PT20J

I had to do that on my KC 192. The avionics tech that fixed an intermittent problem with between my GI 106 and KX 165 taught me that.

Check the schematics in the manual I posted above. With an AA80 InterVOX intercom (which is what I assume you have) each of the four primary phone jacks goes directly to the ICS, so there should be a shielded twisted pair to each jack: one wire connected to the tip and one to the sleeve. I agree with Eric that it sounds like a connector problem now that more things are failing. If you have a KMA 24 audio panel the three lugs on a strip at the rear of the tray on the upper left side (facing forward) are indeed grounds and the wires should be resoldered. Probably a dumb question, but are you making sure to turn the front panel screw on the audio panel all the way in so that the panel makes good contact with the connector? Again, if it is a KMA24, the rear connector on the tray mounts with two screws from the front. I would check that the ears on the connector where the screws go through are not broken allowing the connector to be pushed out of position when the audio panel is screwed in. King used PCB edge connectors for the Silver Crown avionics and I have found that over time the pins on the tray connector sometimes don't make good contact. With the audio panel out you can access the connector through the opening in the top of the tray and use a small flat blade screwdriver inserted between the plastic body and each pin to gently push it toward the center of the connector so that it makes better contact when the panel is screwed in. I've had to do that with several different King radios.

I don't know for sure, but it sounds like Dynon started the J and K together and then only recently realized that the F is like the J. But, although we think of the these planes as just one model or another, Mooney tended to make changes along the way and each one has to be researched and analyzed to determine if it matters or not. The reason the engineer came out to visit me is that I have a 1994 J and they noticed part number differences between early (of which they own an example) and later model Js. Sometimes the part number change has nothing to do with dimensions and sometimes it does. Also, sometimes apparently Mooney changed dimensions but used the same part number if the parts were interchangeable. You cannot tell without the manufacturing drawings which Mooney does not release. So they have to make measurements an actual airframes. In my case it was an elevator bell crank he was interested in, but he also noted that my rudder push pull tube is not the same diameter as the elevator push pull tube and in Dynon's airplane they are the same.

It's not that they are picky -- it's the way the GFC 500 was architected. The software is distributed. Much of the software, including the flight director, resides in the PFD. Some of the autopilot software resides in the servos (Garmin calls them "smart" servos because they have a microprocessor and software). It's unlike a B-K or Century or S-TEC.

I would check the connections at the emergency jack. a short or open there would take out all the phone jacks because it is in the line between the ICS and the audio panel.

I assume that the Cirrus alternator inspections are called out in the Cirrus maintenance manual. My M20J maintenance manual, and the latest (Aug 2018) Mooney 50 hr/100 hr/Annual inspection checklist, do not call for any brush inspections or specify a replacement interval. I think my M20J is more similar to a C-172 than a Cirrus. I have a 70 amp alternator. My airplane in normal cruise configuration draws 19A. An alternator (at constant rpm) is a current-controlled current source. Most alternators have a current gain of about 50, so at 19A the field current is only about 380 mA.

Interesting. My M20J service manual doesn’t have a complete schematic of the annunciator panel, but piecing what is there with the aircraft schematic, it appears that the test button applies 28v through a diode to pin 4 of the annunciator connector as an external test output. The diode should isolate it to prevent power applied there from illuminating the bulbs in the annunciator. Maybe the diode is shorted, or the schematic is wrong. Just to be safe, I would have the shop verify all the functions of the annunciator.

I’m thinking this might be a better option. https://www.griotsgarage.com/cadillac-of-creepers/?sku=38912&code=PPCPLG&gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQiA84CvBhCaARIsAMkAvkJmia1oOH-t7asCHQy6y6Ya7_5vD0BREY6F9JI-iX_t_X7lOo_G_MkaAqOjEALw_wcB

There have been a couple of threads lately where alternator maintenance and especially periodic inspection of brushes and bearings has been recommended. This gave me pause because while I check the belt tension at every preflight, and check the wiring and mounting security every time I have the cowling off (these being the common causes of failure), I never check the brushes or bearings. This is based on my experience of hundreds of thousands of miles in automobiles where I have never once replaced brushes in an alternator -- or needed to. So, I thought perhaps I am missing something. To get an opinion based on actual experience, I called the Director Maintenance at a large flight school nearby. The school has a fleet of 4 C-172s, 8 C-172s, a Warrior, a C-182 and a Seneca. That's 16 alternators and the airplanes fly a lot. The shop works on customer's airplanes as well as maintaining the fleet airplanes and I'm familiar with their work because they have worked on my airplane. It's a good shop. What the Director told me is that his experience is that an alternator will run well beyond TBO with no service. He recommends replacing or overhauling the alternator when the engine is replaced or overhauled and not messing with it if it is working to avoid "maintenance induced maintenance." Now, that's just one guy's opinion. But, he does have some real experience to back it up. For those that prefer to periodically replace brushes, it would be interesting to get reports of how many hours were on the brushes and how much they have worn compared to new. Then we would have some better data.

I have had this happen when the headset jack was not completely pushed in. Some of the jacks on my plane are pretty tight and with some headsets the jack feels seated but it's not and if I press hard in moves slightly and seats fully. Another test of the ICS is to turn it's power off. This should fail-safe connect the pilot's headset directly to com 1. Does your airplane have a set of emergency jacks on the panel and if so have you tried them? The audio output from the audio panel to the ICS runs through that jack. If it's not the headset (you tried two), it's not the jacks, it's not the radios (they both indicate TX and RX and the speaker works), it's not the audio panel (you swapped that) and it's not ICS (you swapped that, also), then the only common point is the wire between the audio panel and the ICS. The audio panel is fortunately at the top of the radio stack so it is pretty easy to access with the glare shield removed and the ICS is probably also easy to access.

Lycoming currently ships certified engines with Champion massive spark plugs and AvStar fuel injection.

The visors @DonMuncy makes are a better shape for the Mooney than the Rosens. See if Don might be willing to cut your Rosens down to his profile for a reasonable cost.

I believe mine reads high also, but I never really pay much attention to it. Here is an old method (it mentions slide rules ) developed by Lycoming to determine actual horsepower at best power mixture. You could use that to see how accurate the G3X EIS calculation is. Power_from_fuel_flow.pdf

Perhaps my suggestion to reference what airframe manufacturers use is not such a good idea. It occurred to me that Cessna uses little 15A rocker switches. Some searching turned this up. Note that the switches are rated for 100,000 cycles, but Cessna’s application for incandescent lamps seems to kill them after about 4,000 cycles.

The reason for derating switches is that non-resistive loads frequently draw current when first energized (called inrush current) that is greater (sometimes much greater) than their operating current. Switching power supplies, depending on design, can be troublesome. I found this out when designing a piece of telco central office equipment years ago. No one bothered to tell me that a requirement was that the power supply had to be hot swappable and I didn't specify low inrush current to the power supply vendor. Every time we tried to hot swap it, it fried the connector and we ended up having to redesign the power supply. Incandescent bulbs have high inrush current because for a few milliseconds until the filament heats up they have very low resistance. The derating table 11-4 in 43.13-1B calls for derating a 12V switch for a lamp by a factor of 5. This is not unreasonable for long switch life and I have seen that or similar deratings elsewhere. But, as pointed out, it requires a pretty hefty switch for a landing light. I'm not sure what is common practice by airframe manufacturers. It would be interesting to look up switches used by other manufacturers (that don't use circuit breaker switches) to see what common practice might be. The tradeoff with lower derating might be that the switch would have a shorter service life. But as switches are generally rated for tens of thousands of cycles, and landing lights are used less frequently, perhaps this is a reasonable design tradeoff.

Look in the service and maintenance manual section 24-39. You might also contact international Avionics Inc that made the panels for Mooney. They still repair them. If it’s not the test switch itself, then it’s probably some internal failure of the test circuit.

Maybe this will help. AA80 InterVOX.pdf

But, it's soooo much fun to give it a shove and watch it sail across the hangar and bounce off the wall. I got the locking wheels on mine (extra $$) so I can keep it from wandering.

I get just as good LOP operation with BY plugs at a fraction of the cost of fine wires. Maybe it penciled out with to put in fine wires when they were cheap enough that the added life offset the higher cost over massives, but even Tempest isn't claiming that anymore (of course this is Mooneyspace, so I'm sure someone will be along shortly saying they have 10,000 hours on their fine wires and still going strong ) I think those that purchased fine wire plugs when the cost was more reasonable made a good decision. But, now, I think the cost/benefit tips to BY plugs. It's not the magic of iridium -- it's the extended electrode that provides the operational benefits: It puts the spark deeper into the combustion chamber for easier starting and better LOP operation and it runs the tip hotter to reduce fouling.

No. I have a cheap ACDelco creeper with a tiltable headrest that I bought at O'Reilly Auto Parts. It is not all that well made and so I bought the Aerocreeper as a replacement. Fortunately, I didn't throw out the Delco as I find I use it much more than the Aerocreeper. The Aerocreeper sits higher off the ground and although it fits with me on it under the airplane it's not nearly as comfortable for cleaning the belly as the Delco. Even with the optional headrest (which attaches with a strap and is always falling off) it doesn't put my head at a comfortable angle without neck strain to look in any direction but up. And, tilting the back to get a good angle also raises the seat making it too high for most work. I use it mostly as a very expensive chair.

There are four advantages to fine wire plugs: 1. They don't require frequent maintenance 2. They last a long time 3. They are easy to set larger gaps for SureFly 4. The exposed electrodes provide easier starting, better LOP operation and are less prone to oil fouling The long life used to offset the higher cost, but not so much anymore. The operational advantages can be had with the BY extended electrode plugs.

The engineer told me that they switched to Alaska after completing the Baron. All I know is that the engineer told me that they were certifying the J and K together and looking at the F, and the salesman told me that the latest was that the F would not be included with the J and K.

The Dynon engineer that came out to make measurements recently on my J told me they are working through the FAA in Anchorage, not Seattle. Dynon’s still working on the J and K certification. It’s not done and sitting on a desk somewhere. From what the engineer told me, it seems they began the process with the J and K together as one certification and then thought to add the F later and the FAA wanted more data on the F. But, I didn’t grill the guy. It’s always satisfying to understand why things are the way they are, but the important point is that, for whatever reason, the J and K are in the pipeline and, at least as of today, other Mooney models are not. The intent of my post was provide the latest available information, not to bash Dynon or the FAA.

I know that on the AV-20 if it doesn't sit at 0 deg roll when the airplane is level, you have to (according to uAvionics tech support) rotate it in the panel. AV-30 might be the same. I just made the holes in the instrument panel larger so that I could rotate the instrument and then tighten the screws.

I spoke with a Dynon rep at the NW Aviation Conference yesterday. He said that they are proceeding with the J and K to be certified together, but for some reason the FAA won't go for including the F. That means that to certify the F, they will have to start over. They have other make/models in the pipeline, so unless something changes, the F will probably not happen anytime soon.