uAvionix Tail Beacon Approved - $1950

[Jeev]

The Tailbeacon has been approved.  For all non 172 installs including Mooneys a 337 will be required.  Installation is basically the same as the wing mounted version with two wires and set up on an iPhone or Android device.  I have attached the install manual below and here is a link to purchase it for $1950, shipping is free: https://wolfaviationsales.com/shop?olsPage=products%2Fuavionix-tail-beacon

Thank you! 

Sanjeev

tailBeacon-TSO-User-and-Installation-Guide-UAV-1002185-001-Rev-B.pdf

[HRM]

Anybody put one of these in their Mooney yet?

[RLCarter]

8 hours ago, HRM said:

Anybody put one of these in their Mooney yet?

Have they even started shipping yet? I had lunch with a buddy yesterday who has had one on order from the get go and he hadn't even received a shipping conformation 

[carusoam]

@Jeev, you might know how to handle this one..?

Anyone have an answer for the weight and balance for the extended rudder on the newer than ancient Mooneys...

Is the WnB going to be affected of the rudder/ vertical flight control?

65C and older, the tail lamp was on a fixed tail cone... not an issue here.

Something that came up in conversation the other day...

Best regards,

-a-

[carusoam]

Jim,

Any luck using the FAA ADSB rebate reservation system?

Best regards,

-a-

[Jeev]

23 minutes ago, carusoam said:

@Jeev, you might know how to handle this one..?

Anyone have an answer for the weight and balance for the extended rudder on the newer than ancient Mooneys...

Is the WnB going to be affected of the rudder/ vertical flight control?

65C and older, the tail lamp was on a fixed tail cone... not an issue here.

Something that came up in conversation the other day...

Best regards,

-a-

Since the STC is for Cessna 172's and any other certified aircraft that is installed on will be via minor alteration and 337 the final determination on this will be up to the IA signing it off, I don't see many IA's having an issue with this.  On the sample STC and per the specs "5. Change to Weight and Balance is negligible" and here is what is listed on the uAvionix site:

The tailBeacon installation is considered a minor alteration and can be approved by the installer for most aircraft.  At this time a form 337 should be completed and submitted along with the proper logbook entries.   Please note, the installer must determine if the conditions are appropriate for installation on a specific aircraft.  Additional guidance for ADS-B installation, performance verification, logbook entries and 337 instructions have been provided in the FAA policy memo titled “Installation Approval for ADS-B OUT Systems”

 

[Jeev]

31 minutes ago, RLCarter said:

Have they even started shipping yet? I had lunch with a buddy yesterday who has had one on order from the get go and he hadn't even received a shipping conformation 

They are shipping pre orders now, I am waiting on the latest update but last I was told they are running 4-6 weeks for shipment.

[carusoam]

I have been trying weekly to get the FAA site to work...

I Either got no reservations available...

or...

It seemed as if reservations had been turned back in... filled out all the details... crossed my fingers... said a few prayers...

Got a link doesn’t work error message...

So the FAA knows I was trying to reserve a rebate because it accepted my tail number in the middle of the process...

The only variable left that wasn’t a checked box was my name... and they even showed me how it was written from their database...

 

 

@Jeev, I should have been more clear...

1) not so much the ship’s weight and balance... but...

2) The control surface weight and balance... for those with the extended rudder... the tail light is mounted on the moving part of the rudder... where the weight of repainting flight controls can be a challenge for this...

3) If the light unit and beacon are identical in weight and cg, this is easy... if the beacon is lighter, weight can be added... if it is heavier, the installation just got slightly more challenging...

I assume there are many planes that have this situation... you might want to contact somebody at Uavionix to see what their logic is on avoiding control surface flutter...

I hope there is an easy answer for this...

Best regards,

-a-

[Alan Fox]

On 9/20/2019 at 12:17 AM, Jeev said:

Since the STC is for Cessna 172's and any other certified aircraft that is installed on will be via minor alteration and 337 the final determination on this will be up to the IA signing it off, I don't see many IA's having an issue with this.  On the sample STC and per the specs "5. Change to Weight and Balance is negligible" and here is what is listed on the uAvionix site:

The tailBeacon installation is considered a minor alteration and can be approved by the installer for most aircraft.  At this time a form 337 should be completed and submitted along with the proper logbook entries.   Please note, the installer must determine if the conditions are appropriate for installation on a specific aircraft.  Additional guidance for ADS-B installation, performance verification, logbook entries and 337 instructions have been provided in the FAA policy memo titled “Installation Approval for ADS-B OUT Systems”

 

Wrong , wrong , wrong ,   If you have the light in the rudder , The rudder is a PRIMARY BALANCED FLIGHT CONTROL.... you can not change the weight without removing and rebalancing the flight control , and I am not sure if you can change the aerodynamics of a PRIMARY FLIGHT CONTROL .....    You might want to reconsider who you sell these too , because the first rudder that flutters off , you will be in the liability chain... 

[DXB]

Yeah this seems like a good option for the '68 and earlier short bodies only, before the full length rudder was used on all the models.

[Jeev]

Absolutely understand guys and thank you for bringing this up.  Before any install is completed an IA needs to be consulted.  We recently replaced the beacon on the top of the rudder on my 310 and my IA diligently exactly matched the weight of the old beacon we took off for the exact reasons you guys state here. In the case of the tail beacon it may not be possible to add or subtract weight in a safe way but that is not for me to decide, I am not an IA.   It looks like It is not a good option for the later Mooney’s.  I am waiting on direction from Uavionix on this. 

[rangermb]

I completed the installation and testing of my new tailBeacon today. It was pretty straightforward. Two wires for power, 2 screws for the mount and 2 tiny set screws to lock the beacon in the mount after it 1/4 turns into the mount ring. I also lucked out and snagged a rebate in the weekly lottery. The test flight showed no errors. My test was approved and the check is in the mail.

In flight, I could not feel any difference in the controls in any phase of flight. I took off, I flew fast, slow, turned steep, descended and landed, and lived to tell the tale. The weight of the beacon is pretty close to the old nav light. The STC documents says that the difference is negligible. As far as balancing the rudder goes, the STC was for a 172. A lot of them have the nav beacon on the rudder. There is nothing in any of the docs that mentions balancing the rudder on a 172.

 

Regards

Mike

[carusoam]

Flutter is a laws of physics thing...

High speed and high altitude combine to make things worse...

What works for a Cessna is slow and low...

We train for emergency descents from high altitude... at high speeds... both vertical and horizontal burning up energy in the descent...

Check with your IA and mechanic to make sure your flight controls are balanced properly...

Once flutter starts, it may not stop...  changing speeds may even make it worse....

Mooney maintenance manuals are very specific about control balancing...

Using Cessna details doesn’t make much sense, other than a starting point...

hopefully somebody proves that rudder flutter is an OWT before an MSer proves the details....

Keep both eyes open... something is getting lost between the sales brochure and the installation details...

PP thoughts only, expect there is a resolution to this, with complete details... not a mechanic...

Best regards,

-a-

[HRM]

19 minutes ago, rangermb said:

I completed the installation and testing of my new tailBeacon today. It was pretty straightforward. Two wires for power, 2 screws for the mount and 2 tiny set screws to lock the beacon in the mount after it 1/4 turns into the mount ring. I also lucked out and snagged a rebate in the weekly lottery. The test flight showed no errors. My test was approved and the check is in the mail.

In flight, I could not feel any difference in the controls in any phase of flight. I took off, I flew fast, slow, turned steep, descended and landed, and lived to tell the tale. The weight of the beacon is pretty close to the old nav light. The STC documents says that the difference is negligible. As far as balancing the rudder goes, the STC was for a 172. A lot of them have the nav beacon on the rudder. There is nothing in any of the docs that mentions balancing the rudder on a 172.

 

Regards

Mike

I frankly (from an engineer's standpoint) cannot see why this would make any difference in Mooney performance and your flight test confirms that. Thanks for the data point!

I was more concerned about signal quality from the tail to the cockpit--apparently that is a non-issue.

[carusoam]

HRM,

which signal are you concerned with? The Uavionix’ device is picking up the transponder signal from the antenna...?

Both are external from the plane, not far from each other...

Or did you mean the controls from your smart phone to the Uavionix device?  which could be a greater challenge from inside the cockpit up front...

Best regards,

-a-

[HRM]

9 minutes ago, carusoam said:

HRM,

which signal are you concerned with? The Uavionix’ device is picking up the transponder signal from the antenna...?

Both are external from the plane, not far from each other...

Or did you mean the controls from your smart phone to the Uavionix device?  which could be a greater challenge from inside the cockpit up front...

Best regards,

-a-

Does this device not send a signal to your iPad/iPhone? I may have been confused about how it works.

Clearly, it should have no issue with the signal from the transponder.

[carusoam]

There are some settings that would be helpful from inside the cockpit... once set-up, they may not be needed again...

Based on old fuzzy memories...

Best regards,

-a-

[rangermb]

Maybe to clarify...

The beacon sniffs the transponder signal. It also has an internal gps and barometer. The initial setup is via WIFI and an app on your tablet or phone. The WIFI in designed to shut off after 5 minutes. During the active period you can activate an anonymous mode to hide your tailnumber. I ran the setup from the driver's seat. Once it's up and running there really isn't a need for monitoring the beacon. You just have to power it up on the ground and leave the nav lights until you are parked.

Mike

[Alan Fox]

8 hours ago, rangermb said:

I completed the installation and testing of my new tailBeacon today. It was pretty straightforward. Two wires for power, 2 screws for the mount and 2 tiny set screws to lock the beacon in the mount after it 1/4 turns into the mount ring. I also lucked out and snagged a rebate in the weekly lottery. The test flight showed no errors. My test was approved and the check is in the mail.

In flight, I could not feel any difference in the controls in any phase of flight. I took off, I flew fast, slow, turned steep, descended and landed, and lived to tell the tale. The weight of the beacon is pretty close to the old nav light. The STC documents says that the difference is negligible. As far as balancing the rudder goes, the STC was for a 172. A lot of them have the nav beacon on the rudder. There is nothing in any of the docs that mentions balancing the rudder on a 172.

 

Regards

Mike

Respectfully , the weight being pretty close , doesn't cut it , in any way shape or form ,  nor does lucking out in a flight test , In the service manuals , repainting a control surface REQUIRES rebalancing , An IA on my field , questioned the feds , after he refused to install a tailbeacon on a Mooney , and they were not pleased with the verbiage in the uAvionics installation manual...

[Alan Fox]

Liability doesn't mean you will lose in court , But you may have to fund a very expensive defense...

[Alan Fox]

5 hours ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

Yet they approved it.  That’s not very confidence inspiring.  

I don’t share Alan’s concerns about vendor liability for these installations personally, but I think he is absolutely correct that the installers need to insure that any flight controls that are affected still meet the service manual balancing requirements.  

It is STCd for 1 aircraft , A Cessna 172 , Just to be clear .. 

[Hank]

56 minutes ago, Alan Fox said:

Liability doesn't mean you will lose in court , But you may have to fund a very expensive defense...

Where I used to live, anyone could sue anyone else for any reason, for $35 filing fee. How you defend yourself is your choice. 

[DXB]

 The official company verbiage from their website (below)  shifts the entire onus to the installer to determine whether it is a minor alteration warranting a 337 filing.  Installing one is probably no big deal for the pre-'69 short rudder Bs/Cs/Ds/Es.  But for the rest, I don't see how any installer could simply assume it does not affect flutter margin, even if the rudder is rebalanced.  That is ultimately an empirical assessment for a given airframe, which I imagine the company had to do for the 172, an essential airframe for the STC from a business perspective. I suspect they recognized barriers to a blanket STC for 600-something aircraft like their wing tip version got precisely because of planes like Mooneys with rudder-mounted tail lights.  Rather than excluding such planes explicitly from the STC, they hoped to sell some for these planes too by putting installers in an uncomfortable spot. It seems reasonable for both installers and owners of non-172 aircraft with rudder-mounted tail lights to be wary.  

I don’t have a Cessna 172. How do I install tailBeacon?

The tailBeacon installation is considered a minor alteration and can be approved by the installer for most aircraft.  At this time a form 337 should be completed and submitted along with the proper logbook entries.   Please note, the installer must determine if the conditions are appropriate for installation on a specific aircraft.  Additional guidance for ADS-B installation, performance verification, logbook entries and 337 instructions have been provided in the FAA policy memo titled “Installation Approval for ADS-B OUT Systems”

[HRM]

Let's see...Whelen tail strobe, 4.8 oz. Uavionix Tail Beacon, 2.5 oz.

The tail beacon has a fin (I believe the antenna is in there).

I frankly think it is too little change to worry about, but the point about flutter cannot be ignored. I do not know how that is analyzed, probably need a DER to look at it.

If you feel a new vibration in the control yoke, probably should note the speed and then slow down 

[steingar]

How do you tell in flight if the damn thing is even on?  One thing I will never do is add drag to my Mooney.