Jim Peace Posted November 12, 2015 Report Posted November 12, 2015 Mine sticks a bit. Must tap on the glass for it to unstick. Sometimes hard. I would replace it but the one I found on aircraft spruce says not TSO PMA etc. http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/inpages/scott_therm.php?clickkey=5828 What is the alternative? enclosed is a picture of mine: Quote
carusoam Posted November 12, 2015 Report Posted November 12, 2015 JPI with an OAT probe mounted under the wing or mounted in an air intake near the cabin. Digital display and aerodynamic. Both are nicer when determining probability of ice while in IMC. Best regards, -a- Quote
Andy95W Posted November 12, 2015 Report Posted November 12, 2015 I don't think the Scott thermometers were TSOed themselves. TSOs and PMAs are pretty important for required equipment, but not so much for optional/nice to have equipment so long as it doesn't interfere with anything. In a case like this it would be up to the installer to verify that it was not a required piece of equipment and that its installation was safe and appropriately completed. Ask your A&P, or just have your hangar fairies replace it while you're not looking, IMO. Quote
Alan Fox Posted November 12, 2015 Report Posted November 12, 2015 Oat IS required for IFR flight , it needs to have a PMA , not a TSO... Quote
Andy95W Posted November 12, 2015 Report Posted November 12, 2015 7 hours ago, n74795 said: Oat IS required for IFR flight Not that I've ever been taught, or taught any of my students. Cut and pasted from FAR 91.205: (d) Instrument flight rules. For IFR flight, the following instruments and equipment are required: (1) Instruments and equipment specified in paragraph (b) of this section, and, for night flight, instruments and equipment specified in paragraph (c) of this section. (2) Two-way radio communication and navigation equipment suitable for the route to be flown. (3) Gyroscopic rate-of-turn indicator, except on the following aircraft: (i) Airplanes with a third attitude instrument system usable through flight attitudes of 360 degrees of pitch and roll and installed in accordance with the instrument requirements prescribed in §121.305(j) of this chapter; and (ii) Rotorcraft with a third attitude instrument system usable through flight attitudes of ±80 degrees of pitch and ±120 degrees of roll and installed in accordance with §29.1303(g) of this chapter. (4) Slip-skid indicator. (5) Sensitive altimeter adjustable for barometric pressure. (6) A clock displaying hours, minutes, and seconds with a sweep-second pointer or digital presentation. (7) Generator or alternator of adequate capacity. (8) Gyroscopic pitch and bank indicator (artificial horizon). (9) Gyroscopic direction indicator (directional gyro or equivalent). The only other requirement for IFR equipment could come from the specific Type Certificate Data Sheet for the airplane. The TCDS for the M20C does not mention an OAT. 1 Quote
Andy95W Posted November 12, 2015 Report Posted November 12, 2015 7 hours ago, n74795 said: it needs to have a PMA , not a TSO... Sorry, Alan, I also have to respectfully disagree with this, as well. Typically, generic (not aircraft type specific) parts such as instruments are manufactured in accordance with an FAA established standard- the TSO. PMA parts are specific to an aircraft type, such as a LASAR manufactured oversized nose gear bushing. Quote
Jim Peace Posted November 12, 2015 Author Report Posted November 12, 2015 Well the way I see it,,, A new OAT that is not certified but works is better than a old certified broken one. 1 Quote
N201MKTurbo Posted November 12, 2015 Report Posted November 12, 2015 Davtron makes a nice one if you have a 2 inch hole. Quote
KSMooniac Posted November 12, 2015 Report Posted November 12, 2015 If that was an original Mooney-installed part, then you can replace it with an identical part since the certification is covered by the approved type design, ie Mooney chose *that* thermometer and their engineering/drawings reflect the choice, which were then approved by the FAA. I would take the opportunity to put something modern in there such as a Davtron unit if you have the room, or especially an engine monitor (which should already have!) that can add a probe. Probes should be placed under the wing in an inspection panel (search up previous topics). Quote
carusoam Posted November 12, 2015 Report Posted November 12, 2015 2" hole for the panel, not the smaller hole through the window. Took me a few seconds, -a- Quote
Alan Fox Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 So it is legal to fly in icing conditions without an OAT ?? Quote
Alan Fox Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 Let me rephrase that it is legal to fly in possible icing conditions without an oat ?? Quote
Andy95W Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 32 minutes ago, n74795 said: 35 minutes ago, n74795 said: So it is legal to fly in icing conditions without an OAT ?? I cannot remember ever seeing a requirement for it. But I completely agree it wouldn't be prudent to fly IFR without one. 1 Quote
DXB Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 Before I had no functioning OAT. Now I have independent JPI and Aspen probe numbers. Pretty sure the day will come when I nervously wonder which is more accurate. 1 Quote
N201MKTurbo Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 Go fly in a cold wet cloud and see which one reads 0 when the windshield starts to ice up. Quote
Piloto Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 If you have a multiprobe EGT or engine analizer they would have provision for OAT. All that it takes is installing an external probe underneath the wing. It works pretty well and you do not need extra panel space. José Quote
Marauder Posted November 14, 2015 Report Posted November 14, 2015 23 hours ago, n74795 said: Let me rephrase that it is legal to fly in possible icing conditions without an oat ?? Technically yes, but as was pointed out, stupid to do so. I do think there may be a requirement that the aircraft has one as part of the type certificate. http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_91-74A.pdf Quote
Bob_Belville Posted November 14, 2015 Report Posted November 14, 2015 20 hours ago, DXB said: Before I had no functioning OAT. Now I have independent JPI and Aspen probe numbers. Pretty sure the day will come when I nervously wonder which is more accurate. I turned both on while the plane was parked in the hanger and compare all 3 readings (the 3rd being the original window mounted OAT). Either the JPI 930 or the Aspen has the capacity to enter a factor to offset the display. 1 Quote
N601RX Posted November 14, 2015 Report Posted November 14, 2015 If you want to verify the accuracy you can use an ice bath. An insulated cup filled with small ice chips and just enough water to cover them will give you a reference temperature very close to 32dF. If prepaired properly it can be a NIST standard. Quote
Lood Posted November 14, 2015 Report Posted November 14, 2015 Ridiculous, some of this certified BS. Except for the price, I'll bet my last dollar that there's no real difference between a certified OAT gauge and a non-certified OAT gauge. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.