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.

Exactly right. This is why men need God. Our human nature, no matter how educated, is not up to the task of building a non-plundering civilization.

Wow! That is cynicism at its finest. Well done!

Thank you for posting this link. I am 43 minutes into it and am both learning and enjoying.

I don’t discount any of your speculations. It would be foolish to do so as I could only provide speculations of my own or other’s. I don’t know what will happen, but I am thoroughly convinced of what OUGHT to happen. I stated those convictions in my last post and many former, so I will not go over them again now. It doesn’t matter to me one whit that conventional wisdom, as you have summarized it quite nicely, is against the handful of us that have our heels dug in against this abusive mandate. History is replete with conventional wisdom that was discovered to be flawed. History is also filled with a plethora of examples where abject lies were foisted on a culture and became accepted as truth because no one stood against them. In the present case, I will continue to point out that the honest and fair way to implement any product is through free market principles and not government intervention. I well understand you think that is a lost cause, but I am writing this to hopefully influence those that may be open to a different perspective. If one more pilot will raise his or her voice or pen to rally against this assault on liberty, I will be gratified. Many think we will fail and I don’t resent them for that, but I have till 2030 to fight, and I have zero inclination to surrender 5 years prior. I urge my fellow pilots to stand against this government over-reach. You all know the whole premise that GA is poisoning the public is ridiculous. If you truly believe that deception, it must be awfully awkward to rail against lead spewing machines while flying one. I want to reiterate that I do not disparage or belittle in any way those who disagree. I also admire and respect George Braly. I am not against G100UL. I don’t care if the Angel Gabriel submitted a fuel. It needs to be a free market choice.

The reason this debate is so emotionally charged is not because G100UL is good or bad, but because it appears that this is going to be forced on the consumer by government fiat. The fact that some have a serious concern with the fuel certainly exacerbates the issue, but if no one felt they would be forced into it, most of the heat would dissipate. People would not be fuming on Mooneyspace, they just wouldn’t buy the fuel. @GeeBee mentioned that it is probably time to field test this new fuel, and I agree. The FAA has anointed it and so let the market forces test it. Let the FBO’s decide what they want to sell. They don’t have to offer two choices. If they only have one tank or simply just want to deal with one fuel, their choice. If they think G100UL is their path to better profitability than so be it. If the next FBO at a neighboring airport feels different and sticks with 100LL, that’s their business choice. Let the market decide. Much heat has been leveled against GAMI which I think is misdirected. The real culprit is a weak government that bowed to a special interest using junk science. I utterly reject the notion that we must bow and genuflect to the inevitable “Tsunami” coming our way. Especially with the coming change of administration, there may be a real window of opportunity to roll back some of this government overreach. Even if nothing changes, there is yet 5 years (if I correctly understand the mandate) to field test this fuel. If it proves to be the greatest thing since sliced bread, we will all race to buy our STC. But if the only place it sells is where state governments have prematurely banned 100LL, is that not in itself a pretty good indicator of where the field testing is going? And if the fuel proves to be a disaster that would certainly spark a further movement to delay the mandate. Per chance by that time there would be a real drop-in fuel or even some adult leadership at the EPA. I do understand there is a real sense of urgency on the part of California owners as it certainly appears the steamroller is gearing up. I am very sorry for that and I can only encourage you to enlist the help of any sympathetic voices that may remain in your government.

Maybe @MikeOH is wrong. But he’s the guy I would want in my foxhole.

Well said!! I read an article yesterday reporting that the state government of Vermont is trying to sue the oil companies for contributing to negative climate changes that have impacted Vermont. They are looking for such evidence going all the way back to 1995. Apparently the recent storms which ravaged Vermont are attributable to the nefarious activities of the oil companies dating back to the 90’s. This is exactly what we can expect when lunacy in government goes unchecked. Those who prefer to bow when they could fight, will soon find a time when they can neither bow low enough or fight hard enough to stem the tyranny which has ravished so many of our state governments.

50 years……..doesn’t seem to be a lot of angst over the fate of the little children!

I am hoping that with the seeming cultural shift as evidenced in the recent election, there will be a pushback from at least most of the flyover states. I am not asking that 100LL be anointed, only that any potential alternative be subject to free market forces. The ultimate 3rd party testing will be by customers.