental aircraft. One day we'll get better regs that encourage innovative products like these, and cut the cost so more people can enjoy the benefits of improved lighting. I am in contact with NavStrobe and will post the PMA letter once it is approved. This may be 4-6 weeks, or 4-6 months, depending on Canadian bureaucracy.