T. Peterson

Just read through the whole thread. Lots of gainsayers, but I like how you think. I don’t discount some of the other solutions, but I would love to see an answer from the engine side also!

Some folks do T&G’s because they enjoy them.

I haven’t seen any mention of Western Skyways. It may be worth a call to just see what they have to say.

Bob said that he very much enjoys the work and will continue to do it as long as he is able. He has also moved to McKenzie, TN, which is midway between Nashville and Memphis. He has worked on many EDO-Aire units and had no hesitation about mine. He did say that it would be a two week turnaround due the rotor of the Edo. I think he can turn around the Kings in a couple of days. In aviation terms, two weeks is the speed of light! Especially when it involves avionics. I’m delighted!

I believe I have found a very satisfactory solution thanks to @Will.iam. He recommended Bob Bramble at aerolabaviation.com. I just had a very nice conversation with Mr. Bramble and I will send him my AI as soon as I can.

It is a very good option, but in the short run it is thousands of dollars versus hundreds. In the long run probably a much better investment, but unfortunately I am dealing with short run dollars!

Thank you so very much! That eliminates one concern. Now I just have to find a replacement or someone that will overhaul mine. Century Instruments in Wichita doesn’t handle the 52D177 anymore and I am very hesitant to go back to the other place as all 3 of the faulty replacements came from them. I will continue to work this problem through a couple of other avenues and post my final results. Your tracking down the fact that my AI is not an incorrect application is an immense contribution! Thank you!

My autopilot is the Century 41. Because I am currently out of state taking care of my mother, I don’t have access right now to either my plane or the logbooks, but internet pictures confirm what I already knew.

I called Century and they claim the part number of my AI is incorrect for my Century 41 auto pilot. My AI is 52D177 which they say is matched for a Century 4 auto pilot. The correct AI part number for my application is 52D267 which fortunately they do have in stock, but they think there is a slight difference in pins. So if mine is wrong, how can it fit??? Century is suggesting that maybe I don’t actually have a Century 41, but a Century 4. They want me to check, so I need to make a trip to the airport and verify. They also suggested that if I do indeed have a Century 41, that might explain why my attitude indicators are malfunctioning so quickly.

I have a 1979 M20K. The AI is an Edo-Aire Part #52D177. In the last two years I have had it replaced 3x. The third one is now slow to erect and begins to precess in flight. In straight and level flight it will slowly move to indicate 20 degrees nose down and back up to 10 degrees nose up. There is no indication of vacuum failure and engaging the back up vacuum pump does nothing. I have considered replacing it with a GI 275, but there is no point to do that without also replacing the DG with a 275 and getting rid of the vacuum system altogether. That is a 21000.00 bill, and with a 56000.00 engine plus all the peripherals coming in 3 weeks it’s just more than I can spend right now. Therefore I need a replacement vacuum AI that actually works, or have mine overhauled by someone that actually knows how!! If you folks on the forum have a recommendation, I am eager to hear it. Thank you, Torrey

Can you not just make your case without insulting people? Lots of folks on this forum disagree with me, but that doesn’t upset me. I try to persuade, but not to belittle. You can actually respect and appreciate people with whom you disagree.

Very interesting and informative. Sounds like a diesel would fit the bill. Is the weight and expense the major detractors? In other words if it wasn’t for the expense and weight, would the diesel actually be a preferred option?

I am no engineer, but is torque not more important in a low revolution engine than a high revolution engine? This may be apples to oranges and I may be demonstrating colossal ignorance, but I am thinking of a motorcycle engine. The crotch rockets make crazy horsepower, but they are spinning 10 to 14,000 rpm to do it and you have to row the gearbox to keep the rpm up. The cruisers can’t begin to match the horse power running 3 to 5000 rpm, but they have stump pulling torque requiring much less shifting. I’m not sure how that relates to our airplanes, but our max rpm is 2700 which leads me to believe that torque would be more important than horsepower and thus very suitable to a diesel engine. I would welcome the correction/ insight of our resident engineer/tech guys. I know the diesel is heavy and expensive. I am curious about the hp vs torque angle. Please be nice to me. I know I am way over my head when I postulate anything technical!!

I don’t think it was a debate, just a question. But your point stands. I don’t think anyone would argue with you.

Clearing the Air: How Unleaded Aviation Fuel Is Gaining Approval - Part 1: Understanding the STC process and why it matters to pilots and aircraft owners This is the title to another thread that will better answer your question. Apparently there are at least two avenues to approving a fuel. One is the STC, the other is an FAA fleet authorization. I won’t say more because it is well beyond my expertise, but some of the smart fellows will probably be along shortly that can better explain it to both of us.