cliffy

Standard parts MUST conform to an industry or US design standard (AN bolts for instance). LEDS (unless approved) do not conform to an industry design standard- they are unique in their design even though they do the same function. Below is a cut from AC 21-29C on how to determine unauthorized or bogus parts. The full AC link is shown at the bottom. (8) Produced as standard parts that conform to established industry or U.S. specifications (refer to definition in subparagraph 3l, Standard Part). NOTE: Standard parts are not required to be produced under FAA approval; therefore, it is incumbent upon the installer (and the producer) to determine that the part conforms. The part must be identified as part of the approved type design or found to be acceptable for installation under part 43. Refer to the AC 20-62 for additional guidance on this matter. http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC%2021-29C%20CHG%202.pdf

Are you installing the sender in the correct orientation with the tank and the float hanging down in the "empty" tank position? Just a thought :-)

The zero point for the stabilizer/elevator is in relation to the zero point for the thrust line. The skin lap on the aft fuselage side is the zero thrust line. The aircraft is leveled fore and aft by this line. The elevator travel board is put on the elevator and the elevator is trimmed "aircraft nose up" to 3 1/2 degrees. At this point, the elevator will be displaced from a "trail" position in an up elevator position. This is the elevator setting at the bungee zero spring travel setting. It is adjusted by tightening or loosening the nuts on the bungees.

Here is everything you ever wanted to know about nav lights and TSO approval and compliance. Also, Aveo Engineering spent a long time getting their LED lights TSO approved. I looked at them several years ago and when I saw they were not TSO'd I didn't put them on my Mooney. Now that they are TSO'd I might, as they are pretty good looking and way bright. I've seen them on experimentals and they are bright even in daylight. In addition, the owner of the airplane is responsible for the maintenance being done on the a/c. Per FAR 91.403 § 91.403 General. (a) The owner or operator of an aircraft is primarily responsible for maintaining that aircraft in an airworthy condition, including compliance with part 39 of this chapter. Part 39 deals with complying with ADs. Here also is a link to the AOPA web article on Owner Performed Maintenance. Note that it includes the requirement to sign off in the log book any "Preventive Maintenance" that you do as and owner of the airplane. http://www.aopa.org/Pilot-Resources/PIC-archive/Aircraft-Ownership/Preventive-Maintenance.aspx TSO-C30 http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidan... ADDED; See the following : Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part 21, Certification Procedures for Products, Articles, and Parts. http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/tex... Advisory Circulars 20-110, Index of Aviation Technical Standard Orders http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidan... 20-41, Substitute (TSO) Aircraft Equipment http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidan... 21-43, Production Under 14 CFR Part 21, Subparts F, G, K, and O Orders http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/... 8110.43, Joint Technical Standard Order Authorization for U.S. Article Manufacturershttp://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidan... 8120.20, Production Approval Procedures http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/... 8150.1, Technical Standard Order Program http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidan...

Man, I want to use these also BUT philplane is correct- THEY ARE NOT LEGAL YET ON CERTIFIED AIRCRAFT no matter what the company ad says! And please note that on their website under "About" they specifically say that the 7.5 watt units are 'non-compliant" in very fine print as the last sentence. If you look at the TSO you will find specific manufactures listed as being in compliance with the TSO, this company is not listed. As mentioned, it can be "designed" to meet the TSO but if it is not approved as a TSO product, it is not legal. The testing is quite extensive and expensive to qualify as meeting the TSO. In addition, as mentioned, one has to hold a PMA (Parts Manufacturing Approval) to manufacture and sell a/c parts for certified airplanes. http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgTSO.nsf/MainFrame?OpenFrameSet These look like a neat way to improve our planes but right now we can't use them. Our regs are so antiquated that they inhibits innovation but they are the only ones we have. They are a morass of minutia that only dedicated bureaucrats can comprehend on a daily basis. Many thanks to philplane for trying to work with the manufacturer. I await his next posting so maybe we can all use these.

n601 and rob- both ways absolutely correct. Not a simple bolt on but some form of approval.

Letter from the factory noted except that it's still not legal to do unless there is a change to the TCDS reflecting the approval for higher throws and p/n change OR and STC accompanies the work OR a DER signs it off OR a FSDO gives a Field Approval or maybe a Service Bulletin. I can't as an A&P do that work on just a letter from the factory. I'm willing to guess there was more to it than just change the part and sign it off. I'd really like to know what approved process LASAR used to install the part and change the throws. With the TCDS showing the "conformity" of the aircraft, I can't deviate from that unless I have some other "APPROVED" paper work to go by, nor can any other A&P. Especially with something that affects the basic flying qualities of the airplane. I won't disparage Bill Wheat's words as he know these planes as well as anyone ever did BUT there has to be more to it than just change the part and increase the throws beyond what the conformity calls for to be legal. Mr. Wheat can't, on his own volition, change a conformity issue by just a letter. There has to be a legal means to do it,

Actually it's worth a look but as mentioned the price may seem a little high (trying to recoup the radio work) but he's probably got a lot more in it than that and could you find a similarly equipped F or J for that price, just price the radios alone + install. I would take a real good look at the gear for wear (6800 hrs and now on grass), tank leaks (same, grass) how old are the gear pucks? (old and hard and on grass means tank leaks) and make sure you shake the tail for any looseness in the hinge bushings! As said, a good MSC pre-buy is in order before money changes hands.

Just asking the question and not criticizing but: On a Model B the listed rudder throw is 18 degrees L and R On a C, D, E, F, it is 23-24 degrees, max of 6 degrees more, not 11 more, according to the TCDS. Phil, does your throw match what is called for on the TCDS? 18 degrees? If it does, it is at the max legal throw even though the Cs have a different part and go further. Here is a link to the FAAs website to check your allowable rudder throw on the TCDS. http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/e74974516b2c5ee886257c3500689e02/$FILE/2A3_Rev_53.pdf I'm not saying that there is no approval to use some other part to increase throw but it would have to go through a full flight test regime to get such an approval as it affects the basic flying qualities of the airplane. If there is such an approval I would like to know about it so I can advise those I come in contact with (yes, really, I'm very interested in having correct information for people, if it's available as a mod, I really do want to know about it) but to legally do such a change requires some kind of written approval traceable back as a modification to the original Type Certificate. Just because a certain part fits doesn't mean it's legal to use it. This can also affect your personal liability and your insurance if you have an accident. If an A&P installs it without knowing of such an approval HE will lose his license as he is required to ascertain the legality of each part he installs before he installs it and sign off the installation according to some "approved" process. If you install it and it is not logged (you can't sign the log book unless you are an A&P (under most circumstances) and you have an accident, your insurance may not be valid (not maintained according to the regs), you could be violated for performing a/c maintenance without the proper credentials (A&P) and God forbid anyone is hurt, you could loss everything you have in court. I guess this is my biggest Achilles heel and it rears its ugly head even here on this forum and I won't apologize for it. In doing a/c maintenance for almost 50 years I have seen things done by owners (even well meaning owners) that is not legal, or, in most cases, not even safe. I know of one Piper Pawnee on a farm that was bought new and has never had an annual or parts bought from an approved source since it left the factory. At least the owner will only kill himself if he goes down. On my own Mooney, when I bought it, it had a battery lead to the starter made from automotive cable and it had been maintained by an A&P even. I could go on and on about what I have found on airplanes (even when the owners thought they were doing right). I have lost many friends in a/c accidents due to ignorance, stupidity or error. This is not your high school Chevy you're working on. You could pull over and park your car, you can't do that in your airplane. I just don't want to see any more friends (and yes, you all are my friends if you fly airplanes) go west in airplanes. I teach flying and a/c maintenance the same way, if it ain't legal, it ain't safe.

OK now I understand where you are coming from. When I was working on Boeings (many years ago) effectivity was a big thing with each airframe.

rob47v Don't quite know what you are saying but I've included a clip from the TCDS sheet on C models (Ds Fs are the same) but this shows how the throws change at certain S/Ns and they also changed the bungee number. This is why changing elevators from one airplane to another (even of the same model) can become an issue if this is not known. I knew at one time why they did this I just can't remember now after 40 years. I do know that 2 Mooneys went off the end of Stockton Airport, CA only because they had the elevator trim set at full up on T/O and they couldn't rotate. Control Surface Movements (Aircraft with serial numbers up to 690001) Wing Flaps .................................... T.O. Position .... Down ........ 15° ± 1° ....................................................... Landing ............ Down ........ 33° + 0°, -2° Aileron .............................. Up ....... 12½° to 17° ...... Down ........ 8° ± 1° Aileron static position ............................................... Down ........ 0° to 2° Elevator ........................... Up ....... 24° ± 1° ............ Down ....... 10½° ± 1° Rudder ............................ Left ....... 23° to 24° ......... Right ........ 23° to 24° Stabilizer (L.E.) ................ Up ....... 1 to 2½° ............ Down ....... 4½° + 5° Elevator Trim Assist Unit With stabilizer set at 3½° negative setting to the thrust line, adjust trim assist unit (740044) for elevator up angle of 19° ± ½° at the zero spring travel position. (Aircraft with serial numbers 690001-700091, 20-0001 and up) Wing Flaps .................................... T.O. Position .... Down ........ 15° ± 1° ....................................................... Landing ............ Down ........ 33° + 0°, -2° Aileron .............................. Up ....... 12½° to 17° ...... Down ........ 8° ± 1° Aileron static position ............................................... Down ........ 0° to 2° Elevator ........................... Up ....... 22° ± 2° ............ Down ....... 22° ± 2° Stabilizer (L.E.) ................ Up ....... ½° to 1° ............ Down ....... 5¼° to 5¾° Rudder ............................ Left ....... 23° to 24° ......... Right ........ 23° to 24° Elevator Trim Assist Unit With stabilizer set at 3½° negative setting to the thrust line, adjust trim assist bungees (740188) for elevator position of 10° ± 1° at the zero spring travel position of the bungees.

Had the question pop up as to "why" the elevator rigging changes between different S/Ns of vintage Mooneys according to the TCDS sheets. I heard it mentioned once a long time ago but can't seem to drag it from the memory bank right now. A search of records here hasn't shed any light either. Anyone remember or know why Mooney changed the rigging?

That's cool! I hope you have many great hours in that airplane!

Anechoic chambers, WOW, haven't been in one of those since the Viet Nam days when I worked for an ECM company. We had one about 50X50X60 feet. All "dark" projects then. Going back to VOR or ADF can be as much a struggle as needle-ball-airspeed is when one only uses TV screens. Going from steam gauges and levers in a 727 to the first glass of a 757 was a giant step for many airline guys back when. Did Garmin give any s/n info on what antennas are being replaced? I have one on a Twinkie that I will need to check now.

A 709 ride is just about mandatory these days for any mishap that the Feds come out for. It really helps to know what has to be reported and what does not have to be reported. Sometimes the airport management reports stuff that really shouldn't be reported, much to the chagrin of the pilot

150 lbs of boned out deer meat, complete bathroom rebuilding supplies (but not the sink:-), 4 people in a short body C model ( I know, NO one carries 4 people in flight in a short body!).

BTW, make sure your A&P will sign off any work accomplished. This is not an owner approved job. :-) :-)

Just a quickie here, but, if the nose gear is off the ground and you move the nose wheel left and right (like it was being steered) you will see the "monkey motion" linkage up in the top of the wheel well that transfers the rudder pedal movement to the nose wheel. A "new" linkage allows only slight left-right movement, a worn one can have 15 or more degrees left and right. You can see how loose it is just by looking at it. LASAR and others sell a completely overhauled unit. I have to change mine about every 10 or so years. This is an area where proper lubrication pays big dividends. No shimming just replacing parts (bushings, bolts, rod end) but the complete unit is available to do it right.

Honestly, this is not something an owner should even contemplate doing if that is what your intent is (and it's not legal for an owner to do it unless they are also an A&P or "directly supervised" by an A&P). Even A&Ps sometimes have trouble doing this correctly unless they have training on how to do it. Now, the manuals are available online for free with a little digging but the procedure is very detailed and takes special equipment like jacks and jack pads, tail hook and nose support according to the newest SB for jacking Mooneys. Opening the bottom of the airplane, Having the correct certified torque wrench and special tools to check the MAIN gear settings as when you change one setting (nose gear ) you are required to recheck the mains also. Then you need to check the up limit switch setting, gear door closing and setting, etc. This can go in circles for a while. It is not just a simple set and forget job.

It's .060 of an inch of compression for the nose gear bungees per the MM.

donkaye DON'T GIVE UP IMC BECAUSE OF ME:-) :-) I just wanted to bring forth thoughts that don't get thought of too often in the go-no go decision. BTW, I just did my BFR AND ICC in my Mooney today so I'm still flying IMC under my terms- your mileage may vary :-) :-) Mooneys really are the best from of transportation out there!

Cheap +$2 Going Going :-)

Actually in the last 15 years I've not seen a leaking compass. i bought a diaphragm for one years ago but I don't know what happened to it Hmmm, odorless mineral spirits, I thought I had a can of that somewhere a long time ago also, I'll have to go look around for it in all my junk :-)

I would love to remove my hand crank step and put in a fixed step. Anyone have one for sale --------cheap :-) :-)

In reading arcane minutia again I find that a compass swing is detailed in AC 43.13-1B Section 3 Paragraph 12-37 http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/list/AC%2043.13-1B/$FILE/Chapter%2012-13.pdf It details exactly when a swing is required (you might be surprised as it is required after a hard landing or turbulence? !) and how to do it. As it is a "maintenance" function it falls under the auspices of an A&P to sign it off. Although because of Far 65.81 an A&P can no longer replace the rubber diaphragm on a wet compass and refill it as that is "repairing an instrument". Crap, We did for decades before! So if it leaks you technically have to bring it to an instrument shop for repair. FAR 23.1327 and Far 23.1547 should also be consulted for the compass card requirements. Now Mooneys are mostly CAR3 certified and not FAR 23 but I wouldn't want to argue the issue with an FAA Inspector by not following 23.1327 and 1547 as the "best methods and practices". If any electrical item when in operation throws off the swing by more than 10 degrees on any heading, a placard needs to be installed or a second swing needs to be done with a second compass card for the pilot to refer to. Try your landing light or heated pitot and see what happens with these heavy electrical loads. Hope this helps clarify any questions. If not, ask away and I'll try to look up more info.