cliffy

OK if that is the case then things moved faster than the known data was found ( the submitted package was short of the empirical data need)(not looking far enough ahead?) BUT, also, IF that is true, it foreshadows more models being approved in the initial AML. Could it be that both BK and Dynon will have approvals at the same time? The sky will truly fall if that happens. I have almost 2 complete Brittian systems on the shelf and if either BK or Dynon come through in the next 6 months I'm going to sell them.

Somethings can not be explained- Not including the correct drawings in an STC application? Unbelievable that someone in the aviation business doesn't know how to submit an STC application. Sorry to be harsh but 50 years dealing with the FAA gives me a biased point of view. This ain't rocket science we're dealing with here.

I think these are what I was thinking about https://mitchellproducts.com/product/modular-gauges-fuel-quantity-gauges/

There is a place in Lock Have PA that also overhauls them In fact 2 places there. You're lucky you have the six individual units Each ca be overhauled separately and not as a 6 pac for the early ones. There is also replacement units new available from several suppliers

I used to make VOR antennas Early Moonies didn't have internal baluns (mostly ferrites) They only had folded coax cable baluns, If you have a NEW antenna that fits and it has only a BNC connector then (as noted above) it has an internal balun. If you are using the old antenna then it more than likely has/had a cable balun that needs to be replaced. Directions on how to make a VOR cable balun are easy to find on line. Show us the antenna and it connections and we can better advise Forgot to add that there are new antennas that come with a cable and cable balun as a kit and there are new VOR antennas that have the balun built in. Be sure you know what you have if you buy new. They each work the same.

Put the probe in boiling water and see what the temp shows. Ground it with an alligator clip wire you make up. Check it cold- check it hot using an IR temp gun.

I have machined several alternator slip rings when found very worn but the wear may have come from (as noted above) wear caused by worn brushes and the concomitant weaker spring tension pushing the brushes onto the slip rings thereby causing wear from more arcing. Nothing is ever mentioned about replacing brushes at an hour mark but maybe, just maybe, it should be considered a preventative maintenance item in reality. No reason why an alternator shouldn't make TBO with proper maintenance.

Point of reference- D/C model, 52 gal total (26 a side), filling from dead empty (drained) EXACTLY 26 gallons each side right to the steel lip. PoR #2- I use a stick to check each tank before every flight to double check the "indicated" quantity on my Dynon at start up. Always within 2 gallons Stick graduated every 5 gallons- interpret between marks. 99% of the time I leave with full tanks regardless of the flight distance Sometimes it bites me in the behind when I can't purchase the min to avoid charges. I usually (on longer trips 2+ hrs) make a reasonableness check after each hour by reading tank quantity and subtracting what I know I should have burned to what is in the tanks (NOT what is shown as burned on the computer) as I have made many many flights and measured how much went back in after each flight. Just like we all learned in basic flight training. Works for everything from J-3s to Boeings. We knew what we should have burned each hour and subtracted from what we had on board at the start and compared to the indicated quantity remaining each hour or each waypoint crossing. Did it on over water trips in big stuff, do it still on spam cans today. Its called "flight planning". How many still do it today? I wonder. Prediction from a Jurassic pilot- Glass panels and Autopilots have dumbed down flying so much that we will have a problem in the future (if not now). Those who have learned only on glass panels/A/Ps know not what they don't know and its not their fault. JMO But glass panels may also be as much a safety improvement to aviation in total as the jet engine was to commercial flying in the 60s. Jet engines transformed the safety paradigm of commercial aviation. Of that there is no doubt. But just like jet engines- sometime the panel will go dark-not often but sometime- What will you do then? The gorilla in the room? What happens when the GPS system goes down? (This probably needs a separate thread itself)

If you an just replace with already approved Mooney parts it even qualifies as a 'Minor Alteration' and only a log book entry is required by any A&P

I wonder it the original manufacturer of the C and E ducts is still in business? I further wonder if they are in a position to help with an OPP order (best solution) much like McFarand does with throttle cables? They may have an exclusive deal with Mooney but if Mooney is not interested in supplying the part and because the follow on business is now in reality a dead issue that company might be wiling to break any deal with Mooney

There seems to be a disconnect between an OPP part FOR A PARTICULAR AIRPLANE ((by N number) which is what the OPP regs allow and having an owner design and build a part per OPP AND THEN OFFER IT TO THE PUBLIC for sale. Any owner can make HIS OWN part but he can't then go out and sell it to the general public even if he designed it and qualified it for his own airplane by OPP. The above referenced article is clear on that subject. The problem remains - How are you going to get the part available to those who need it without either an STC or a PMA.? There is a way but I'll leave it there.

I attended the same VARMA webinar. BTW It seems to me that VARMA is a path to "replace" approved parts with other than approved parts on a like for like basis and not to "manufacture" a different part altogether. And for "non-important" parts much like NORSEE approvals As was the battery relay shown in the program.

BINGO!!!! Problem Solved!!!

How is this "APPROVED" data?

Just a thought - Has anyone assessed the deflection with impact ice on the inlet air filter thereby lowering the pressure inside the duct due to this ice restriction to air flow ahead of the duct? Both the C and E model ducts (they are different) could/would be susceptible to this event. Failure analysis probably should include this possibility/probability. As a long time A&P I would still have to fall back on "what is the approved data that was referenced to make this part", before I would consider installing same and signing it off. Don't take this wrong, no disrespect meant but- How many here promoting the making of this part through OPP in a way that is "different " than the original (even if better than original)- How many of you actually hold an A&P and would sign your name to the log book? That is a true test. Also remember each owner who "designs" an OPP part shall sign HIS name to the log book signifying that he was the one who participated in the design. BUT ultimately it comes down to an A&P being willing to put this part on the airplane; The question remains - How do you get around the "approved data" requirement in OPP? A challenge- Someone needs to go the their local FSDO and present this idea and ask about its legality rather than just guess as is being done here. That's what they are there for. Why waste your time if its not going to fly.

Measure it with a yardstick, mark it with chalk and cut it with an axe- precision aircraft manufacturing in the 1960s If you ever saw how Cessna actually built their airplane back in the 150 172 days it would astound you I did! Rubber hammers were an essential tool

Its not a switch Its the data USB for the Dynon Has to be connected for all the charts to pop up on screen as they are not resident in the Dynon.

How about Lucas Electrical - The Prince of Darkness in car electronics ! It matched the panels in my Rolls Royce:-) :-)

Cirrus= parachute pilot :-)

I use a Bose and and after market plug in mike assembly Works good for me and when turned on discrimination in the audio is fine and I'm somewhat compromised in hearing - too many jet engines all my life. Had early Lightspeed and it worked but it was big and bulky.

But I'll bet they're drawing inspectors from all over the country to cover Boeing The FAA can't afford another mistake there. And its all from the Certification ranks. TDY? I'll bet there will be enough inspectors on the ground at Boeing that it'll look like an invasion. Already other countries are not holding US certification as the Holy Grail as they once did. The 2 MAX crashes did it.

I designed my Dynon panel so the next owner only has to install a G 175 to be fully IFR capable although it would be single source WAAS GPS only navigation (perfectly legal for all IFR navigation) no VOR-ILS-ADF etc. I figure if someone ACTUALLY did enough IMC flying that really needed all sources of navigation they need a different airplane than a 60 year old Mooney.

Thats interesting thanks for writing I'm trying to remember as its been 40 years or so since I worked on them but I think I remember either the manual or a SB specifying EXACTLY how the wiring should be run inside the cam box. IIRC it was quite specific.

I'm willing to bet the aluminum curve varies more than the amount you want to trim off in thickness These are all hand built, no to identical airplanes Pop a window out an lay a thin strip of aluminum (on the inside) matching the curve and see how much it all varies from top to bottom. None of this stuff is close tolerance manufacturing Just look at how the rivets are set. Highs and lows in the surface.

Now with the 737 MAX issues and the FAA having to drag all the inspectors they can into Boeing I wonder how that will settle with any future equipment approvals? I'll probably be hand flying my Dynon panel until I sell it when the grim reaper starts knocking,