Anyone Replace A Panel?

G

Guitarcrazy

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
10
Location
Great Falls Montana
Display Name
Display name:
Guitarcrazy
I have a 1964 Mooney M-20E with the typical "Shotgun" panel arrangement. I have been thinking of upgrading the avionics and changing the layout of the instruments. LASAR has a left side panel they sell for only $250, with the holes cut however you wish. Then I would have to remove the instruments, take out the old panel, and install the new panel, and replace the instruments. I know it can't be as easy as disconnecting the old instruments and putting them in the new panel, but I don't know exactly how difficult a project it may be. Has anyone done so, and would you recommend it? I have a close friend who is an A&P, but he hasn't done any panel replacements so he can't give a good estimate of time and difficulty. Any info is appreciated. Jason
 
First, look in there with a tape or ruler and make sure there are no physical restrictions to relocating radios and instruments. Some control yokes are placed, or move, in such a way that you cannot put item 'a' where item 'b' was - because full aft motion of the control wheel will hit it. Others have structural items in the way.
This is your chance to reorganize the rat's nest of wires that has no doubt built up over the last 40 years... a hint that in fact it may become necessary to allot a day or three for a full or partial rewiring. (also, expect a few lights etc to not work right when it is done)
Might need to replace all the vacuum lines if pre-bent ones are used due to space - probably a good idea anyway if they are that old. You will be cracking the static system (and maybe cutting, rebending alum tubing in some installs) so expect a recert after done.
It is a horrendous feeling to see everything splayed open like a gutted fish but have no fear, it will return to normal.
Label everything! Cap off everything as you open lines! Remove the battery before beginning!
Some panels provide structural support to the aircraft, ie box the left and right doorposts and you'd probably need preapproval and dar engineering to cut into them.
 
Mooney panels aren't structural but as Dave mention it is tight back there. There will be depth issues in the upper areas and parts of the steel tube 'cage' structure get in the way. And sure as heck none of the wires, tubes, cables etc will be long enough so you will rewire most everything.

Do you still have the access panels or do you have the 201 windscreen? My 68F still have the panels and most of the wiring runs right underneath. I can't imagine getting at some of it if I lost the top access.
 
ejensen said:
Do you still have the access panels or do you have the 201 windscreen? My 68F still have the panels and most of the wiring runs right underneath. I can't imagine getting at some of it if I lost the top access.
Click to expand...
With the 201-style windscreen, you still have the top access. The glareshield comes off and you can sort of go in from above. But you're right it's not as easy as with the external access panels.
 
I have done this with 3 planes so far.

68 C-150
64 B-23
59 C-182

With the middle one, I started with a piece of sheet metal & cut all new holes myself. The Mouse had a horrible layout with a large hole for the AI.

The other 2 had holes close enought to a "T" config that all I did was move everything around. I had to enlarg a hole & make another smaller, but it was easier than making a whole new panel.

I was lucky enought to do this at an avionics shop so I had access to all new hoses right there. The largest problem as allready stated is the size differance of the gauges & if they will fit where you want to put them.
 

Attachments

  • beechnewpanel.jpg
    beechnewpanel.jpg
    82 KB · Views: 44
  • beecholdpanel.jpg
    beecholdpanel.jpg
    76.3 KB · Views: 37
Ken Ibold said:
With the 201-style windscreen, you still have the top access. The glareshield comes off and you can sort of go in from above. But you're right it's not as easy as with the external access panels.
Click to expand...

And with SWT version you get those little triangles left. I wouldn't mind the glareshied access if it was wired using it. My concern is covering/changing the original access and making even more difficult to fix or change something later.

Saw a neat design on an experimental where the whole panel hinged down for great access. Both side of the radio stack.
 
I don't dare buy a plane that doesn't have a six-pack, 'cuz if I were to upgrade the panel I'd be WAY too tempted to do it with this:

pt-g600-LG.jpg


http://www.garmin.com/products/g600/

:yes: :D
 
Thanks for the replys. It sounds like this might be better to do during the annual since a lot of the plane will already be apart. I still have the two piece windshield, although I have acquired a 201 windshield. I don't know how much work it is to install that, although I hear it is not a small job. That Garmin glass panel is sweet, but I don't think I'll be able to afford that any time soon! J
 
Guitarcrazy said:
Thanks for the replys. It sounds like this might be better to do during the annual since a lot of the plane will already be apart. I still have the two piece windshield, although I have acquired a 201 windshield. I don't know how much work it is to install that, although I hear it is not a small job. That Garmin glass panel is sweet, but I don't think I'll be able to afford that any time soon! J
Click to expand...

Do you have the true 201 windshield (that requires significant sheet metal work), or the 1 piece pre-201 windshield?

As a suggestion, if it is the pre-201 1 piece, you may want to speak to someone who has installed one, as the reports I have read say that although it looks good, it significantly increases the cabin noise level. Apparently without the center brace and complex curves of the 201, this windshield can act as a "drum" in the propwash.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
Eamon, do you know if these were signed off as a minor modification?
Click to expand...
My guy said it can go either way depending on many things.

The first 2 were done with a 337. We added antennas and changed almost everything.

The last one was done as a minor. No ant & just remove an ADF & loran and add an audio panel & 1 radio.

If I remember, he said adding an IFR GPS or antennas was his breaking point.
 
Guitarcrazy said:
Thanks for the replys. It sounds like this might be better to do during the annual since a lot of the plane will already be apart. I still have the two piece windshield, although I have acquired a 201 windshield. I don't know how much work it is to install that, although I hear it is not a small job.
Click to expand...

Putting the 201 windshield on a short body Mooney is a significant amount of labor. The work should be done by someone who has done it many times before as it involves cutting into the metal above and below the windshield. I had this work done when I bought my plane ('63 M20C) several years ago. It took a few months to have it completed by a fellow who was in his late 70's at the time, it was his speciality. It turned out great, I don't think you can tell it was not made that way.

There is a technical email list that can be found via the link below. You might want to ask for information on that link. Note that besides the windshield you will probably want the STC to install it. The owners of the STCs also do installations.

http://www.mooneypilots.com/

I also have the "half panel" mod you describe. The plane had it when I bought it. I rate it at OK. If I had the money when I put in the windshield I would have gotten the full 201 panel at the same time as it requires less labor to do both at once.

Note that you may need new gyros if your current panel is the slanted type.

Len
 
Len Lanetti said:
I had this work done when I bought my plane ('63 M20C) several years ago. It took a few months to have it completed by a fellow who was in his late 70's at the time, it was his speciality. It turned out great, I don't think you can tell it was not made that way.
Click to expand...

Len, I didn't realize you had this mod? Cool! I'm sure you showed it to me when I saw your plane, but I didn't know much about Mooneys until I started to research them as a potential "next step".
 
Thanks for the info Len. What do you mean by slanted panel? My panel is flat from the left to the right. The 201 and later panel slants on the left and right sides toward the pilot, is that what you are referring to? I have another friend who is an A&P, and one of our Huey mechs at the AFB who says it is a piece of cake to replace the left side. Is this accurate? What holds the gyros and indicators in place behind the panel? Surely it isn't just the panel supporting the weight of the instruments? How do you relocate the mounting trays or whatever is holding the bulk of the weight? Thanks again for the answers to my simple minded questions. JB
 
Guitarcrazy said:
What holds the gyros and indicators in place behind the panel? Surely it isn't just the panel supporting the weight of the instruments? How do you relocate the mounting trays or whatever is holding the bulk of the weight?
Click to expand...


for the instruments all the weight is held by the panel (Sheet) . Each radio, gps, audio panel, etc has a tray the is mainly supported by the panel & has some straps on the back that tie into other places on the airframe.
 
Guitarcrazy said:
Thanks for the info Len. What do you mean by slanted panel? My panel is flat from the left to the right.
Click to expand...

Some of the early Mooney panels are slanted from top to bottom. From the "what I think I know file"...a different kind of gyro (AI, DG & TC) is required for those types of panels. So going to a straight vertical panel might mean replacing your existing gyros if your current panel is slanted.

I don't know the difficulity in replacing the "half panel" as mine was already done. Personally, the half panel in my aircraft is one of my least favorite things regarding the plane. In the case of my plane it provides me with the standard "six pack" of instruments which I find better than the original layout. The result is functional but not pretty. YMMV as the outcome of a lot of these types of mods are very dependent on the individual craftsmanship of the mechanic. You might look into the cost of the full 201 panel...the parts are probably not that expensive...it will be the labor...if you are doing this under mechanic supervision it would be your time and I think it would be time well spent. While you have things pulled out you can have them refurb'd (tach and engine instrument pack). Of course, you could also go with the new JPI 930 on the right side panel too (which I'm actually considering for either 2007 - don't tell wife).

Len
 
Thanks for the reply Len. I don't believe mine is slanted. I looked at the newer displays, but it looks like none are STC'd for certificated aircraft. I have an Aerospace Logic digital oil temp/pressure guage, and I would love to get rid of my analog CHT/EGT guage. I called JPI and EI and they both said that if I used their systems I would have to keep the stock CHT/EGT guage as their systems aren't STC'd for both functions. My current panel doesn't have room for a new guage on top of the others, so I will have to wait. If the Dynon or 930's get certified I'd certainly want one of those. So many upgrades, so little cash! J
 
Guitarcrazy said:
I looked at the newer displays, but it looks like none are STC'd for certificated aircraft. I have an Aerospace Logic digital oil temp/pressure guage, and I would love to get rid of my analog CHT/EGT guage. I called JPI and EI and they both said that if I used their systems I would have to keep the stock CHT/EGT guage as their systems aren't STC'd for both functions. My current panel doesn't have room for a new guage on top of the others, so I will have to wait. If the Dynon or 930's get certified I'd certainly want one of those. So many upgrades, so little cash! J
Click to expand...

J.,

This kind of stuff drives me crazy...what is it with aviation firms don't they know their own products...I constantly get conflicting information direct from the source - ok rant mode off.

From what I've read and discussed with JPI both the 900 and the 930 are STCd for use in certified aircraft. The digital bar graph for the CHT and EGT are direct replacements for the installed equipment...as are the fuel flow and fuel quantity displays, tach and MP displays.

Now for the bummer (though it does reinforces my point that STCd versions of these units are available)...just last night I read that the STCd version of the units are more than twice as expensive as compared to the non STCd version of the device. The non STCd 900 for a 4 cylinder engine is listed at just under $3K while the STCd version is over $7K. This was the first time I had seen a price difference for the display based on it having the STC or not. Also, during my discussions with the JPI folks they never quoted me a price other then the $3Kish number. While I could see springing for the $3K and the cost to install the $7K number is far too much for what you get. At $3K it makes sense (almost, in an aviation kind of way) to replace all the guages with the new display rather then rebuild the existing guages as they fail. At $7K plus the cost to install there is no way I can justify that number to myself or the household CFO.

Len
 
Guitar Crazy
Do not underestimate the complexity of panel replacements. I had a complete panel replacement done on a TurboLance. A project of epic proportions $$$ but very worthwhile.
 
Len,
I too found the cost a bit on the absurd side until such time I took a closer look. When you buy a generic JPI 930 you do all the programming. However, when it is certified for YOUR aircraft, model, serial number and N number from the factory things are a bit different. To replace your instrument suite the FAA requires that all the aircraft and engine limits be preprogrammed by the factory. Part of the factory deal is the RAD or remote alarm display. This little window on the world is an LED readout directly in front of you eyes that provides RPM and Manf Pressure remote from the 930. When you exceed a preprogrammed RPM, MP, or any other factory limit the RAD begins to blink with the offending value and continues until you either address it or ignore it. I suspect in the non certified units all that is available but in the certified unit you can not change the limits. Annoying? some, but now that we have about 100 hours on the 930 it is the best piece of technology around.
Rich
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top