goalstop Posted September 22, 2022 Report Share Posted September 22, 2022 (edited) I bought my E-model a year ago, and so far it's spent >60% of the year in the shop... some of it for good / normal stuff (Annual, a REALLY long panel overhaul, new interior), but since the panel overhaul have had several issues with the pitot / static system. (have had to replace the pitot/static line fittings twice, this time with metal fittings, due to faulty fittings that snapped) FINALLY I had the bird ready to go - static lines fully replaced, all the beautiful avionics in (G5's, 650+430, JPI), just to have my mechanic find that one of my static ports has a leak. Now, I'm looking at ANOTHER 15+ week lead time just to get a little tiny static button the size of a screw https://lasar.com/pitot-static-system/static-button-820057-003?rq=static Avenues I've tried: LASAR: Out of stock indefinitely STEC: 15+ week lead time (but who really knows) Scrapyard: most locations don't have it. Finally found one willing to pull it out of the fuselage. But the challenge with a used one is that these have "barbs" that lock the port in place, so it can't really be re-used (scrapyard sent the full assembly and had to cut it out of the old plane) Using a more standard non-Mooney part: Other static ports have a larger aperture / surface area, and mechanic says he'd need to drill through a rib to install, rendering the plane unairworthy I'm getting desperate at this point, and it's very disheartening to own a plane but fly less than when I was renting. Would really appreciate any advice you can give to help either think of alternatives, source a part, or legally fly without a replacement in the meantime (e.g., if it were plugged up, there's still a backup port - but apparently both are required equipment) Thank you all for your combined wisdom!! Edited September 22, 2022 by goalstop Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DXB Posted September 22, 2022 Report Share Posted September 22, 2022 @Alan Fox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeOH Posted September 23, 2022 Report Share Posted September 23, 2022 What part of the static port is actually leaking? Is there a crack? It seems too simple a part to develop a leak! Can it be repaired? Can you show a photo of the defect? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PT20J Posted September 23, 2022 Report Share Posted September 23, 2022 Agree with @MikeOH -- seems really unlikely that that part would leak. But, it looks like something a machine shop could easily make if you provide them the original part. Who knows, with current Mooney parts pricing, having one made might be the least expensive route . Skip 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carusoam Posted September 23, 2022 Report Share Posted September 23, 2022 Let’s put an eye on this…. Then put it in front of Alan… @Alan Fox It looks like heating the hole, while cooling the device, may be used for the install…. Just remember… the same effort needs to be done to remove the old one…. By the look of the device from the pic…. It is awfully simple… be sure to find the leak before preceding… hmmmmmm… find the install method… it isn’t likely to have the shiny stainless piece in direct contact with aluminum… we would all be complaining about dissimilar metal corrosion issues and see bubbling paint nearby… …and getting a sealant in between would be hampered with all the extra heating…. Do you have the alternate air source in your Mooney? Or does plan B include breaking glass? I would expect that there is a nut holding this in place… with a nice washer… We could always ask the good Doc what holds this all together… Searching on the key words static port provides a few answers… there isn’t much Mooney specific about static ports… except the one used, is the one it was certified with…. PP thoughts only, not a mechanic… Best regards, -a- 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carusoam Posted September 23, 2022 Report Share Posted September 23, 2022 Examples of other static ports… with a good view of the hardware required… And a statement about bonding in one… PP thoughts only, not a mechanic… If really stuck for ideas… find @M20Doc… (static port challenge) Best regards, -a- https://www.aircraftspruce.com/menus/in/staticports.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carusoam Posted September 23, 2022 Report Share Posted September 23, 2022 Is Joey Cole anywhere nearby? A person and a shop that has great pireps that may be worth consulting with… Best regards, -a- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 23, 2022 Report Share Posted September 23, 2022 $1 worth of aluminum and an hour with a lathe should build you a new one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricJ Posted September 23, 2022 Report Share Posted September 23, 2022 FWIW, imho, a static leak is about the least consequential problem you can have on one of these airplanes, especially at that particular piece. The guy that does my IFR/transponder check was also our department head at my A&P school and our DME. This spring when he came to recert my system we were talking about calibrating the G5 that I had put in, and I showed him the pitot/static system tester that I had bought and rehabbed with new instruments, etc., for that task. I showed him the various pieces I'd experimented with for connecting to the static ports, both with the usual recommended ways and with some medical blunt tips that work pretty well. The worry, though, is that whatever you are using isn't sufficiently attached to the static port and falls off in the middle of a static test, or just opens up a significant leak at its attachment point, either of which can be catastrophic and damage the air instruments. Since he does this all the time I was asking his input on less risky ways to attach to the static port and still get a good test. His advice on my airplane was to just disconnect the static line inside the tail at the static ports and connect the tester to the threaded fitting. Boom...no risk of instrument damage due to the tester falling off the side of the airplane or sagging enough to spring a leak. It doesn't test the port itself or lines past that connection, but...so...? Some of the local shops test Pipers (Cherokees, etc.) that have the integrated pitot/static mast by disconnecting the lines to the mast and connecting the tester directly to the lines, bypassing testing the mast itself. Apparently this sort of thing is not at all unusual among the practitioners. That said, if your IA or IFR test cert guy insists that that port piece has to be part of the test, I'd +1 that making one is probably the way to go. If you're not confident on making one yourself, you only need to find somebody who can and supervise their fabrication of the part. Do this in coordination with your A&P/IA as an Owner Produced Part and it is 100% legal. If the shop doing the avionics is a Repair Station, they may not be so keen on it, but you and your A&P installing the OPP part can be done separately from whatever they're doing (I hope). Anyway, you should be able to get there from here without waiting for the supply chain to come up with the part. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 23, 2022 Report Share Posted September 23, 2022 1 hour ago, EricJ said: FWIW, imho, a static leak is about the least consequential problem you can have on one of these airplanes, especially at that particular piece. The guy that does my IFR/transponder check was also our department head at my A&P school and our DME. This spring when he came to recert my system we were talking about calibrating the G5 that I had put in, and I showed him the pitot/static system tester that I had bought and rehabbed with new instruments, etc., for that task. I showed him the various pieces I'd experimented with for connecting to the static ports, both with the usual recommended ways and with some medical blunt tips that work pretty well. The worry, though, is that whatever you are using isn't sufficiently attached to the static port and falls off in the middle of a static test, or just opens up a significant leak at its attachment point, either of which can be catastrophic and damage the air instruments. Since he does this all the time I was asking his input on less risky ways to attach to the static port and still get a good test. His advice on my airplane was to just disconnect the static line inside the tail at the static ports and connect the tester to the threaded fitting. Boom...no risk of instrument damage due to the tester falling off the side of the airplane or sagging enough to spring a leak. It doesn't test the port itself or lines past that connection, but...so...? Some of the local shops test Pipers (Cherokees, etc.) that have the integrated pitot/static mast by disconnecting the lines to the mast and connecting the tester directly to the lines, bypassing testing the mast itself. Apparently this sort of thing is not at all unusual among the practitioners. That said, if your IA or IFR test cert guy insists that that port piece has to be part of the test, I'd +1 that making one is probably the way to go. If you're not confident on making one yourself, you only need to find somebody who can and supervise their fabrication of the part. Do this in coordination with your A&P/IA as an Owner Produced Part and it is 100% legal. If the shop doing the avionics is a Repair Station, they may not be so keen on it, but you and your A&P installing the OPP part can be done separately from whatever they're doing (I hope). Anyway, you should be able to get there from here without waiting for the supply chain to come up with the part. You could also install a “Tee” in a convenient location in a static line, then connect the test line to the “Tee” tape over the ports on the fuselage, do the test and cap the “Tee” when the test is completed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricJ Posted September 23, 2022 Report Share Posted September 23, 2022 40 minutes ago, M20Doc said: You could also install a “Tee” in a convenient location in a static line, then connect the test line to the “Tee” tape over the ports on the fuselage, do the test and cap the “Tee” when the test is completed. Yes, and that'd test the ports, too. It does add an additional potential leak spot that winds up being the untested component instead (the cap/plug), but that's still a small thing when it comes to static systems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
211º Posted September 24, 2022 Report Share Posted September 24, 2022 A very different thought - if you have a Britain altitude hold chamber in the tail of your E, isn’t there a line or something that needs disconnected or plugged when you do a static check? @takair, do you recall? If you don’t have the altitude hold, then never mind… but if you do, that could well be the source of your small leak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takair Posted September 24, 2022 Report Share Posted September 24, 2022 If it has a Brittain, the airspeed has a calibrated leak. That said, I can’t imagine a static port has over a 100fpm leak at 1000’ setting unless it is cracked. They do get leaks if the tube is not well attached. As I recall, mooney used safety wire on older ones. For the OP, what is the leak rate your mechanic is trying to fix and why does he think the port is bad? How is he sealing the system to test it. I used to do these tests and folks can get over zealous in trying to achieve a zero leak rate. It is not required. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalstop Posted October 11, 2022 Author Report Share Posted October 11, 2022 Hi everyone, THANK YOU for the advice Sorry for the delay here. Life got in the way. Answering your questions below : + I have sent EVERYTHING I could to my mechanic and he's said none of them will work. Scrapyard "unserviceable", the ones from Sporty's (sent 5 different ones) were not the right size for the hole, etc. + Said he's not allowed to machine a part himself + Agree this does not sound like a major issue / seems like a part that could easily be waived, but my mechanic is firm on it. Apparently required for airworthiness even though I have an alternate port + Tried Cole Aviation but haven't heard back Mechanic has been totally not communicating back / I'm calling the receptionist 3 times a day asking her to get him to call me and haven't heard back for 4 weeks other than some texts that these don't work Pics attached - I can't quite decipher what's wrong myself or why it can't be fixed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takair Posted October 11, 2022 Report Share Posted October 11, 2022 I can’t see a crack or anything in your picture. Clean with sandpaper/scotchbrite and add appropriate size hose and clamp with two loops of safety wire. Almost sure that’s how it came. The hose may get loose over time, but easy to get it to the leak rate of 100ft/min at 1000’. That is the goal for a Non-pressurized airplane. If pumped up to higher altitudes, that rate will appear large, but the rule is all you need to achieve. You can spend a lot of money getting an old airplane to zero leak rate and it won’t make any difference in operation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricJ Posted October 11, 2022 Report Share Posted October 11, 2022 40 minutes ago, goalstop said: + Said he's not allowed to machine a part himself He's right, *he* can't make it, but *you* can. This is the beauty of the FAA's path to Owner Produced Parts. It's a bit too involved to get into the details here but there are a lot of resources all over the web about how you, as the owner of the aircraft, can legally "make" the part. You can search on "FAA Owner Produced Part" and get a bunch of useful information. One way is to take it to somebody who can do it, have them make it, and you supervise (which can be just making sure it comes out right), and provide quality control. You don't have to physically make it yourself. An A&P will still be needed to install it. Your A&P still makes a determination of whether the part is suitable for use in the airplane, but this is a pretty simple part. However, if he's been uncooperative already, this may be a difficult step. This is where a separate A&P might be able to help to install the part and sign it off. Your A&P has, unfortunately, put you in a difficult position, but there are definitely ways out that should be practical. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.