EarthX Inc Posted January 7 Report Posted January 7 EarthX Lithium batteries received FAA STC approvals for 150+ 12V Aircraft! The following 12V models were approved: Alon A-2, A-2A Bellanca 14-19, 14-19-2, 14-19-3, 14-19-3A, 17-30, 17-31, 17-31TC, 17-30A, 17-31A, 17-31ATC Cessna 150D, 150E, 150F, 150G, 150H, 150J, 150K, A150K, 150L, A150L, 150M, A150M, 170, 170A, 170B, 190, (LC-126A, B, C) 195, 195A, 195B, 206, U206, P206, U206A, P206A, TU206A, TU206B, TP206A, TP206B, U206B, P206C, P206D, TP206C, TP206D, TP206E, U-206C, U206D, U206E, U206F, TU206C, TU206D, TU206E, TU206F, U206G, TU206G, 210, 210A, 210B, 210C, 210D, 210-5 (205), 210-5A (205A), 210E, 210F, T210F, 210G, T210G, T210H, 210H, 210J, T210J, 210K, T210K Ercoupe 415-C, 415-CD, 415-D, E, G Extra Flugzeugproduktions EA 300, EA 300/S, EA 300/L, EA 300/200, EA 300/LC Extra Aerobatic EXTRA NG Forney F-1, F-1A Gamebird GB1 Maule Bee Dee M-4, M-4, M-4C, M-4S, M-4T, M-4-180C, M-4-180S, M-4-180T, M-4-210, M-4-210C, M-4-210S, M-4-210T, M-4-220, M-4-220C, M-4-220S, M-4-220T, M-5-180C, M-5-200, M-5-210C, M-5-210TC, M-5-220C, M-5-235C, M-6-180, M-6-235, M-7-235, MX-7-235, MX-7-180, MXT-7-180, M-8-235, MX-7-160, MXT-7-160, MX-7-180A, MXT-7-180A, MX-7-180B, M-7-235B, M-7-235A, M-7-235C, MX-7-180C, M-7-260, M-7-260C, MX-7-160C, MX-7-180AC, M-4-180V, M-9-235 Mooney M10 Piper J3C-40, J3C-50, J3C-50S, J3C-65, J3C-65S, PA-11, PA-11S, PA-16, PA-16S Stinson 108, 108-1, 108-2, 108-3, 108-5 Taylorcraft 15A, 19, 20, F19, F21, F21A, F21B, F22, F22A, F22B, F22C
exM20K Posted January 7 Report Posted January 7 on their website: E-K models. Eagerly awaiting the Feds to approve the STC for 24V Mooneys. https://earthxbatteries.com/list-of-stcs/
EarthX Inc Posted January 7 Author Report Posted January 7 Hello! The M20E-K 12V are already approved! The M20, M20A, M20B, M20C, M20D, M20E, M20G 12V aircraft are in progress and we hope to get those STC's this year! And the 24V M20J, M20K, M20L, M20M, M20R, M20S, M20TN, M20U, M20V are in progress as well. To see all approved and pending STC's, you can go to https://earthxbatteries.com/list-of-stcs/ 1
KSMooniac Posted January 7 Report Posted January 7 I'm a big fan of reducing weight and increasing useful load/utility, but most Mooney owners with batteries behind the cabin should run W&B calcs and decide if this is a good upgrade or not. In my case with a J, it would run the CG too far forward for me. I wish that were not the case! 1
Hank Posted January 7 Report Posted January 7 I'll see what happens to CG with battery on the firewall, it should offset some of my 3-blade prop. Then again, need to review the performance specs--how long will it run my plane when the alternator craps out? And the big bugaboo, price. Concorde has gone up significantly the last few years, but what about a 12V EarthX?
EarthX Inc Posted January 7 Author Report Posted January 7 2 hours ago, KSMooniac said: I'm a big fan of reducing weight and increasing useful load/utility, but most Mooney owners with batteries behind the cabin should run W&B calcs and decide if this is a good upgrade or not. In my case with a J, it would run the CG too far forward for me. I wish that were not the case! Hi Scott, for reference with the M20K, where the battery is the same location as the M20J, the CG moved .38" forward. Moving the pilots seat forward or back will have a bigger impact on the CG. But this can change depending on what other STC's have been applied to the plane over the years too. Just a point of reference for you. 1
EarthX Inc Posted January 7 Author Report Posted January 7 2 hours ago, Hank said: I'll see what happens to CG with battery on the firewall, it should offset some of my 3-blade prop. Then again, need to review the performance specs--how long will it run my plane when the alternator craps out? And the big bugaboo, price. Concorde has gone up significantly the last few years, but what about a 12V EarthX? Hi Hank, we do not have the STC yet for the M20C but when we do, the EarthX battery will be the same model as the other 12V STC's, the ETX900-TSO. Over the decades, there are a few lead acid choices you could have used in your plane but the most common is the Concorde RG-35. If that is what you have, the weight is 29.5 pounds, 390 CCA's and 29 Ah and on Aircraft Spruce today, the price is $487. The ETX900-TSO is 5.4 pounds (24 pound weight savings), the same CCA's of 390, and 15.6Ah (13.4Ah less). So in the event of an alternator failure, you do have less Ah. The EarthX battery will give you an LED flashing alert on your panel when you have used up 70% of the energy is you have not already landed at this point. The price is $699. The first time you install the battery with the STC there is a kit of all items needed to install it and this cost is $295. We provide the STC paperwork free of charge. Hope that helps answer your questions. 2
MikeOH Posted January 7 Report Posted January 7 Sorry, heretic here. I'm just not seeing the cost benefit of paying more for less capacity just to save 27ish pounds. Concorde RG35-AXC is 33 A-hr vs 15.6 A-hr for the EarthX, Peak power (IPP) 1200 Amp vs. 800 Amp, cold 800 Amp vs. 390 Amp
EarthX Inc Posted January 7 Author Report Posted January 7 16 minutes ago, MikeOH said: Sorry, heretic here. I'm just not seeing the cost benefit of paying more for less capacity just to save 27ish pounds. Concorde RG35-AXC is 33 A-hr vs 15.6 A-hr for the EarthX, Peak power (IPP) 1200 Amp vs. 800 Amp, cold 800 Amp vs. 390 Amp And that’s the advantage of having options. According to Concorde’s specifications, the RG‑35AXC offers 33 Ah capacity, weighs 32 lbs, and delivers 440 CCA, with a current price of $520 at Aircraft Spruce. By comparison, the EarthX ETX900‑TSO provides 15.6 Ah, weighs only 5.4 lbs, and delivers 390 CCA, with a listed price of $699. Both batteries meet the FAA STC requirements and have been tested to ensure compliance with the performance and equipment standards for Mooney M20 12V aircraft. If your priority is maximum capacity and weight is not a concern, the Concorde battery remains an excellent choice. For those seeking a significant weight reduction—nearly 27 lbs lighter, the EarthX STC offers a compelling alternative. That’s the beauty of choice: pilots can select the solution that best fits their mission and preferences. 4
exM20K Posted January 7 Report Posted January 7 30 minutes ago, MikeOH said: Sorry, heretic here. I'm just not seeing the cost benefit of paying more for less capacity just to save 27ish pounds. Concorde RG35-AXC is 33 A-hr vs 15.6 A-hr for the EarthX, Peak power (IPP) 1200 Amp vs. 800 Amp, cold 800 Amp vs. 390 Amp x2 for the long body planes. would need to check W&B as the 2 batteries are back there for a reason. -dan
DXB Posted January 7 Report Posted January 7 @EarthX Inc It's good to see this technology advancing for our 12V system planes. I will consider it for my M20C when my currrent Concorde 35AXC warrants raplacement. However, the 15 amp-hr capacity of your battery vs. the 33 amp-hrs of my current battery still leaves me a bit wary. When the charging system fails on our planes (a common event), high battery capacity becomes a critical safety feature for us. 3
Hank Posted January 7 Report Posted January 7 1 hour ago, EarthX Inc said: Hi Hank, we do not have the STC yet for the M20C but when we do, the EarthX battery will be the same model as the other 12V STC's, the ETX900-TSO. Over the decades, there are a few lead acid choices you could have used in your plane but the most common is the Concorde RG-35. If that is what you have, the weight is 29.5 pounds, 390 CCA's and 29 Ah and on Aircraft Spruce today, the price is $487. The ETX900-TSO is 5.4 pounds (24 pound weight savings), the same CCA's of 390, and 15.6Ah (13.4Ah less). So in the event of an alternator failure, you do have less Ah. The EarthX battery will give you an LED flashing alert on your panel when you have used up 70% of the energy is you have not already landed at this point. The price is $699. The first time you install the battery with the STC there is a kit of all items needed to install it and this cost is $295. We provide the STC paperwork free of charge. Hope that helps answer your questions. Like many, I use the RG-35-AXC, a little heavier with more capacity. Do you have one that compares favorably? I should have three more years' life in my Concorde, so your not being approved yet isn't a problem. EDIT--just saw your follow up post. I'm wary of halving capacity, I've had two (2) electrical failures in the air.
EarthX Inc Posted January 7 Author Report Posted January 7 2 minutes ago, DXB said: @EarthX Inc It's good to see this technology advancing for our 12V system planes. I will consider it for my M20C when my currrent Concorde 35AXC warrants raplacement. However, the 15 amp-hr capacity of your battery vs. the 33 amp-hrs of my current battery still leaves me a bit wary. When the charging system fails on our planes (a common event), high battery capacity becomes a critical safety feature for us. We could not receive an STC without all critical safety considerations and requirements met. In the event of an alternator failure/power loss (which if this is a common event as you suggest, this should be a serious topic for the manufacturer of the alternator) the battery must have enough capacity to power the essential loads to continue safe flight so you can land as soon as practical. The minimum required time is 30 minutes. As a pilot, it is very important for you to know what your amp draw is in this situation so you can plan accordingly, regardless of what chemistry battery you use. And the capacity of your battery will decrease with time based on several factors, but environment is a big one (the hotter it is, the larger decrease of capacity with time). Example, if your essential load is 10 amps, with the EarthX battery you would have 93.6 minutes of operation to land. If your amp draw is 20 amps, you have almost 47 minutes to land. (It should be noted that the lead acid batteries with the high capacity is so they can meet the CRANKING requirement to start your engine). But all that being said, if you want more time to land in the event of a power loss failure in flight, then an EarthX battery may not be a good choice for you. With double capacity, you double your time to land. 1
Utah20Gflyer Posted January 7 Report Posted January 7 1 hour ago, EarthX Inc said: Hi Hank, we do not have the STC yet for the M20C but when we do, the EarthX battery will be the same model as the other 12V STC's, the ETX900-TSO. Over the decades, there are a few lead acid choices you could have used in your plane but the most common is the Concorde RG-35. If that is what you have, the weight is 29.5 pounds, 390 CCA's and 29 Ah and on Aircraft Spruce today, the price is $487. The ETX900-TSO is 5.4 pounds (24 pound weight savings), the same CCA's of 390, and 15.6Ah (13.4Ah less). So in the event of an alternator failure, you do have less Ah. The EarthX battery will give you an LED flashing alert on your panel when you have used up 70% of the energy is you have not already landed at this point. The price is $699. The first time you install the battery with the STC there is a kit of all items needed to install it and this cost is $295. We provide the STC paperwork free of charge. Hope that helps answer your questions. Do you have any feel for when the approval will happen for the M20C or in my case M20G? Id love to get my useful load over 900 lbs. Thanks
EarthX Inc Posted January 7 Author Report Posted January 7 20 minutes ago, Hank said: Like many, I use the RG-35-AXC, a little heavier with more capacity. Do you have one that compares favorably? I should have three more years' life in my Concorde, so your not being approved yet isn't a problem. EDIT--just saw your follow up post. I'm wary of halving capacity, I've had two (2) electrical failures in the air. HI Hank, I totally understand. Hypothetically, if you installed 2 ETX900-TSO's, you would have more capacity then the RG35-AXC as an option and still be only at 10.8 pounds vs. 32 pounds and have way more cranking power. I am very sorry you have had 2 electrical failures in the air! When this happened, how long did it take you to find a practical place to land? And do you know what your essential load draw was in these events? 1
EarthX Inc Posted January 7 Author Report Posted January 7 5 minutes ago, Utah20Gflyer said: Do you have any feel for when the approval will happen for the M20C or in my case M20G? Id love to get my useful load over 900 lbs. Thanks We are hopeful to receive this next STC batch of approvals in next couple of months but we never can predict the timeline of the FAA! 1
Hank Posted January 7 Report Posted January 7 1 minute ago, EarthX Inc said: HI Hank, I totally understand. Hypothetically, if you installed 2 ETX900-TSO's, you would have more capacity then the RG35-AXC as an option and still be only at 10.8 pounds vs. 32 pounds and have way more cranking power. I am very sorry you have had 2 electrical failures in the air! When this happened, how long did it take you to find a practical place to land? And do you know what your essential load draw was in these events? Sadly, there's no space for a 2nd battery on my firewall. Getting the top plug wires to the left cylinders is already tough, and there's less than 1/2" horizontal clearance when I unscrew my oil filter. My first electrical failure was from a blown circuit board on the panel light dimmer, everything shut down. I flew home below the clouds that I had just descended out of on a nearby VOR-A approach. The second time my alternator field wire broke, and the radios stopped transmitting when I tried to ask for lower about 14 minutes from the field. There was additional flying time as I finished my late-started descent and hand-cranked the gear down.
Justin Schmidt Posted January 7 Report Posted January 7 @EarthX Inc are there any plans in making a higher capacity option?
EarthX Inc Posted January 8 Author Report Posted January 8 13 minutes ago, Justin Schmidt said: @EarthX Inc are there any plans in making a higher capacity option? Great question and there are no plans at this time to make a higher capacity option in the 12V market.
Crawfish Posted January 8 Report Posted January 8 (edited) 1 hour ago, EarthX Inc said: HI Hank, I totally understand. Hypothetically, if you installed 2 ETX900-TSO's, you would have more capacity then the RG35-AXC as an option and still be only at 10.8 pounds vs. 32 pounds and have way more cranking power. I am very sorry you have had 2 electrical failures in the air! When this happened, how long did it take you to find a practical place to land? And do you know what your essential load draw was in these events? @EarthX Inc Is there a way to legally install two batteries in parallel? just bought the battery STC kit for my M20K and so excited for the increase in useful load. Edited January 8 by Crawfish Adding a tag
M20F Posted January 8 Report Posted January 8 I removed my battery years ago and just hand prop it, best of all worlds. 7
MikeOH Posted January 8 Report Posted January 8 3 hours ago, EarthX Inc said: Great question and there are no plans at this time to make a higher capacity option in the 12V market. Ok, sorry, but I find that answer a bit absurd. When you compare your product to the existing standard from your competitor, Concorde, the glaring item is Amp-hours of capacity; yours is HALF of the Concorde!! This single parameter is 100% what is stopping me from even considering your product; I am simply NOT willing to trade off 50% of my time should my alternator fail in IMC. I doubt I'm alone in that analysis. I can't fathom why your company would not want to address that limitation???
varlajo Posted January 8 Report Posted January 8 5 hours ago, Crawfish said: @EarthX Inc Is there a way to legally install two batteries in parallel? Yes, I would love to know this as well.
Recommended Posts