New Ovation Interior—DIY

[MikeOH]

@GeeBee

You and your anal IA need to just let this one go.  As much as you want it, you are NOT always right

[EricJ]

And not all test sets, especially some of the ones used by the mobile guys, will provide a printout of the corrections.  So the guys that have one with a printer or other recording method are motivated to say you need it.   To me it's a bit akin to the controversies around using travel boards for rigging.    The guys that have boards seem far more likely to insist that you have to have them.

[MikeOH]

Now, back to our original topic...

What's the story with a CAR3 certified aircraft (which I thought all Mooney TCDS were under?) and burn certifications?  I was under the quite possibly mistaken impression that materials do NOT need burn certs if there is a "no smoking" placard in the cabin.

Any truth to any of that?

[GeeBee]

10 hours ago, PT20J said:

Aw come on, you just want to be right.   A couple of us pointed out that it's not required by FAR. But, there is certainly no harm in having it. The compression numbers might be useful in establishing trends. But, can you honestly say that you gain any meaningful information from the card? Do you correct your altimeter in flight like you do heading with your compass card, or do you just fatten your logbook with it and never look at it again? Your original post said it is required to be in the logbook and I believe that we have established that it is not. The shop will generate it, so there is no reason not to get a copy and put it wherever you want, but it does not need to be stapled in the logbook.

I was just reporting what the guy said to me, not trying to be right, but like Spock, being logical. See my pointy ears?

[skykrawler]

Conceptually, the altitude correction chart is supposed to go in the operation manual so you can use it like a compass card.   Similar to the IAS to CAS correction.

Doesn't everybody reference the CAS conversion when figuring their true airspeed?  Not.

 

[GeeBee]

6 hours ago, MikeOH said:

Now, back to our original topic...

What's the story with a CAR3 certified aircraft (which I thought all Mooney TCDS were under?) and burn certifications?  I was under the quite possibly mistaken impression that materials do NOT need burn certs if there is a "no smoking" placard in the cabin.

Any truth to any of that?

Some. Depends on the model. Look at the TCDS under "Certification Basis" and you note all models up to the G are pure CAR 3, in which burn certs are not required. Starting with the J model there is some Part 23 basis to the TCDS which activates burn certification requirements. The OP is an R model. They also have to comply with Part 36 starting with the J model.

"\

Model M20R CAR 3 effective November 1, 1949, as amended to May 18, 1954, paragraph 3.74 as amended to August 25, 1955; paragraphs 3.109, 3.112, 3.115, 3.118, 3.120, and 34.441 of CAR 3 effective May 15, 1956; as amended to October 1, 1959.
In lieu of corresponding CAR 3 paragraphs, where applicable - FAR 23, effective February 1, 1965; paragraph 23.29 as amended to March 1, 1978, paragraph 23.33, as amended to September 14, 1969; paragraphs 23.901 through 23.953, 23.955 through 23.963, 23.967 through 23.1063, as amended to September 14, 1969; paragraphs 23.1091 through 23.1105, as amended to February 1, 1977; paragraphs 23.1121 through 23.1193, 23.1351 through 23.1399 as amended to September 14, 1969, paragraphs 23.1401 as amended to August 11, 1971; paragraphs 23.1441 through 23.1449 as amended to June 17, 1970, paragraph 23.1521 as amended to December 1, 1978, paragraph 23.1525; paragraph 23.1527, as amended to September 14, 1969; paragraphs 23.1545, 23.1549, 23.1553 as amended to December 1, 1978, paragraph 23.1557, as amended to December 20, 1973; paragraph 23.1559 as amended to March 1, 1978; paragraph 23.1563 as amended to September 14, 1969; paragraph 23.1583 as amended to December 1, 1978, FAR 36 effective September 20, 1976, as amended to December 22, 1988.

[Little Dipper]

Good luck on your interior refurbishment.    I have a 95 Ovation and after 3,000 hours it was time.   I had mine refurbed last year.    You clearly possess a skill and have patience and the time that I do not.     

[Andy95W]

8 hours ago, MikeOH said:

Now, back to our original topic...

What's the story with a CAR3 certified aircraft (which I thought all Mooney TCDS were under?) and burn certifications?  I was under the quite possibly mistaken impression that materials do NOT need burn certs if there is a "no smoking" placard in the cabin.

Any truth to any of that?

@MikeOH- that is correct, at least for our CAR3 airplanes.  I’m not familiar with everything GeeBee mentioned above.

The actual CAR3 reg says that interior materials must be flash resistant in areas where smoking is not permitted, and flame resistant where adequate ash trays are provided.  The only requirement for flash or flame resistance is that the materials conform to a nationally recognized standard.

Cliffy and I posted data and references about 8-10 years ago, but all that was probably lost in the great MooneySpace knowledge purge.

[EricJ]

8 hours ago, MikeOH said:

Now, back to our original topic...

What's the story with a CAR3 certified aircraft (which I thought all Mooney TCDS were under?) and burn certifications?  I was under the quite possibly mistaken impression that materials do NOT need burn certs if there is a "no smoking" placard in the cabin.

Any truth to any of that?

Yes, AC 43-13 9.61(b), says that for CAR3 airplanes materials should be "flame resistant" where smoking is permitted, and all other areas should be placarded against smoking.    Even "flame resistant" is not a very high bar, as most modern interior materials are made to meet basic specs.   It is still a requirement that interior materials be "flash resistant", though, which means it doesn't burn violently when ignited.

You can test a material yourself using the methods described in Part 23 Appendix F, and that is an acceptable test procedure for showing compliance to the indicated Part 23 requirements, which are presumably higher than the CAR 3 requirements.   I don't know of a reg off the top of my head that requires burn certs for Part 91 airplanes.

And, yes, all Mooneys are certificated under CAR3, but some models have some dependencies on Part 23 as well, and the "Certification Basis" section of each model entry in the TCDS says which specific parts of Part 23 apply.   A brief look doesn't seem to include the interior material burn requirements (23.853 and 23.859) except the M20L model mentions 23.853(d), which says, (d) Each receptacle for towels, paper, or waste must be at least fire-resistant and must have means for containing possible fires;

[Fly Boomer]

3 minutes ago, EricJ said:

 A brief look doesn't seem to include the interior material burn requirements (23.853 and 23.859) except the M20L model mentions 23.853(d), which says, (d) Each receptacle for towels, paper, or waste must be at least fire-resistant and must have means for containing possible fires;

Hmmm.  The lav in mine is compliant because I don't provide a receptacle for towels, paper, or waste.

[LANCECASPER]

12 minutes ago, EricJ said:

 Each receptacle for towels, paper, or waste must be at least fire-resistant and must have means for containing possible fires;

I need to check and see if my Gatorade bottle is fire-resistant.

[N201MKTurbo]

There is no requirements to put anything in the logbooks. The regs say they have to be in the maintenance records. That could be a cardboard box full of papers, or neatly filed in binders. Those binders are as much the maintenance records as the log books. 

How many keep your A/D compliance and recurring A/D compliance times in a separate spreadsheet? That spreadsheet is as legitimate a maintenance record as the log book.

FWIW, I was told by an FAA maintenance inspector that there is no requirement to keep any maintenance records except necessary to show compliance with A/Ds and ICAs and other required inspections. You can legally throw away everything before the last inspection. An Annual inspection is supposed to indicate that everything done up until the inspection is correct, so nothing before it matters. If you change the oil and log it, you can legally discard the record of every previous oil change.

Good luck selling your plane with records like that. Like many things in aviation, it isn't the regulations as much as tradition.

Here is the regulation. 

§ 91.417 Maintenance records.

(a) Except for work performed in accordance with §§ 91.411 and 91.413, each registered owner or operator shall keep the following records for the periods specified in paragraph (b) of this section:

(1) Records of the maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alteration and records of the 100-hour, annual, progressive, and other required or approved inspections, as appropriate, for each aircraft (including the airframe) and each engine, propeller, rotor, and appliance of an aircraft. The records must include—

(i) A description (or reference to data acceptable to the Administrator) of the work performed; and

(ii) The date of completion of the work performed; and

(iii) The signature, and certificate number of the person approving the aircraft for return to service.

(2) Records containing the following information:

(i) The total time in service of the airframe, each engine, each propeller, and each rotor.

(ii) The current status of life-limited parts of each airframe, engine, propeller, rotor, and appliance.

(iii) The time since last overhaul of all items installed on the aircraft which are required to be overhauled on a specified time basis.

(iv) The current inspection status of the aircraft, including the time since the last inspection required by the inspection program under which the aircraft and its appliances are maintained.

(v) The current status of applicable airworthiness directives (AD) and safety directives including, for each, the method of compliance, the AD or safety directive number and revision date. If the AD or safety directive involves recurring action, the time and date when the next action is required.

(vi) Copies of the forms prescribed by § 43.9(d) of this chapter for each major alteration to the airframe and currently installed engines, rotors, propellers, and appliances.

(b) The owner or operator shall retain the following records for the periods prescribed:

(1) The records specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section shall be retained until the work is repeated or superseded by other work or for 1 year after the work is performed.

(2) The records specified in paragraph (a)(2) of this section shall be retained and transferred with the aircraft at the time the aircraft is sold.

(3) A list of defects furnished to a registered owner or operator under § 43.11 of this chapter shall be retained until the defects are repaired and the aircraft is approved for return to service.

(c) The owner or operator shall make all maintenance records required to be kept by this section available for inspection by the Administrator or any authorized representative of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). In addition, the owner or operator shall present Form 337 described in paragraph (d) of this section for inspection upon request of any law enforcement officer.

(d) When a fuel tank is installed within the passenger compartment or a baggage compartment pursuant to part 43 of this chapter, a copy of FAA Form 337 shall be kept on board the modified aircraft by the owner or operator.

[EricJ]

Here's a pretty good article that goes into a fair amount of detail regarding interior material burn requirements for a light aircraft certificated under Part 23.    There's a nice FAA letter linked in the article that is also quite good.   Note that the FAA letter predates, and cites, some relevant changes in AC 43.13.  

https://www.avweb.com/features_old/interiors-legalities-and-part-91-aircraft/

[GeeBee]

1 hour ago, EricJ said:

Here's a pretty good article that goes into a fair amount of detail regarding interior material burn requirements for a light aircraft certificated under Part 23.    There's a nice FAA letter linked in the article that is also quite good.   Note that the FAA letter predates, and cites, some relevant changes in AC 43.13.  

https://www.avweb.com/features_old/interiors-legalities-and-part-91-aircraft/

I think I posted that earlier.

[PT20J]

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 302 (FMVSS 302) is the flammability standard for auto upholstery. I wonder how it compares to the FAA requirements? Maybe standard auto materials meet or exceed the FAA requirements in which case it may not be difficult at all to source acceptable materials.

[Yetti]

On 1/5/2024 at 9:55 AM, milotron said:

What is the preferred material for replacing the carpet-covered sidewall panels? I think the originals are cardboard or fibreboard. Is there a modern material with burn certifications that is better or recommended?

I used sheet aluminum covered with cow hides.   The pattern for the alum was the cardboard stuff covered in moss Green carpet.   I over cut the alum by an inch and then bent the edge over.  This gave them some stiffness.   Used contact cement to glue the leather down to.   https://leatherhidestore.com/

The Mooney is Certed under CAR3.   The burn test is a AC (not regulatory).  I did my own burn test following the AC.  used the same piece of leather for all three tests and it did not burn through.  You are supposed to use a new piece for each test. There are several weights of leather.

 

[Yetti]

1 hour ago, PT20J said:

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 302 (FMVSS 302) is the flammability standard for auto upholstery. I wonder how it compares to the FAA requirements? Maybe standard auto materials meet or exceed the FAA requirements in which case it may not be difficult at all to source acceptable materials.

And the FAA and DOT are under the same US government department.   But can I use my FAA medical for a DOT medical for a CDL.  NO. 

[EricJ]

1 hour ago, PT20J said:

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 302 (FMVSS 302) is the flammability standard for auto upholstery. I wonder how it compares to the FAA requirements? Maybe standard auto materials meet or exceed the FAA requirements in which case it may not be difficult at all to source acceptable materials.

FMVSS is a "national standard", so I think it meets the guidance of AC 43.13-1 9.61(a)1-2.  

[DCarlton]

3 hours ago, EricJ said:

Here's a pretty good article that goes into a fair amount of detail regarding interior material burn requirements for a light aircraft certificated under Part 23.    There's a nice FAA letter linked in the article that is also quite good.   Note that the FAA letter predates, and cites, some relevant changes in AC 43.13.  

https://www.avweb.com/features_old/interiors-legalities-and-part-91-aircraft/

I think I'm going to need to buy a flame resistant flight suit...  ;>

[GeeBee]

The fact is most catalogs contain material that meets FAA burn test. It is indeed rare to find vehicle material that does not, the exception being some of the stuff used to replicate 50's era factory original. Unless you are trying to make your airplane look like a 54 Oldsmobile, just ask for the burn certs with your material order. It is really that simple and eliminates all questions unless you feel like being difficult to the people you are trying to sell your airplane to, in which case foolish comes to mind.

[PT20J]

20 minutes ago, DCarlton said:

I think I'm going to need to buy a flame resistant flight suit...  ;>

Lots of them on eBay 

[MikeOH]

7 hours ago, skykrawler said:

Conceptually, the altitude correction chart is supposed to go in the operation manual so you can use it like a compass card.   Similar to the IAS to CAS correction.

Doesn't everybody reference the CAS conversion when figuring their true airspeed?  Not.

 

@skykrawler

Ok, I'm familiar with the requirement for a compass correction card and the required POH table for IAS to CAS, but have NEVER heard of any requirement for application of "altitude correction" per the results of the latest altimeter accuracy certification testing.  I was under the impression that the required test was made to CONFIRM the altimeter still meets its accuracy limits; nothing more.

Do you have a cite to a regulation, or even an AC, that technically requires pilots to apply the altimeter measured errors when in flight (i.e. your assertion that it "is supposed to go in the operation manual"?

[GeeBee]

59 minutes ago, MikeOH said:

@skykrawler

Ok, I'm familiar with the requirement for a compass correction card and the required POH table for IAS to CAS, but have NEVER heard of any requirement for application of "altitude correction" per the results of the latest altimeter accuracy certification testing.  I was under the impression that the required test was made to CONFIRM the altimeter still meets its accuracy limits; nothing more.

Do you have a cite to a regulation, or even an AC, that technically requires pilots to apply the altimeter measured errors when in flight (i.e. your assertion that it "is supposed to go in the operation manual"?

You don't have to apply a correction to a properly installed and certified altimeter system except temp correction in extremely cold conditions. However the errors can add up, and basically there is about (but not always) a 75' "fudge factor" in minimums. Think about it. Without all these errors you could go down to 125' HAT!

https://www.aviationsafetymagazine.com/features/your-altimeter-lies/

https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aip_html/part2_enr_section_1.8.html

[William Munney]

8 hours ago, Little Dipper said:

Good luck on your interior refurbishment.    I have a 95 Ovation and after 3,000 hours it was time.   I had mine refurbed last year.    You clearly possess a skill and have patience and the time that I do not.     

Thank you.  My preference was to drop it somewhere and pick it up completed. I would say I was forced into it by some of the interior refurbishment companies current prices and/ or requiring me to disassemble and reassemble the interior or pay someone to do it.  I also had the fuel leak problem to take care of so I would say a few things came together to push me down the DIY path.

Patience is definitely required.  And lots of pictures, notes and labeled baggies too.  Otherwise, it’s easier than I thought.  So far.  The front seats are 4 bolts.  The rear ones pull out.  The carpet is tear out.  The lower carpet side panels have a lot of small screws.  The ultra-leather side panels only have a few screws but electronics at each seat position you have to work around.  The center console has 4 tiny screws.  I’ll cover that in ultraleather or spray paint it.  (It’s painted plastic now)  The seat frames get repainted as well.

It’s all at the interior shop now.  Time estimate is 6-7 weeks but only because they can’t get to it for 4 weeks.  I’m confident in their abilities judging by the cars they had in there.  Hot rods, classics, collectors etc.

Also,  I need probably a full day scraping glue and vacuuming and replacing insulation and sound proofing.  Not looking forward to that but it’s one time and done.

It’s not done yet so I don’t want to get overconfident.  Ha ha  But, so far……so good.

 

 

 

 

[William Munney]

All.  Do we have a consensus on burn certification requirements?

I know ultra leather is certified.  My understanding for the seat foam, and leather and carpet is that it has to have the burn testing results from the manufacturers…….not that has to meet a particular standard other than being flash and burn resistant..  Is this correct?

And, that these results should be kept with the aircraft maintenance records.

My understanding is that any material can be lab tested for these as well?

I don’t want to spend time and money building a flying tinderbox, violate a regulation, or affect the eventual resale of the airplane.

Thanks again.

Edited January 8 by William Munney