Basic Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


jcovington last won the day on February 7

jcovington had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

105 Excellent

About jcovington

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Huntsville, AL
  • Reg #
  • Model

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Something else to think about although it doesn't sound like exactly the same problem. A few years ago I helped a C172 owner diagnose some odd problems with his panel lighting. I don't recall the fuse blowing but the rheostat became very warm and the lights dimmed in random fashions. Turned out that someone performing a panel upgrade years earlier had soldered the new lights onto the rheostat rather than the light controller. Instead of having the rheostat supply a small current to control the transistors within the light controller it was attempting to dim the panel lights directly. Didn't work very well. The solution was to move the wire to the controller side and everything worked well afterwards. Jim
  2. Once again, I am going to try to close out this thread with results of the prop replacement. The prop arrived back in Georgia on March 7th and I picked up the plane on the 11th. We have put about 17 hours on the prop and so far no issues. Both blades are tight with very little movement. When the prop arrived back at New Mexico Propeller they didn't think that the looseness of the blade was too bad. That surprised me. I don't have details on what was done to the prop but it looks like at least the hub housing was retained as that serial number didn't change. I can tell that the blades have been replaced but I don't know about the hub internals. New Mexico Propeller stood behind their work and did not charge for the second service. I did have to pay for labor to remove the prop and shipping but that was my only cost. Overall, I am happy to have the plane back and my trust in the plane is growing. I feel like New Mexico Propeller did a good job on the prop and wouldn't have a problem using them again. I hope I don't have to reopen this thread but if anything happens again with the prop I'll let everyone know. Jim
  3. The inverter is located in the overhead headliner very close to the EL panel (2 to 3 inches away). As I recall I had to drop the headliner to access the inverter. From my notes (2008, my how time flies) the inverter is LP105A in the parts manual and is an ERG LPS28-3-3P. I have attached the specs below. It is probably a commercially available part but I just ordered both parts from Dan at LASAR for convenience. I believe the inverter was about $100.00. It is fairly easy to check the inverter. From the spec sheet for the part number an LPS28-3-3P will take in 28VDC and output 120 Vms. A DMM on the AC scale will show if you have voltage on the pins on the connector. If you have voltage but no light the inverter is good and the panel is bad. Something less than 120 AC will cause the panel to be dim. In my searching for a replacement panel there are places that repair EL panels. I kept my old panel and may try the repair route next time. Jim lps.pdf
  4. There is no bulb to change. The panel is an Electroluminescence panel which requires AC power. There is also a small invertor (28 VDC -> 115VAC) in the overhead to power the panel. If it burns out your only choice is to replace the entire panel. I have replaced the panel once on my 1996 M20J. I replaced the invertor at the same time. That was about 6 years ago so about a 15 year lifetime. The insulation on mine starting wearing off and shorting to the airframe (not a good thing). The panel had started to dim so I decided it was time to replace. Jim
  5. Clarence @M20Doc Are you located close to Brampton? I have a friend that bases his Cardinal there (hopefully, not one of the planes involved). We flew in to Brampton about 3 years ago to visit and spend a week touring Canada. Very nice area and airport. I was able to tour the flight school while I was there and came away very impressed. We will be in Brampton again in June for another visit. Jim
  6. Gary No offense taken. Sorry, if I came off strong in my reply. I missed your point in the first post. This whole incident has and continues to cause me a lot of stress. I am very concerned about how this is going to affect the future value of the plane not to mention the trips we have planned in the next few months. Someone buying the plane is certainly going to wonder why all the prop work on the plane in such a short period of time. I am considering adding a write up to the logs just to explain what really happened. I was told that this plane was used by Mooney as a demonstrator in 1996. I believe the plane was purchased by the first owner and then leased back to Mooney for about 6 months. At that point it was delivered to the new owner with a fresh paint job. My guess is that the prop was overhauled as part of that delivery. Just a guess on my part but does explain some of the early work logged on the plane. Jim
  7. There has only been one prop strike which occurred before I purchased the plane. This latest incident was not a prop strike. It was a failure of some sort that has caused the blades to loosen or lose snap rings. I may be a bit oversensitive about the prop strike misconception. That has been the first question I get from anyone seeing the pictures of the prop (including the FAA). I didn't hit anything so the engine doesn't need to be and hasn't been torn down for inspection. Either way, the failed prop has been condemned and is being replaced. Jim
  8. Anthony, I would be honored to fly with you anytime. You might not want me to touch your prop right now. Props and I don't seem to be getting along too well at the moment . Jim
  9. I have owned the plane since 2004. There were two previous owners that had the plane for 4 years each. There was a documented prop strike (taxi accident) from the first owner with an engine tear down/inspection (~1998). It is always possible that the earlier damage caused something now although it seems to me 20 years and about 2400 hours is a long time to wait for damage to show up. Who knows? It may be as good an explanation as anything at this point. I am curious if the prop shop finds anything when they examine the prop this time. There wasn't anything found during the tear down last month. Jim
  10. I haven't gotten cost figures yet but I believe that the cost will be the difference between what I paid for the overhaul and the exchange price. Of course, I'll still be out labor and shipping costs. Jim
  11. Looks like I was wrong about being finished with this thread. I can't tell everyone how sorry I am to reopen this saga. I took the plane to Joey Cole in Dalton, GA yesterday for the annual inspection. I jokingly told him that if anything was wrong with the prop I didn't want to know about it. Joey called a few minutes ago and told me that the opposite blade that was undamaged in the initial loss of the snap ring is too loose. He says that the tip was moving about an inch when he was doing the compression check on the engine. Videos of the movement are attached. Joey has called New Mexico Propeller this morning and they are standing behind their work. The prop has about 10 hours since the overhaul and has now failed. Just to recap the prop was resealed in Feb 2017, resealed in Feb 2018, lost a snap ring in December 2018 and has a loose blade in Feb 2019. Joey and New Mexico Propeller agree that something is wrong with the prop and it should be condemned at this point. I can purchase a new prop or New Mexico Propeller is offering to build an exchange prop from parts that they have on hand. I was assured that no parts from my old prop would be used in building the exchange prop. My choice is to accept the exchange prop as that will get us back in the air the fastest. New Mexico Prop have begun the building of the exchange prop. Joey is boxing up the old prop to send back to New Mexico Prop for a failure analysis. I hope to find out what caused the failure and will let everyone know the outcome. Jim VID_20190219_112347801.mp4 VID_20190219_112424104.mp4
  12. To close out this thread. The prop shop ended up taking three weeks to overhaul the prop so it arrived back in El Paso on Monday January 28th. I took a commercial flight (shudder) on the 30th to pick up the plane on the 31st. I arrived home on the afternoon of the 31st and the plane is back in the hangar where it belongs. The American flight from Huntsville to El Paso wasn't too bad and it only took slightly longer than if I flew myself. I keep telling my wife that flying on other people's airplanes is no fun, she tells me to quit complaining . The prop looks brand new after the overhaul. El Paso Aero touched up the spinner so it is hard to tell any damage had been done. After @Cody Stallings mentioned in one of his posts that there should be some play in the prop blades I wanted to check mine. As he said you can grip the ends of the blades and move them slightly. I can feel some difference in movement between the two blades but both move a similar amount. Final tally was about $5.6AMU for the repair. The prop overhaul was about $3.5AMU and the rest was shipping along with shop labor. I ended up with two commercial flights for trips we had scheduled and one long drive back from Tucson in a rental car. It is nice to have the event behind me. Jim
  13. My 1996 J model had the fuel transducer hard mounted to the engine with the wires facing down (original from the factory). In the first few years of ownership I replaced a couple of fuel transducers and put them back on the hard mount with the wires facing down. Joey Cole convinced me on the third iteration that the transducer was mounted incorrectly and I should change to the JPI recommend mounting. He removed the transducer from the hard mount and let it free hang per the JPI installation manual. That has been about a 1000 hours/8 years without a failure. I believe this is a case where Mooney got the design wrong and you should follow the JPI requirements. Jim
  14. I am sure that the snap rings are replaced as part of an overhaul. I wouldn't be surprised that a snap ring is a one time use part. In my case, at least one snap ring is somewhere on or near 26L in El Paso so I know it will be replaced :). Jim
  15. I looked back through the logs after I returned from our trip. The prop was overhauled at 40 hours (1996) after the plane was built. No reason given so I was surprised by that. It was all just annual inspections until 2008 when the engine was replaced and the first reseal completed. That makes two overhauls and three reseals in the life of the prop (about 2200 hours total service). Jim