B&C Standby Alternator Field Approval

[OR75]

Isn’t installing a second alternator defeating the purpose ? 
no gain ( clutter or weight ) vs keeping the vacuum pump. 
the instruments battery is the backup . If my alternator went, I would find the closest airport or VFR conditions asap 

[carusoam]

52 minutes ago, OR75 said:

Isn’t installing a second alternator defeating the purpose ? 
no gain ( clutter or weight ) vs keeping the vacuum pump. 
the instruments battery is the backup . If my alternator went, I would find the closest airport or VFR conditions asap 

Depends on where the next airport is…

Batteries have some unknowns to them… age, and charge level, and how many minutes are left…

But, I’m a belt and suspenders kind of guy… 

 

Vacuum instruments are on their way out…

As are the TCs…

 

They were good… once.

Best regards,

-a-

[takair]

I’m fairly confident it can still be done under field approval in some FSDOs.  I did it in 2019 for a European customer as referenced in post 3 or 4.  The field approval package was equivalent to an STC, with FAA approved, custom flight manual. That was the hardest part.   I can’t post the package since it was paid for by a customer, but B&C has most of the paperwork required for submittal for a field approval….which was the basis of my package.  I can point folks in the right direction or can put together an approval package for a small fee.  Many avionics shops and some IAs are capable as well.  It is a nice mod for an all electric bird.  I suspect it is not worth another STC for B&C as long as FSDOs are still doing field approvals. Each install has its own peculiarities so an AML STC package would not be fun.

[OR75]

2 hours ago, carusoam said:

Depends on where the next airport is…

Batteries have some unknowns to them… age, and charge level, and how many minutes are left…

But, I’m a belt and suspenders kind of guy… 

 

Vacuum instruments are on their way out…

As are the TCs…

 

They were good… once.

Best regards,

-a-

I did replace my  TC with a G5+Battery (so replaced a belt with a belt + suspenders)

Vacuum instruments are on a long way out ... but are still here and are great suspenders. There is a definite benefit in removing the vacuum system (less weight, less clutter in the accessories panel), but that benefit is wiped out if you replace it with a second alternator. 

  

[toto]

3 hours ago, OR75 said:

Isn’t installing a second alternator defeating the purpose ? 
no gain ( clutter or weight ) vs keeping the vacuum pump. 
the instruments battery is the backup . If my alternator went, I would find the closest airport or VFR conditions asap 

In my mind, losing the vacuum pump is a neat opportunity to add a standby alternator that wouldn’t otherwise be possible.

Having had a bunch of alternator failures in my aviation life, including one at night and a couple in IMC, it … sucks. Even if you can proceed VMC, you’re trying to shed current draw in the hopes that you’ll have enough battery to talk to ATC for a little while - and trying to remember your light gun signals. Never mind wondering how much battery you’ll need to get the gear down and what that will do to your radio. 

Having a battery-powered nav display is very nice, and a self-contained AHRS battery definitely helps keep the dirty side down, but having an accessory pad open for a standby alternator brings a bunch of other benefits in addition to attitude and nav.

[tmo]

21 hours ago, takair said:

I suspect it is not worth another STC for B&C as long as FSDOs are still doing field approvals.

It might be worth doing a STC if you see a market for it outside of the US - getting a FAA STC "approved" under EASA is probably much easier than getting approval for a field approval. That said, that market probably isn't too big.

[takair]

2 minutes ago, tmo said:

It might be worth doing a STC if you see a market for it outside of the US - getting a FAA STC "approved" under EASA is probably much easier than getting approval for a field approval. That said, that market probably isn't too big.

You are right.  It is worth noting that the Field approval I helped facilitate was for an N registered aircraft operating in Europe. 

[PT20J]

Which is easier to get: A one-only STC or a field approval?

[takair]

4 hours ago, PT20J said:

Which is easier to get: A one-only STC or a field approval?

These days they might be about the same amount of work. First stop is usually the FSDO. They can do basic field approvals. If they need engineering assistance they send us over to the ACO. The ACO will then work with you on deciding their preference. They may continue as a field approval or suggest an STC. If a flight manual approval is required they also bring in the appropriate ACO….I think it is Wichita for airplanes. They might even deem it a minor alteration….in other words, they can refuse to do a field approval or STC because it is minor!  This is actually a positive…..in that it starts to provide actual examples of minor alterations….if there was a way to compile them all….

[Lionudakis]

On 12/29/2021 at 7:05 PM, takair said:

These days they might be about the same amount of work. First stop is usually the FSDO. They can do basic field approvals. If they need engineering assistance they send us over to the ACO. The ACO will then work with you on deciding their preference. They may continue as a field approval or suggest an STC. If a flight manual approval is required they also bring in the appropriate ACO….I think it is Wichita for airplanes. They might even deem it a minor alteration….in other words, they can refuse to do a field approval or STC because it is minor!  This is actually a positive…..in that it starts to provide actual examples of minor alterations….if there was a way to compile them all….

This ! I gave up with my local FSDO on getting an approval. They're requesting stuff not even applicable to the install. How I read the definition of minor, a standby alternator falls under it. I think it comes down to the guy signing it off. I've found nothing documented that would keep one from calling it a minor. 

[M20F-1968]

There is another alternative to provide an indefinite 12 amps/14 Volts at 105 kts indefinitely as long at the unit is turning.  It will power basic avionics.  I have this unit and configured my panel with two avionics master so the extra load can be shed quickly.   See  https://www.basicaircraft.com/shop

John Breda

[Lionudakis]

50 minutes ago, M20F-1968 said:

There is another alternative to provide an indefinite 12 amps/14 Volts at 105 kts indefinitely as long at the unit is turning.  It will power basic avionics.  I have this unit and configured my panel with two avionics master so the extra load can be shed quickly.   See  https://www.basicaircraft.com/shop

John Breda

Thanks ! is it spring loaded out to deploy, or do you deploy and retract it with a push/pull?  

[M20F-1968]

On 10/8/2023 at 1:42 PM, Lionudakis said:

Thanks ! is it spring loaded out to deploy, or do you deploy and retract it with a push/pull?  

It has a pressure piston which pushes it out.

John Breda

[Ethan]

Folks,

I recently won a field approval to install a B & C standby alternator for my 1981 M20K (231) late last year. I just completed the installation and, though I have only flown once with it, it works as advertised.  The 20 amp alternator mounts to the empty vacuum pad on the back of my TSIO-360-LB1B. I am very happy about this because of all things on my airplane, the gear driven alternator - with its finicky coupling - is the weak link.

I started this process right here where someone pointed me to an existing field approval for a slightly different airplane - one with the -MB engine. I got a copy of that 337 and called the installer at LASAR and he gave me a rundown on the install and the process to obtain the field approval. I then emailed a copy to my mechanic and enlisted his help - he was willing. I then emailed my FSDO’s Principal Avionics Inspector who seemed immediately positive about the prospect of a field approval.

The inspector had me edit the 337 form here and there, and had me draft an AFM Supplement. I think the FSDO was so easy to work with primarily because the B & C system is such a well-known quantity. TJ at B & C was an excellent resource and helped me immensely with technical questions along the way. B & C has its own technical publication section available on its website that was very helpful as well, with line-drawings and installation instructions for the PA-32 and the Bonanza.

If anyone wants help, I have compiled quite a trove of documents I used to prove that the install would 1) work on my airframe, 2) work on my electrical system. 

 

Ethan
 

 

[Lionudakis]

Wow, that’s great !!
It’s such a simple system and install it seams a no brainer. What FSDO did you get that though ? I’ve given up working with the Houston FSDO. I sent my field approval package to a DER/DAR. Still waiting on the drafted AFMS for my C for approval which had to go to the ACO office to approve it. 

[LANCECASPER]

1 hour ago, Ethan said:

Folks,

I recently won a field approval to install a B & C standby alternator for my 1981 M20K (231) late last year. I just completed the installation and, though I have only flown once with it, it works as advertised.  The 20 amp alternator mounts to the empty vacuum pad on the back of my TSIO-360-LB1B. I am very happy about this because of all things on my airplane, the gear driven alternator - with its finicky coupling - is the weak link.

I started this process right here where someone pointed me to an existing field approval for a slightly different airplane - one with the -MB engine. I got a copy of that 337 and called the installer at LASAR and he gave me a rundown on the install and the process to obtain the field approval. I then emailed a copy to my mechanic and enlisted his help - he was willing. I then emailed my FSDO’s Principal Avionics Inspector who seemed immediately positive about the prospect of a field approval.

The inspector had me edit the 337 form here and there, and had me draft an AFM Supplement. I think the FSDO was so easy to work with primarily because the B & C system is such a well-known quantity. TJ at B & C was an excellent resource and helped me immensely with technical questions along the way. B & C has its own technical publication section available on its website that was very helpful as well, with line-drawings and installation instructions for the PA-32 and the Bonanza.

If anyone wants help, I have compiled quite a trove of documents I used to prove that the install would 1) work on my airframe, 2) work on my electrical system. 

 

Ethan

Great job!  @jlunseth might be interested - if memory serves correctly he was thinking about this awhile back.

It might be worth a trip to Oregon to get  it done.

[toto]

43 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

Great job!  @jlunseth might be interested - if memory serves correctly he was thinking about this awhile back.

It might be worth a trip to Oregon to get  it done.

I would install one of these tomorrow if they had a Mooney STC. I wonder if the data @Ethan collected would help B&C move the needle on certification. 

[Ethan]

1 hour ago, Lionudakis said:

Wow, that’s great !!
It’s such a simple system and install it seams a no brainer. What FSDO did you get that though ? I’ve given up working with the Houston FSDO. I sent my field approval package to a DER/DAR. Still waiting on the drafted AFMS for my C for approval which had to go to the ACO office to approve it. 

I went through the Portland, OR FSDO. It is strange how one FSDO varies so much from another. Do you have an IA/A&P with a good relationship with the Houston FSDO, that may help. 

[jlunseth]

That’s really great. I tried with Lasar a couple of years ago but couldn’t get it done. I gave up on the whole idea and went with a vacuum AI so I have two different power sources driving my AIs. I also have installed a new engine and I have to say the alternator, so far, has been really great. The major problem with the original alternator was not enough charging capacity at low idle, so it was necessary to taxi at 1150 or higher to keep from getting a buss voltage warning. The new one will let me idle in the high 900’s.

[Lionudakis]

33 minutes ago, Ethan said:

I went through the Portland, OR FSDO. It is strange how one FSDO varies so much from another. Do you have an IA/A&P with a good relationship with the Houston FSDO, that may help. 

I'm an A&P/IA. I've done upward of 30 field approvals over the years.  the relationships with the Houston FSDO are non-existant anymore. The last field approval I ever got was about 5 years ago, the PMI working it called me, and advised me to wrap it up asap because once he retired, I wouldn't be getting one. He was right. All the common sense and customer service folks retired. 

The last communication with them they required a form to be filled out. It was an application for an STC for a belt driven alternator installation. There was no way around it. This told me, they have zero interest in working for the public anymore

[201Mooniac]

1 hour ago, toto said:

I would install one of these tomorrow if they had a Mooney STC. I wonder if the data @Ethan collected would help B&C move the needle on certification. 

I would install one as well but I floated the idea with the FSDO and they gave it a thumbs down.  If there was an STC I'd buy it in a minute.

[Ethan]

1 hour ago, jlunseth said:

That’s really great. I tried with Lasar a couple of years ago but couldn’t get it done. I gave up on the whole idea and went with a vacuum AI so I have two different power sources driving my AIs. I also have installed a new engine and I have to say the alternator, so far, has been really great. The major problem with the original alternator was not enough charging capacity at low idle, so it was necessary to taxi at 1150 or higher to keep from getting a buss voltage warning. The new one will let me idle in the high 900’s.

My problem with my alternator has not been charging power but that it just failed. Once some internal electrical connections came loose and it stopped charging. Twice, the polymer in the alternator-engine coupling pooped-out way too soon. Another time, a Woodruff key fell out of the coupling and the gear was just spinning on the shaft. Finally, some oil plug gave way and coated the alternator with oil causing it to fail.