Swapping to older panel

[jbs007]

My M20E had a 201 style panel installed by a previous owner about 20 years ago.  I will be redoing my panel in a few months (when I get back to the states and get out of USMC).  I want to go to a modern layout of new avionics but on the old style panel. I like the smaller panel for better visibility, I like the way it looks more, and my panel will be pretty simple leading to too much blank space if I stay with the 201 panel.  I have never personally looked at how either style is built and attached to the airframe and have 2 questions:

 

1) Were permanent mods done to the airframe in installing a J panel that would prevent me from going back to the old style panel?  Of note I am worried about moving the radio stack back to the middle (I understand the limitation from the center steel spar, its ok, my stack will be short) and finding/installing the brushed AL looking bar along the bottom of the panel.

 

2) On original panels the top of the pilot side is more vertical while the copilots side looks tilted back about 8 degrees (but I am not sure how many degrees).  Can I tilt the pilot side back to line up with the copilot side or will this cause physical interference between backs of instruments and airframe or something?  It seems the copilot side more directly faces a sitting person's face than the pilot side.  (I am aware of panel tilt affecting the gyro, right now I'm concerned about what's physically possible/impossible with the panel).

 

Thanks for the help! 

[Danb]

Thank you

Semper Fi

[Bob_Belville]

My M20E had a 201 style panel installed by a previous owner about 20 years ago.  I will be redoing my panel in a few months (when I get back to the states and get out of USMC).  I want to go to a modern layout of new avionics but on the old style panel. I like the smaller panel for better visibility, I like the way it looks more, and my panel will be pretty simple leading to too much blank space if I stay with the 201 panel.  I have never personally looked at how either style is built and attached to the airframe and have 2 questions:

 

1) Were permanent mods done to the airframe in installing a J panel that would prevent me from going back to the old style panel?  Of note I am worried about moving the radio stack back to the middle (I understand the limitation from the center steel spar, its ok, my stack will be short) and finding/installing the brushed AL looking bar along the bottom of the panel.

 

2) On original panels the top of the pilot side is more vertical while the copilots side looks tilted back about 8 degrees (but I am not sure how many degrees).  Can I tilt the pilot side back to line up with the copilot side or will this cause physical interference between backs of instruments and airframe or something?  It seems the copilot side more directly faces a sitting person's face than the pilot side.  (I am aware of panel tilt affecting the gyro, right now I'm concerned about what's physically possible/impossible with the panel).

 

Thanks for the help! 

My gallery has pics of my '66E panel, including one taken during a complete redo that might give you a better idea of the structural tubes you have to contend with. I'm not sure whether my panel is easier to see over than a stock 201 style. This panel is flat.

[N601RX]

The right side panel tilt is close to 24 deg in level flight.  I think there were a couple of option for the 201 panel upgrade, one which kept the original structure and used spacers like in Bob's pictures and and the other replaced the structure with parts from a J model.

[Bob_Belville]

The right side panel tilt is close to 24 deg in level flight.  I think there were a couple of option for the 201 panel upgrade, one which kept the original structure and used spacers like in Bob's pictures and and the other replaced the structure with parts from a J model.

A couple more pics. As you can see the only stuff on that panel section that is no longer canted toward the pilot are CBs and a 14V power socket.

 

I think you can also see that my panel is indeed taller than a vintage panel, at least at the sides. I'm 5'8" and I like to have a cushion on the seat. But I like the panel. To each his own, of course.

[N601RX]

Bob,

Is your panel the SWTA upgrade?

[Bob_Belville]

Bob,

Is your panel the SWTA upgrade?

Sort of. A prior owner had done that STC. The shop that did my new panel probably utilized some of the panel support features of the SWTA but my recollection is that they had to change some of that. Here's the panel as it was when I bought the plane.

 

 12/15/1997: "Instrument panel by SW Texas Aviation, STC SA7828SW"

[Andy95W]

I owned my first M20C about 20 years ago and I remember drooling over those 201 style panels, especially after assisting on the installation of one (SWTA mod).

It was a very intensive installation, and I think you will be very unhappy with the resultant price and result if you try to go back to the original. You will probably need to buy the original instrument panel and structure from a wrecked Mooney, to begin with. You should expect the airplane to be down for at least a month, probably more unless you pay top dollar for an avionics shop to do the work. And most avionics shops won't want the job unless you are dropping $20k + on new avionics.

If your local shop does the work, figure at least 50 hours of labor, not including parts. If you have a 201 style windshield, double the labor and good luck finding a shop willing to do the work.

I understand the desire to go back to original, I would not consider "upgrading" mine today. But it is a very good selling point for a future owner of your airplane.

[jbs007]

Thank you Dan!

 

Bob, thanks for all the pictures! It's need seeing the actual mounts that hold the panel onto the airframe.  Yours doesn't seem to have modification to the underlying structure so I'd think you could go back to the old style if you wanted.  Man, if I had your "before" panel I'd be happier than a pig in s***.  I'm also 5'8" and use a cushion so I'd like to keep the panel height down if I can.

 

N601RX, now that you mention it you're right; the different STCs or shops that did 201 panel mods did them differently and unfortunately I won't know how mine was done till October.  Hopefully I'm not getting too ahead of myself. 

 

I'd be interested to hear from someone who has an older style panel with the pilot side angled like the copilots side to see if its possible and if they like it.
 

[jbs007]

Thanks Andy.  Yeah I'd definitely have to find some wrecked Mooney parts if I go this route.  I'll be unemployed soon and have all the time in the world, I have the hangar space to do a lot work myself, and know the right A&P and IA to help me out.  I'll be prepping the plane for a thorough paint job and can take the windshield out with my labor and A&P guidance, and can also design and have laser cut panel parts myself.  The actual wiring up will go to a shop but I think I can take out a lot of labor costs.  I am kind of planning big for now.  When I get home and really get in the weeds of planning everything I might decide to stay with the 201 panel so I a planning that out too.

 

Attached is a basic idea of what I'm thinking for the panel. 

[Bob_Belville]

Thank you Dan!

 

Bob, thanks for all the pictures! It's need seeing the actual mounts that hold the panel onto the airframe.  Yours doesn't seem to have modification to the underlying structure so I'd think you could go back to the old style if you wanted.  Man, if I had your "before" panel I'd be happier than a pig in s***.  I'm also 5'8" and use a cushion so I'd like to keep the panel height down if I can.

 

 

 

I have zero interest in going back! I have a perfect panel for my little old '66E. 

 

And I thought my old panel looked pretty nice when I bought the plane. I had been out of flying for 20 years. This plane had an IFR GPS and a HSI, neither of which I had had in my first '66E years before. It also had a Stormscope and a STEC which I had added to the first plane, knew how much I liked both and that they were expensive. But... the HSI was Narco and when it started misbehaving I found out that keeping it working might be tough. The ADF worked fine but who needs it? The KNS80 had to be sent off for repairs within a few months, the AP wouldn't track the VOR, the IFR GPS worked fine but was Garmin's 1st generation (155IFR TSO) and was pretty primitive to program and had no moving map... in other words, stuff that was almost state of the art in 1997 was not so much in 2012.  

 

So I doubled my cost basic in the first year of ownership. The next owner of this plane, I'm 72, should be appreciative. 

[Marauder]

Thanks Andy. Yeah I'd definitely have to find some wrecked Mooney parts if I go this route. I'll be unemployed soon and have all the time in the world, I have the hangar space to do a lot work myself, and know the right A&P and IA to help me out. I'll be prepping the plane for a thorough paint job and can take the windshield out with my labor and A&P guidance, and can also design and have laser cut panel parts myself. The actual wiring up will go to a shop but I think I can take out a lot of labor costs. I am kind of planning big for now. When I get home and really get in the weeds of planning everything I might decide to stay with the 201 panel so I a planning that out too.

Attached is a basic idea of what I'm thinking for the panel.

Going back to the old style panel, will in my opinion, lower resale potential.

Got another idea for you. Have you thought about looking to see if the later model articulating seats will fit in your plane? Might be a cheaper alternative than reworking the entire panel.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Bob_Belville]

Going back to the old style panel, will in my opinion, lower resale potential.

Got another idea for you. Have you thought about looking to see if the later model articulating seats will fit in your plane? Might be a cheaper alternative than reworking the entire panel.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If they are any wider the JBar path well might be an issue. When were they introduced? Which models?

[Hank]

I'm not sure changing back to the original style panel will help with the cushions. My C has the original panel with the tilted 6-pack; I am 5'-11" and sit on a 2" cushion. My wife, 5'-3", sits on three stacked chair pillows . . .

[jbs007]

Interesting idea with the articulating seat.  I could see changing seating if the panel mod ends up looking too troublesome.  I'm not worried about resale value though, more my own enjoyment.  When I get back to San Diego I'll have to find a few Mooney owners who will let me sit in and see how panels/seats line up.  If anyone here wants to let me in their Mooney, the Ballast Point is on me. 

 

Thanks

[rbridges]

If they are any wider the JBar path well might be an issue. When were they introduced? Which models?

 

the previous owner put articulating seats in my C model.  It works great and doesn't obstruct the johnson bar.  It's a nice feature to have.

[carusoam]

JBS's creativity + Lyles panels = good plan!

Add in Bob's experience + Having spare time is a plus.

Best regards,

-a-

[Alan Fox]

I have done the SWTA panel mod , They eyeball for the yokeshafts gets cut out so the structure will be different , and may not accommodate the older style anymore.....Dave Matthieson of Airmods in Robbinsville NJ is trying to sell a set of articulating seats , they have been on barnstormers a few times, you may want to check it out,,,,

[yvesg]

Thanks Andy. Yeah I'd definitely have to find some wrecked Mooney parts if I go this route. I'll be unemployed soon and have all the time in the world, I have the hangar space to do a lot work myself, and know the right A&P and IA to help me out. I'll be prepping the plane for a thorough paint job and can take the windshield out with my labor and A&P guidance, and can also design and have laser cut panel parts myself. The actual wiring up will go to a shop but I think I can take out a lot of labor costs. I am kind of planning big for now. When I get home and really get in the weeds of planning everything I might decide to stay with the 201 panel so I a planning that out too.

Attached is a basic idea of what I'm thinking for the panel.

Take a look at my panel. It looks a lot like the one you want. The bottom CDI /DG are reversed. The reason is that my DG is so long that when fitted in the right spot, the control column would bang at the end of it so had to move it elsewhere. I will change this when the DG is replaced by a shorter one. I had to get rid of the glove box when added the WAAS GPS to make room for the transponder.

(Sorry for the reverse picture... for that one the iPAD was upside down I guess)

Yves

[jbs007]

Thanks Yves that's exactly what I am looking for!  How deep is your current DG? The Sandel 3500 I want to install there is 9.8" deep from the front of the panel.  Does the pilot side panel have to have the bend in it?  could the top row of instruments be co-planar with the bottom row or would that cause interference behind the panel?  Also, there is a spacer between your throttle/mixture/prop knobs and your GPS.  Is that required for clearance behind the panel or could you have removed it and mounted your GPS lower?  Thanks!

 

Carusoam,  And there is my biggest problem... I have WAY too much time to sit here and think about redoing my instrument panel over the next few months. I wonder if I can think of a way to install a cappuccino maker where the glovebox is...  I bet it starts with a PlanePower alternator!

[KSMooniac]

It is fun to dream about these kinds of projects... I know since I'm ears-deep in finishing airframe mods on my J that I'm doing myself with supervision.  

 

In your case, i'd join the chorus to recommend you keep the 201 style panel as it offers a lot more flexibility and thus resale value down the road.  Perhaps you could get a new panel re-cut that bolts in to your current interface and design it to your specs.

 

Do you already have a Sandel 3500 kit to install?  It will be a lot of work since you'll need to install a remote gyro in the back and a flux gate out in the wing (I believe).  If you don't already have all that stuff, you better be sitting down when you price it out.  An Aspen installation will very likely be less expensive and much easier.  

[Alan Fox]

I had a SN3308 in the SWTA panel in the bottom slot above the yokeshaft , it wont fit without the bend on the old style as the yokeshaft will interfere with it , also Keep in ,mind that connectors for the 3500 are rigid type and will add an extra 2 inches beyond the depth of the instrument...

[jbs007]

Great info thanks!

 

I have al the pieces required for the Sandel kit which I got it for about $2500 a year or 2 ago.  I cant check it now but I believe the gyro, flux gate, and slaving accessory (don't even know if that's needed with the Sandel) are from a newer king HSI system. Does the Aspen not need the flux gate or gyro? I still don't think I could go spend ~10k on one of those right now when I already have the whole Sandel kit. 

 

n74795, what you're saying is the info I'm looking for and does seem to ruin the whole idea of the pushed back old style panel on the pilot side.  But what if I slide the it over to the left a little bit? I have seen panels with a little more of a vertical gap right of the attitude gyro/DG than it does between other columns of instruments.  maybe that's why. 

 

Also that is another good idea; I might be able to cut a new panel face that I like (hopefully that takes up less area) and mount it on the existing structure. 

 

Thanks everyone!  I don't want to beat a dead horse on this quite yet.  I think at this point I need to investigate my panel before planning much more in depth.

[KSMooniac]

The Aspen just needs an antenna mounted on the top of the cabin IIRC, and no flux gate or remote gyro so the wiring runs are much easier.  If you got a functional Sandel 3500 kit for that price, that is a good deal.  You'll still have a big installation task making a harness and routing it as required.  The King KG102A remote gyro might need ongoing maintenance to keep it functioning, though, and that cost will add up.  People are ditching those for a reason and converting to glass.  Sandel makes their own solid-state remote gyro that presumably would be much more reliable, but they're expensive and rare on the used market.  (I was sorta looking for a kit for a while before deciding to wait on an Aspen or whatever else might come soon.)

[testwest]

jbs007, Scott (KSMooniac) knows exactly what he speaks.

 

The KG102A remote gyro does require ongoing maintenance. You really should take it to an avionics shop for a checkout. You may find (as we did) that is so far out of currency as far as mod status goes that it could not be made reliable without a lot of money (i.e. not economically repairable.) And, it is somewhat heavy.

 

The Aspen needs one "antenna", it is called a remote sensing unit, or RSM. It includes a GPS antenna, magnetometer and OAT sensor. Looks sorta like a fat GPS antenna.

 

The Aspen also gives you immediate and potential capability that the Sandel does not, including ADS capability now and a pretty decent autopilot capability (Avidyne DFC90) in the future. I would not spend money on an initial installation of old technology, with the exception of DME (like the KN63).