Lasar windshield stc

[Browncbr1]

I took the plunge after having water come in the cowl deck a few times.   I’ve been lucky not to have fried anything expensive.  Just had a $220 refurb on my audio panel after water shorted it.  

I went ahead and went for the solar gray UV version.   I didn’t ask for it, but they sent me the 1/4” thick version, which I hope doesn’t end up being too difficult to fit, but we will probably make good use of the sanding wheel.  

It was a nice surprise that lasar included three tubes of polysulfide, all rivets and hardware..   

Going to start work this month and will post progress and experiences here

[Dream to fly]

I took the plunge after having water come in the cowl deck a few times.   I’ve been lucky not to have fried anything expensive.  Just had a $220 refurb on my audio panel after water shorted it.  
I went ahead and went for the solar gray UV version.   I didn’t ask for it, but they sent me the 1/4” thick version, which I hope doesn’t end up being too difficult to fit, but we will probably make good use of the sanding wheel.  
It was a nice surprise that lasar included three tubes of polysulfide, all rivets and hardware..   
Going to start work this month and will post progress and experiences here

Please keep me posted as this will be my next repair I will need to make. I am having the same issues

Sent from my E6810 using Tapatalk

[Ragsf15e]

If you want to do anything to your avionics, do it now!  It gets much tougher to access without taking apart the whole panel.

[podair]

did you go for the full M20J type windshield , or the one piece replacement to our split windshield?

[Browncbr1]

4 hours ago, podair said:

did you go for the full M20J type windshield , or the one piece replacement to our split windshield?

It is the 201 conversion stc.  

[Tcraft938]

Anyone have suggestions on how best to seal the what I call, "the avionics bay panel"?  While I like the look of the 201 STC, I like the ease of access to avionics, engine mount bolts, etc.  I know my luck, two weeks after I installed a  201 windshield STC every piece of electrical equipment will have an issue, one at a time.  :-)  

[Browncbr1]

47 minutes ago, Tcraft938 said:

Anyone have suggestions on how best to seal the what I call, "the avionics bay panel"?  While I like the look of the 201 STC, I like the ease of access to avionics, engine mount bolts, etc.  I know my luck, two weeks after I installed a  201 windshield STC every piece of electrical equipment will have an issue, one at a time.  :-)  

I had best success with silicone and just living with the aweful mess, ugly look, and difficulty getting it off, then scraping all old silicone off...   even then, somehow water got it several times.. i'm over it...  I view the windshield as insurance on $20k of avionics, and a worthy upgrade...    I did make a point of getting the panel how I want it for good before doing this...  I had previously decided against the upgrade, but the last time water came in, it made me decide otherwise.    I know @Fred₂O pulled out his radios / gps and they were full of water... he got out lucky... I know @Glenn lost a couple of 430w boxes this way, then he got the windshield... I'm not waiting anymore!.. 

[Prior owner]

3 hours ago, Tcraft938 said:

Anyone have suggestions on how best to seal the what I call, "the avionics bay panel"?  While I like the look of the 201 STC, I like the ease of access to avionics, engine mount bolts, etc.  I know my luck, two weeks after I installed a  201 windshield STC every piece of electrical equipment will have an issue, one at a time.  :-)  

There was a recent thread on this- you should be able to scroll down and find it- maybe in vintage Mooneys, or in the avionics/panel forum. “3M Strip Caulk” is the replacement for the factory method of sealing, I believe. If you find that thread, there are others who have had success with certain peel and stick weatherstripping.

[Prior owner]

3 hours ago, Tcraft938 said:

Anyone have suggestions on how best to seal the what I call, "the avionics bay panel"?  While I like the look of the 201 STC, I like the ease of access to avionics, engine mount bolts, etc.  I know my luck, two weeks after I installed a  201 windshield STC every piece of electrical equipment will have an issue, one at a time.  :-)  

Thread on topic

[RLCarter]

AircrarftSpruce has it..kinda messy but it seals good, just dont block the channel on the firewall flange or drain holes in the panels

[Glenn]

7 hours ago, Browncbr1 said:

I had best success with silicone and just living with the aweful mess, ugly look, and difficulty getting it off, then scraping all old silicone off...   even then, somehow water got it several times.. i'm over it...  I view the windshield as insurance on $20k of avionics, and a worthy upgrade...    I did make a point of getting the panel how I want it for good before doing this...  I had previously decided against the upgrade, but the last time water came in, it made me decide otherwise.    I know @Fred₂O pulled out his radios / gps and they were full of water... he got out lucky... I know @Glenn lost a couple of 430w boxes this way, then he got the windshield... I'm not waiting anymore!.. 

@Browncbr1You have me mixed up with someone else.  I installed one 430W a year after I did the windshield mod, and one a year after that.  I never had water damage.  I have skinned my knuckles working behind the panel since the mod.

 

Edited July 3, 2019 by Glenn
add photo

[Hank]

I really like the smaller access panels on my SWTA windshield. If onlynit was still available . . . .

[RLCarter]

1 minute ago, Hank said:

I really like the smaller access panels on my SWTA windshield. If onlynit was still available . . . .

I really wish they would bring back...... Or LASAR would put panels in theirs

[Guest]

22 minutes ago, RLCarter said:

I really wish they would bring back...... Or LASAR would put panels in theirs

Is there a reason that one couldn’t add the two access doors to the LASAR/ Mooney forward skin?

Clarence

[Hank]

5 minutes ago, M20Doc said:

Is there a reason that one couldn’t add the two access doors to the LASAR/ Mooney forward skin?

Clarence

People are questioning the legality of putting Mooney-supplied seats from one letter-designated model into a different one without DAR approval supported by engineering studies and crash tests, and you want to go off and modify an airframe part manufactured under PMA and installed under airframe modification process STC all on your own????

[Guest]

In my experience people tend to over think the simplest of things.  I think that one could argue that you’re simply adding Inspection holes to the Mooney part using the LASAR drawing to support it.

 I would guess that if one tried to order a seat for a mid sixties airframe, Mooney would say the seat for a newer model is the replacement part number.  

I have repaired a single Comanche with parts from a Twin Comanche with the approval of Piper after a few emails back and forth with Piper engineering and some of their own documents to support my request.  

Clarence

[Hank]

7 minutes ago, M20Doc said:

In my experience people tend to over think the simplest of things.  I think that one could argue that you’re simply adding Inspection holes to the Mooney part using the LASAR drawing to support it.

 I would guess that if one tried to order a seat for a mid sixties airframe, Mooney would say the seat for a newer model is the replacement part number.  

I have repaired a single Comanche with parts from a Twin Comanche with the approval of Piper after a few emails back and forth with Piper engineering and some of their own documents to support my request.  

Clarence

I agree with your sane approach, Clarence. Can you convince the FAA to think similarly?

BTW, you would be adding smaller (modified) Mooney-style inspection panels in the STC'd LASAR-manufactured part. Or maybe modifying the STC'd LASAR part to be similar to the no-longer-available STC'd SWTA part, while paying LASAR for their parts but not paying SWTA for their development work . . . Kind of like me editing and selling my collection of magazine articles by a favorite author and not paying the author.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Hank said:

I agree with your sane approach, Clarence. Can you convince the FAA to think similarly?

BTW, you would be adding smaller (modified) Mooney-style inspection panels in the STC'd LASAR-manufactured part. Or maybe modifying the STC'd LASAR part to be similar to the no-longer-available STC'd SWTA part, while paying LASAR for their parts but not paying SWTA for their development work . . . Kind of like me editing and selling my collection of magazine articles by a favorite author and not paying the author.

I think that the LASAR Kit uses a standard Mooney forward skin and lower windshield retainer strip.  The SWTA STC gave a choice of access doors or no access doors so strength doesn’t seem to be an issue.

Clarence

[RLCarter]

If the inspection panels were install as SWTA's why wouldnt it pass the smell test, the FAA approved it once and you could reference it

[Hank]

Just now, M20Doc said:

I think that the LASAR Kit uses a standard Mooney forward skin and lower windshield retainer strip.  The SWTA STC gave a choice of access doors or no access doors so strength doesn’t seem to be an issue.

Clarence

I learn something every day. I thought all SWTA parts had access panels, and no LASAR panels did. Further, I supposed that they had come up with the parts themselves, at least how they adapt to the pre-J frame and support the windshield. Joey Cole just pointed out that the trim across the bottom of the windshield is different, and that my SWTA can leak in areas that the LASAR can't because the LASAR parts are caulked. So I need a tube of clear bathroom / kitchen caulk to fully waterproof the bottom of my windshield.

I also supposed that the FAA would not grant STCs to two different entities for the same part, thus both LASAR and SWTA cannot both make the same parts under different STCs.

[I learned the dangers of assuming as a child, watching The Odd Couple, and my first real job after college taught me to be a world-class supposer . . . ]

[Browncbr1]

It seems the lasar stc uses mooney manufactured 201 cowl deck and retainer.  The windshield came from LP aero.    I had thought about adding inspection panels like the swta deck and referencing those drawings, but it does seem like a lot of extra work.  

 

[Tcraft938]

Thank you very much everyone, very helpful.   I have my access panel off now to install the engine.  I think my favorite response was from an avionics technician "if you want to keep the rain out, you have nice IFR avionics, just leave the cabin cover on.  It's cost effective, fast and simple, in other words a Mooney Solution".   LOL

[gsxrpilot]

I'm pretty sure SWTA would be willing to sell the STC's (molds, tooling, etc) to anyone who'd like to bring them back to the market. 

[kpaul]

4 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

I'm pretty sure SWTA would be willing to sell the STC's (molds, tooling, etc) to anyone who'd like to bring them back to the market. 

Sounds like a great fit for @Sabremechand his vintage cowl.

[Sabremech]

3 hours ago, kpaul said:

Sounds like a great fit for @Sabremechand his vintage cowl.

I’ve had some conversation with SWTA about their STC’s, but that’s as fas as its gone right now.

Thanks,

David