There's hope for vintage Mooneys!

[Wildhorsesracing]

New FAA regulations could let us modify our birds without all the pain of certificated paperwork...

 

http://macsblog.com/2014/03/could-your-airplane-be-a-pnc/

 

Looking forward to adding some homemade speed mods, LED lights and assorted panel upgrades that are usually only reserved for Experimentals...

[Mooneymite]

Thanks for sharing.

It sounds like a way to legalize those evil hangar fairies!

[jwilkins]

"more than 20 years old"

 

So by the time the Govt gets around to seriously considering this, current production 2014 planes will probably be eligible....

 

Yes, I'm cynical. I'd love to see this, but I don't think I'll be around long enough.

 

Back in NY I had an AP/IA who was willing to teach me correct maintenance procedures, check the work when I did it myself, and sign off when needed.

 

It didn't help with the use of non-approved parts but I sure learned a lot.

 

Jim

[triple8s]

Anyone that knows me would probably think I would say "YAAAA!" At first look this could be good, would give an open door to advances in new parts, save old doomed airframes that are cod locked by paperwork like those two Porsche Mooneys we all talked about a few months ago, but, I can see a huge can of worms being opened if this were to go through. The are lots of pilots/would be mechanics that have a lot more faith in their mechanical abilities than they deserve and I for one am afraid of the black eye that GA might get. All an over reaching government needs is an excuse and I am afraid this could give them one. I don't think its worth it. Just my two cents.....

[scottfromiowa]

Would be awesome to have this option. Combined with eliminating the 3rd class medical would get a bunch flying again AND keep many flying longer. Sounds GREAT!

[Mooneymite]

The are lots of pilots/would be mechanics that have a lot more faith in their mechanical abilities than they deserve and I for one am afraid of the black eye that GA might get. ....

The Darwin effect would soon cleanse the pilot population!

[gsxrpilot]

Anyone that knows me would probably think I would say "YAAAA!" At first look this could be good, would give an open door to advances in new parts, save old doomed airframes that are cod locked by paperwork like those two Porsche Mooneys we all talked about a few months ago, but, I can see a huge can of worms being opened if this were to go through. The are lots of pilots/would be mechanics that have a lot more faith in their mechanical abilities than they deserve and I for one am afraid of the black eye that GA might get. All an over reaching government needs is an excuse and I am afraid this could give them one. I don't think its worth it. Just my two cents.....

Experimentals have had this for years. It seems to work fine for them. I don't see the downside?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Guitarmaster]

Oh… please, please, please!!!

[triple8s]

http://eaaforums.org/showthread.php?2679-Safety-EAA-type-accidents

[1964-M20E]

Anyone that knows me would probably think I would say "YAAAA!" At first look this could be good, would give an open door to advances in new parts, save old doomed airframes that are cod locked by paperwork like those two Porsche Mooneys we all talked about a few months ago, but, I can see a huge can of worms being opened if this were to go through. The are lots of pilots/would be mechanics that have a lot more faith in their mechanical abilities than they deserve and I for one am afraid of the black eye that GA might get. All an over reaching government needs is an excuse and I am afraid this could give them one. I don't think its worth it. Just my two cents.....

I have faith in my mechanic but I have more faith in myself and my ability to determine what I can or cannot do with MY AIRPLANE.  The gov't does not own or maintain the plane I fly.  I do!!

 

Would I go crazy with thing no I would not but I'd have some nice things in the cockpit for far less but are prohibited to me. 

 

As stated above the experimental folks are doing quite well well outside the cage we are in with the certified.

 

Why do I own a certified bird vs an experimental pure and simple economics.  I'd spend more on an experimental plane with the same capabilities as my F models has and I'd probably still be building it and making motor sounds sitting in the empty fuselage instead of flying for the past 4 years.

 

Finally, at the end of the day the experimentals fly in the same airspace as I do so I should be able to do as they do.

 

OH I really like my Mooney too.

[triple8s]

Don't get me wrong I would LOVE what it would allow but, it could be the beginning of much increased scrutiny after a likely increase in accidents. Raining planes? That's all they need to start slowly taking away the privilege of flight. I remember when they sold firearms at Sears & Roebuck, I competed in the rifle team in high school jr. ROTC in the late 70's, now children are suspended for playing with a plastic gun in their own yard while waiting for the school bus! Times are a changing and if we aren't diligent we will not be able to fly before we know it. User fees, UAV, more and more regulation and regulation every year. We have a huge spike in accidents and we will lose our freedom of flight. I don't see it is worth the risk unfortunately, but it is only my opinion.

[Oscar Avalle]

It would really help us kelvin our birds flying. I also believe it would make our planes safer, because of, hopefully cheaper, options to work on them

[AmigOne]

According to a recent article in Sports Aviation we should not expect changes to the regulations governing experimental-grade avionics for Part 23 aircraft because:

 

Liability:  that legal risk is not presently contemplated in their current business plan.  And if they do make provisions then the price of the avionics would no longer be at present levels

 

Product support:  while makers of non certified avionics provide excellent support, their customer base is smaller and more knowledgeable.  If they were to provide support similar to the one expected from the makers of certified avionics this cost, now for  much larger potential market,  would have to be added once again increasing current cost for similar equipment.

 

Innovation: It is said  that many successful innovators of aircrafts and productsfor the EAA world are nor necessarily suited for the larger certified market and may end up selling their business to existing TSO's product manufacturers.

 

Finally, the article points out that while the "net result would be good for consumers, may not be as good as we might hope" and new business plans would have to be developed because the innovation and low cost of the experimental market "would not transfer unscathed to the certified market"

[1964-M20E]

According to a recent article in Sports Aviation we should not expect changes to the regulations governing experimental-grade avionics for Part 23 aircraft because:

 

Liability:  that legal risk is not presently contemplated in their current business plan.  And if they do make provisions then the price of the avionics would no longer be at present levels

 

Product support:  while makers of non certified avionics provide excellent support, their customer base is smaller and more knowledgeable.  If they were to provide support similar to the one expected from the makers of certified avionics this cost, now for  much larger potential market,  would have to be added once again increasing current cost for similar equipment.

 

Innovation: It is said  that many successful innovators of aircrafts and productsfor the EAA world are nor necessarily suited for the larger certified market and may end up selling their business to existing TSO's product manufacturers.

 

Finally, the article points out that while the "net result would be good for consumers, may not be as good as we might hope" and new business plans would have to be developed because the innovation and low cost of the experimental market "would not transfer unscathed to the certified market"

 

 

Very valid points but with the proposed approach at least the market will settle out for itself and not be artificially inflated and or restricted by the gov’t.

[scottfromiowa]

We are not talking about federalization of 10% of the GNP here...

Give it a go.

[aviatoreb]

Things I wish I could have installed in my Mooney:

 

The Garmin G3X Touch avionics suite with digital autopilot - $6k.

 

Amsafe airbag seatbelts.

 

The King KT74 ADSB out enabled transponder.

 

Gami Prism.

 

I do not feel safer knowing that the FAA prevents me from installing these by the difficulties of their STC process making it economically difficult for these reputable companies from offering their products to me.

 

That said, I am flying certified since over all the system works pretty well.  This "half way" experimental category is tempting.

[N9453V]

Things I wish I could have installed in my Mooney:

 

The Garmin G3X Touch avionics suite with digital autopilot - $6k.

 

Amsafe airbag seatbelts.

 

The King KT74 ADSB out enabled transponder.

 

Gami Prism.

 

I do not feel safer knowing that the FAA prevents me from installing these by the difficulties of their STC process making it economically difficult for these reputable companies from offering their products to me.

 

That said, I am flying certified since over all the system works pretty well.  This "half way" experimental category is tempting.

 

For the KT-74, there is an STC allowing installation on Mooney aircraft. The STC for ADS-B using a 430W, however, is still pending since Trig apparently reverse-engineered the position source data from the GNS430W for the KT-74. There's more information on Beechtalk on this: http://www.beechtalk.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=86871

 

When I called Bendix-King, they told me the STC to enable ADS-B out is expected in August (previous answers with February, March, April, Q2...) so I plan to install a GTX 330ES rather than installing hardware that may not work properly with my 430W.

 

-Andrew

[aviatoreb]

For the KT-74, there is an STC allowing installation on Mooney aircraft. The STC for ADS-B using a 430W, however, is still pending since Trig apparently reverse-engineered the position source data from the GNS430W for the KT-74. There's more information on Beechtalk on this: http://www.beechtalk.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=86871

 

When I called Bendix-King, they told me the STC to enable ADS-B out is expected in August (previous answers with February, March, April, Q2...) so I plan to install a GTX 330ES rather than installing hardware that may not work properly with my 430W.

 

-Andrew

 

Andrew when did you talk to them?

[mike_elliott]

I talked with BK at SNF and they were touting a July STC timeframe for the KT74 and GNS series Garmin's.

[Marauder]

I talked with BK at SNF and they were touting a July STC timeframe for the KT74 and GNS series Garmin's.

Mike -- any mention on the GTN series?

Sent using Tapatalk