uAvionix Tail Beacon Approved - $1950

[Hank]

11 minutes ago, DXB said:

 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”

So if it's a "minor altercation," while file a Form 337, "Major Repair & Alteration"?????

[DXB]

29 minutes ago, Hank said:

So if it's a "minor altercation," while file a Form 337, "Major Repair & Alteration"?????

Good point.  Another ambiguity in the company language -  trying to cover their butt I imagine without a cogent approach!

[Mooneymite]

From uAvionix technical folks in answer to a question about the Mooney:

 

uAvionix can not comment about anything related to the airframe configuration or certification or maintenance.  As per the STC installation documentation, the rudder balance must be addressed as per this statement; If installed on a moving control surface, specific attention must be paid to proper balance. Refer to the Manufacturer's Service Manual to determine if balancing is required and for balancing instructions.

 

Each manufacturer addresses control surface balance in the detailed aircraft maintenance manual and the mechanic performing the installation should be able to perform the required verifications and enter the data in the logbook.

[Jeev]

44 minutes ago, Mooneymite said:

From uAvionix technical folks in answer to a question about the Mooney:

 

uAvionix can not comment about anything related to the airframe configuration or certification or maintenance.  As per the STC installation documentation, the rudder balance must be addressed as per this statement; If installed on a moving control surface, specific attention must be paid to proper balance. Refer to the Manufacturer's Service Manual to determine if balancing is required and for balancing instructions.

 

Each manufacturer addresses control surface balance in the detailed aircraft maintenance manual and the mechanic performing the installation should be able to perform the required verifications and enter the data in the logbook.

Thanks for posting, I just came into Mooneyspace to post the same thing ;-).  Please talk to your IA before you make a purchase.

 

[bonal]

Nice thing that the early models have the position tail light on the empennage not the movable rudder 

[HRM]

15 hours ago, bonal said:

Nice thing that the early models have the position tail light on the empennage not the movable rudder 

Good point. That part moves very little and only vertically on those Mooneys. I am still a bit concerned about the flutter. The Skybeacon has that fin.

[Alan Fox]

17 minutes ago, HRM said:

Good point. That part moves very little and only vertically on those Mooneys. I am still a bit concerned about the flutter. The Skybeacon has that fin.

I don't know if the fin is a flutter issue , but I am sure balance is , 

[Alan Fox]

21 hours ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

Yes, and to be equally clear, the tail nav light on the 172 is mounted on the rudder.  

And to be equally clear , if you put the beacon on a 172 , and don't balance the rudder , you can create a situation of flutter , and you have not maintained the aircraft to the manufacturers maintenance manuals …  The rudder has to be rebalanced regardless of STC or not..

[HRM]

2 hours ago, Alan Fox said:

I don't know if the fin is a flutter issue , but I am sure balance is , 

I'm the opposite, the sky beacon is lighter than the current unit, so you could always add weight to balance it out (ignoring geometry, of course).

Flutter is an undesirable resonance that occurs as air passes over parts, the ultimate example of this is a flag fluttering in the wind. Here we have a little flag sticking out into the airflow around the tail. It is pretty stiff looking, but resonance is a peculiar thing. Even if it flutters a little bit; i.e.,unnoticeable from the cockpit, it could cause vibration wear over time, possibly snap off in flight  and there's your balance issue.

I am speaking solely of the earlier models where the beacon is in the stinger section of the tail. In the rudder itself, different animal all together.

[rangermb]

In stepping carefully back into this...

The beacon weighs 3.0 ounces. The Grimes light it replaced weighs 3.0 ounces. One variable not considered is the weight/location of the wire connectors used for the power. How does all this factor in?

[HRM]

2 hours ago, rangermb said:

In stepping carefully back into this...

The beacon weighs 3.0 ounces. The Grimes light it replaced weighs 3.0 ounces. One variable not considered is the weight/location of the wire connectors used for the power. How does all this factor in?

I was looking at the Whelen unit, it is substantially heavier than the SkyBeacon. I doubt the wiring has much impact, my understanding is that it was just 'plug 'n play'.

I thought the SkyBeacon was 2.5 oz.

[Alan Fox]

10 hours ago, HRM said:

I was looking at the Whelen unit, it is substantially heavier than the SkyBeacon. I doubt the wiring has much impact, my understanding is that it was just 'plug 'n play'.

I thought the SkyBeacon was 2.5 oz.

 

[Alan Fox]

https://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/4147179/technical_documents/service_bulletins/SBM20-335C.pdf

[Alan Fox]

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAD.nsf/AOCADSearch/F9CE0A6570EC427186256A64004F5BA6?OpenDocument

[HRM]

9 minutes ago, Alan Fox said:

 

 

9 minutes ago, Alan Fox said:

https://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/4147179/technical_documents/service_bulletins/SBM20-335C.pdf

 

8 minutes ago, Alan Fox said:

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAD.nsf/AOCADSearch/F9CE0A6570EC427186256A64004F5BA6?OpenDocument

That all looks to be an issue for the later models.

[Mooneymite]

Does anyone know what is involved in balancing the rudder after the Tail Beacon is installed?

Does this require an A&P, an IA, a DER?  Does it require any special equipment?

I know that paint shops supposedly do this after repainting an aircraft, but the change is very slight.

[HRM]

42 minutes ago, Mooneymite said:

Does anyone know what is involved in balancing the rudder after the Tail Beacon is installed?

Does this require an A&P, an IA, a DER?  Does it require any special equipment?

Alan posted an SB link. Note, this does not apply to early Mooneys--like yours (but check the S/N anyway).

A&P to do the work, I imagine an IA to 'Return to Service'.

[Mooneymite]

1 hour ago, HRM said:

Alan posted an SB link. Note, this does not apply to early Mooneys--like yours (but check the S/N anyway).

A&P to do the work, I imagine an IA to 'Return to Service'.

The SBs that Alan posted do not apply to my Mooney, but I'm sure there are instructions for balancing the rudder on a C model with the long rudder.  Does anyone have a lnk to the applicable section for checking the balance and the allowable limits on the older Mooneys?

Even though there may be little or no balance change, this whole issue is pushing me back toward the wing mounted ADS-B beacon....in this case, procrastination may have worked in my favor.  

Edited October 4, 2019 by Mooneymite

[Alan Fox]

19 hours ago, HRM said:

I was looking at the Whelen unit, it is substantially heavier than the SkyBeacon. I doubt the wiring has much impact, my understanding is that it was just 'plug 'n play'.

I thought the SkyBeacon was 2.5 oz.

Rebalancing a control surface , Does not require an IA , Filing a 337 , requires an IA , a 337 must be filed when an STC is involved ,  Installing as a minor modification does not require a 337 , or an IA .…..    I think the wing mounted beacon is the way to go , if you don't have sculpted tips....

[HRM]

25 minutes ago, Alan Fox said:

I think the wing mounted beacon is the way to go , if you don't have sculpted tips....

I basically agree with the wingtip unit, but I think the tail unit is cleaner (only after all is said and done!).

With the tail, the discussion got muddled and it looks like there are two groups, full length rudder and short rudder. At the end of the day, i would not even go near this without a seasoned Mooney-savvy IA. Two words you do not want to come up: unbalanced and flutter.

[Hank]

So those of us whose Vintage Mooneys have full-length rudders and wingtips just don't need no steenkin' ADS-bleeping-B!! Unless like Gus, you keep your plane inside the veil, that sacred airspace that ATL Approach protects against all itinerant Vintage Mooneys whose destination isn't inside it . . . . . Other veil space has proven much friendlier, but I don't pass them often; I have the pleasure of staying out of ATL far too frequently . . . .

[HRM]

Here you go...rudder not involved. Stinger, yes. Not a balance issue, flutter TBD. In actuality, tail is not that big.

[carusoam]

Harley,

That there is the short rudder...

The tail cone shown is not quite the stinger... the stinger was a few planes in the Butler era... the stinger is an extended version of the tail cone... they also got the buttonhook at the top of the tail...

So the tail cone is fixed... makes a great place for the tail beacon...

The flutter issue is one part weight and balance of the moving flight control surface... but changing the geometry (physical shape) of the flight surface opens a whole other can of worms... probably a small can... how much of a difference is the tail beacon..?

Better to let somebody else be the test pilot and record everything being OK before mounting something to the rudder...

The sensitivity of WnB is documented regarding adding a coat of paint.  In this case it is adding a 3D light unit with an antenna...

 

The bummer from a financial standpoint... is the plane with the long rudder and formed wing tips...

There is always the Garmin unit for about 2X the price + 2X the installation...

PP thoughts only, not a mechanic...

Best regards,

-a-

[HRM]

1 hour ago, carusoam said:

The tail cone shown is not quite the stinger... the stinger was a few planes in the Butler era... the stinger is an extended version of the tail cone... they also got the buttonhook at the top of the tail...

Sorry Tony, that is the stinger. I did the annual on that plane and that is what it is called in the manuals.

Many errors of a truth consist in the application of the wrong names of things--Goethe.

No matter, we know what we are talking about with respect to the empennage geometry here.

Frankly, and I am an engineer, I don't think the SkyBeacon is an issue on this type of tail. That said, i am not an A&P/IA, a DER, or even an attorney...so YMMV 

[HRM]

1 hour ago, HRM said:

In actuality, tail is not that big.

Sh*t, I meant to say 'fin is not that big.' On the SkyBeacon that is. Goethe was right.