DonMuncy

Good question. I have no idea what the law might be up there.

It is easy to say "it is a lead pipe case" to win. I agree that from my perspective, the OP likely has a very good case, but there are other considerations before suing or even threatening to sue. The cost to remediate the error is an easy place to start. There are many winning cases that simply are not worth enough money to justify litigation. Second, what is it going to cost to litigate it. Who is going to pay that (much of it on the front end)? Can you find a plaintiff's attorney willing to take the case on a contingency basis? Again the amount of damages is a primary consideration. If you can't, do you have many thousands of $ to invest early on in the suit? And even more importantly what are the odds of collecting $ if and when you win? Does the shop have insurance to cover the loss? If it were in Texas, and the shop was not that big (or well insured), it might be awfully difficult to collect on a judgment, If is not covered by insurance, how much money does the shop have, or is willing to invest to defend it. In a case like this, the case would almost certainly hinge on expert testimony, and if the other side get a more believable expert than yours, there could be real problems. We would all like to believe that the justice system is good enough that "if you are right, you will win". Unfortunately that is not always the case. I was a litigator in Texas for more than 25 years before I retired about 15 years ago.

This thread just illustrates what most of us (now) know. After you have been an aircraft owner for several or many years you know how to avoid or mitigate these problems, but when you are new to this corner of the world, you just don't have the knowledge to tell the PPI guys what to look for. It would help, but not solve the problem, if there was a "standard" PPI list. It would also help if people new to the area would read extensively (like on MS) as to what to look for. But when I started to look for a plane, I did not know that forums like this existed, and MS had not yet been created.

I have found the Headsets, Inc. folks easy to deal with. I would give them a call first.

Don, Thanks. Actually, the gurus working on it are a full avionics shop. (Which makes it even more unbelievable that we are having the problem.) I have a hard time envisioning that looking at yours would help troubleshoot mine. But they are going to reinstall the unit tomorrow and look again. I will tell them about your generous offer. I will let you know if they would like to look. Why don't you text me your number (214) 207-6744 and when I go out in the morning, I could call you if it looks helpful. Better yet, why don't you plan a flight to RBD and I will buy you lunch. then if they need to look at your plane, it will be convenient.

Thanks everyone for the help. We are still working the problem.

Yes, fuel can leak up. The lower air pressure on the top of the wing can syphon gas up and out. I do not have bladders and don't know about the filler neck seal, but that is where I would start.

Good memory Anthony. And for the LHS, they need to be in mono? I don't ever remember touching that switch.

Mine are David Clarks with Headsets Inc. ANR conversion. Is anyone here conversant with that set-up to know whether there may be a stereo/mono selection there somewhere.

I am not aware of a mono/stereo option. Where would I begin to look for it?

I got my LHS unit early on, but due to a bunch of stuff not relevant here, I did not get it installed for a long time. The first time I flew with it, I could not hear it in my headset until I was actually on the ground, and then only faintly. My avionics shop originally hooked it to the DME circuit, but after much head-scratching and talking to Nidal, they used the ADF. (My audio panel is a KMA-24). Since then, the unit was sent back to Microkit for testing (which confirmed the unit was putting out the proper power), it was sent back to my shop with equipment to check it in the plane. I am too ignorant to understand all that is going on, but I still do not have enough volume to hear it. Nidal has offered to refund the cost, but I am still out the installation cost, and worse, I still do not have a functioning unit. It has been suggested that updating my audio panel may resolve the issue, but that would be a terribly expensive process. I really want it to work. (Anyone who has flown with me understands that if anyone can use help in improving landings, it is me.) Any and all comments appreciated. Don

I briefly looked at "black oxide" and what I'm seeing is that it only works an ferrous metals. Do you know something different. Naturally, I thought of merely painting them, but I do not see that as a worthwhile venture. From the few responses so far, it looks like I need to perfect my anodizing skills.

"Visors by Muncy". I know it was a joke, but I kind of like it. That is what I might become. I have been toying with anodizing the aluminum hardware. I have discovered that anodizing is not difficult, but is is messy, time-consuming and difficult to get consistent results. Take a look at my second attempt here. (The first was a dismal failure). You might not be able to see it, but the rods look really great and the joints, not so much. What is the consensus of the group as to whether this is worthwhile to keep pursuing. Do you like the black more than aluminum? How much extra would you pay for black hardware vs aluminum colored? I was thinking about an additional $20 per set. (From $140 to $160.) It is actually more trouble than that, but I try to keep the cost within reason.

I thought that was how you were supposed to do it.

If we were all practical, we would not be aircraft owners.

Geez. I'm going to have to raise my prices

Be careful if you decide to lubricate things to get it working. As I understand it, getting lubricant in the clutch is bad news.

Sorry to bother the entire MS family with this, but I think I had two folks wanting a set of visors, but I can only find one of them. If you have contacted me for a set, and haven't heard for me, please let me know.

Actually, you are almost correct. Anyone wanting visors should specify that they require aluminum hardware, fully articulating joints, and tinted acrylic shades. I will then build them according to those directions.

Alan, Do you have a ring type 3/8 inch JPI CHT probe to go under the OEM CHT probe?

Sounds OK to me. How do you want to get paid.

Dan, No, I am not a CFI. And didn't start flying until the 90s.

I will watch for your photos.

Aha. I suppose the cc in the number indicates counterclockwise. At least something to start on.

Thanks, did Mooney use both clockwise and counterclockwise? Looks like I am going to have to do some serious research to figure it all out.