AEC
- Thread starter citationbravo
- Start date
Rellihan
Touring the Galaxy
The 1040BCH and its later 105-420018-5 and 105-420018-17 derivatives use a plated steel housing with an aluminum inner handle. The mounting screw posts are in the same horizontal plane when viewed from inside the cabin looking outward. The door lock cylinder is mounted in the aluminum inner handle.
I cannot pin down exactly 'when', but for an interim period that I believe to have spanned from about 1972 to about 1978, Beech used, on the front cabin doors, what they termed an 'improved' exterior handle made by Hartwell (the H2532-13). Unlike the 1040BCH, the Hartwell handle has the lock cylinder mounted in a hole adjacent to the movable part of the handle. This same Hartwell handle was used on the large and small baggage doors of the planes beyond the reversion to the 1040BCH-style handle. As a result, the 1978 and later 19/23/24R/76 typically have the 105-prefixed handles on the main cabin doors, and the Hartwell handle on the baggage door.
The 1040BCH (and later 105- prefixed) handle is plated metal, but has several undesirable aspects. There is a spring crimped into the handle on each side; they often break. The metal appears to be nickle-plated, and the plating rapidly fails (resulting in rust). The overall quality of fit and finish is simply miserable. These handles are hard to find new. If you do find one for sale from Beech or one of its affiliates, in half those cases what you will find in the received box is a clone handle made by Wag Aero. This includes boxes received directly from Beech, with the paperwork. So much for the quality control financed by high parts prices and enforced by the FAA.
The Hartwell is no better; if anything, it is worse. While it looks like metal, it is a metalized plastic (low-temperature vacuum-deposition plating). Only the sliding locking bar and the movable handle portions are really metal. The plastic housing is highly susceptible to any kind of oil or grease; only powdered graphite is safe to use as a lubricant. The parts are retained by small pins embedded into the plastic; this includes the knurled inserts that retain the mounting screws. All of the plastic surrounding these parts cracks and breaks away with time. Even the slightest extra effort to pull open a stuck door results in the handle breaking through the plastic body at the inner end.
These handle styles are NOT interchangeable. The primary reason is because the mounting screws are not in the same location. While in some cases new holes could be drilled through the inner latch assemblies, in many or most cases that won't work. The later 105- design relies on a press-formed washer area, on the mounting studs, to make the interior latch assembly work properly. The Hartwell style handle does not have these lugs.
AEC makes the only decent handle, and it is a replacement only for the Hartwell-equipped doors. Their handle is 100% machined aluminum and stainless steel. It even has SS Heli-coils in the mounting holes that are machined into the aluminum body; and unlike the Beech replacement parts, it comes with the mounting screws and a lock cylinder. While at $350 is it not cheap, it is almost half of the Beech price for their plastic junk; and it should last the remaining life of the airframe. I wish I could help make a comparable unit become available for the 1040BCH-equipped portion of the fleet, but that's unlikely to happen.
I have become pretty disillusioned with the PMA parts process and the results of past efforts. I have had multiple suppliers tell me that obtaining a PMA will cost them $15,000 to $25,000 per part. Can you imagine how many $50 small baggage door seals AEC has to sell, to recover $15,000 in up-front costs, even when I have gifted them with all the specifications, drawings, applicability information, etc.? After maybe 300 seal sales, they can cover the PMA paperwork costs. Then they have to cover the engineering costs of dealing with the production testing, initial stock production costs, and some actual profit? And they have sold maybe 20 units since these seals were introduced, half of which were bought and paid for by me, for KLUX shop use? While I find Home Depot foam rubber on most of the baggage doors that show up at KLUX, with their sprung hinges, latches, and frames?
Then there are all of the folks who simply know what a plastic part should cost. Who have evidently never actually had to spend $6,000 for a chromed mold that is suitable for any level of production volume on a quality part. Or who have never bought a new car door seal in 40 years. Or who have never actually obtained a spring production quote from someplace like Atlantic Spring or Century Spring, on a product that will actually meet the Beech specs (in order to become a legal PMA part).
We have beaten up these pages before on why vendors such as AECI do or don't deserve support, or what they should be doing differently. I have also described what they typically go through in order to fund a project, with each new parts product having to be self-sufficient via its sales volume. No new product can afford to be 'carried' by other products, or it should not have been produced (insufficient market demand). In most cases, when an outfit like AEC makes a PMA part available, it is only because they believe that there is a defined market segment and marketing vehicle available for the product. In our case. BAC and its members. If they had to spend many additional thousands of dollars in broad advertising efforts through the aviation media, to such a relatively tiny potential market in terms of airframe counts, they simply would never proceed at all. So to think that AEC is failing to move product because they are failing to aggressively market their products, is simply a failure to understand the process itself. If they can only sell 50 door handles per year regardless, how could it makes sense to have to double the cost of each handle because of marketing overhead? These things aren't Big Macs and Frosties, in their millions.
I undertook past PMA efforts with AEC (and others) because of a perceived demand for these key parts within the BAC membership, coupled with the very high Beech pricing on the parts. In most cases I have evidently mis-judged the pent-up demand. For example, I have finally just sold the last of a batch of aft ballast weights, which Beech agreed to make for me more than two years ago. I had several thousand dollars tied up in these parts, thinking that the expressed interest meant that they would all sell within months. It took more than two years. That's the kind of thing that AEC is dealing with, but with far more expensive overhead involved.
I know that none of us can afford to buy every single thing that we want. Nor can we all afford to buy every spare part that becomes available, to stockpile them against future needs. But there also seems to be quite a large disconnect between previously expressed interest versus actual purchases of newly available parts. Robin at Power Flow and Laminar Flow has seen the same thing happen with exhaust systems and wheel pants. So at least in my case, and particularly in light of my current circumstances, pursuit of more PMA parts for our BAC aircraft has taken a relatively distant back seat in my priorities.
I cannot pin down exactly 'when', but for an interim period that I believe to have spanned from about 1972 to about 1978, Beech used, on the front cabin doors, what they termed an 'improved' exterior handle made by Hartwell (the H2532-13). Unlike the 1040BCH, the Hartwell handle has the lock cylinder mounted in a hole adjacent to the movable part of the handle. This same Hartwell handle was used on the large and small baggage doors of the planes beyond the reversion to the 1040BCH-style handle. As a result, the 1978 and later 19/23/24R/76 typically have the 105-prefixed handles on the main cabin doors, and the Hartwell handle on the baggage door.
The 1040BCH (and later 105- prefixed) handle is plated metal, but has several undesirable aspects. There is a spring crimped into the handle on each side; they often break. The metal appears to be nickle-plated, and the plating rapidly fails (resulting in rust). The overall quality of fit and finish is simply miserable. These handles are hard to find new. If you do find one for sale from Beech or one of its affiliates, in half those cases what you will find in the received box is a clone handle made by Wag Aero. This includes boxes received directly from Beech, with the paperwork. So much for the quality control financed by high parts prices and enforced by the FAA.
The Hartwell is no better; if anything, it is worse. While it looks like metal, it is a metalized plastic (low-temperature vacuum-deposition plating). Only the sliding locking bar and the movable handle portions are really metal. The plastic housing is highly susceptible to any kind of oil or grease; only powdered graphite is safe to use as a lubricant. The parts are retained by small pins embedded into the plastic; this includes the knurled inserts that retain the mounting screws. All of the plastic surrounding these parts cracks and breaks away with time. Even the slightest extra effort to pull open a stuck door results in the handle breaking through the plastic body at the inner end.
These handle styles are NOT interchangeable. The primary reason is because the mounting screws are not in the same location. While in some cases new holes could be drilled through the inner latch assemblies, in many or most cases that won't work. The later 105- design relies on a press-formed washer area, on the mounting studs, to make the interior latch assembly work properly. The Hartwell style handle does not have these lugs.
AEC makes the only decent handle, and it is a replacement only for the Hartwell-equipped doors. Their handle is 100% machined aluminum and stainless steel. It even has SS Heli-coils in the mounting holes that are machined into the aluminum body; and unlike the Beech replacement parts, it comes with the mounting screws and a lock cylinder. While at $350 is it not cheap, it is almost half of the Beech price for their plastic junk; and it should last the remaining life of the airframe. I wish I could help make a comparable unit become available for the 1040BCH-equipped portion of the fleet, but that's unlikely to happen.
I have become pretty disillusioned with the PMA parts process and the results of past efforts. I have had multiple suppliers tell me that obtaining a PMA will cost them $15,000 to $25,000 per part. Can you imagine how many $50 small baggage door seals AEC has to sell, to recover $15,000 in up-front costs, even when I have gifted them with all the specifications, drawings, applicability information, etc.? After maybe 300 seal sales, they can cover the PMA paperwork costs. Then they have to cover the engineering costs of dealing with the production testing, initial stock production costs, and some actual profit? And they have sold maybe 20 units since these seals were introduced, half of which were bought and paid for by me, for KLUX shop use? While I find Home Depot foam rubber on most of the baggage doors that show up at KLUX, with their sprung hinges, latches, and frames?
Then there are all of the folks who simply know what a plastic part should cost. Who have evidently never actually had to spend $6,000 for a chromed mold that is suitable for any level of production volume on a quality part. Or who have never bought a new car door seal in 40 years. Or who have never actually obtained a spring production quote from someplace like Atlantic Spring or Century Spring, on a product that will actually meet the Beech specs (in order to become a legal PMA part).
We have beaten up these pages before on why vendors such as AECI do or don't deserve support, or what they should be doing differently. I have also described what they typically go through in order to fund a project, with each new parts product having to be self-sufficient via its sales volume. No new product can afford to be 'carried' by other products, or it should not have been produced (insufficient market demand). In most cases, when an outfit like AEC makes a PMA part available, it is only because they believe that there is a defined market segment and marketing vehicle available for the product. In our case. BAC and its members. If they had to spend many additional thousands of dollars in broad advertising efforts through the aviation media, to such a relatively tiny potential market in terms of airframe counts, they simply would never proceed at all. So to think that AEC is failing to move product because they are failing to aggressively market their products, is simply a failure to understand the process itself. If they can only sell 50 door handles per year regardless, how could it makes sense to have to double the cost of each handle because of marketing overhead? These things aren't Big Macs and Frosties, in their millions.
I undertook past PMA efforts with AEC (and others) because of a perceived demand for these key parts within the BAC membership, coupled with the very high Beech pricing on the parts. In most cases I have evidently mis-judged the pent-up demand. For example, I have finally just sold the last of a batch of aft ballast weights, which Beech agreed to make for me more than two years ago. I had several thousand dollars tied up in these parts, thinking that the expressed interest meant that they would all sell within months. It took more than two years. That's the kind of thing that AEC is dealing with, but with far more expensive overhead involved.
I know that none of us can afford to buy every single thing that we want. Nor can we all afford to buy every spare part that becomes available, to stockpile them against future needs. But there also seems to be quite a large disconnect between previously expressed interest versus actual purchases of newly available parts. Robin at Power Flow and Laminar Flow has seen the same thing happen with exhaust systems and wheel pants. So at least in my case, and particularly in light of my current circumstances, pursuit of more PMA parts for our BAC aircraft has taken a relatively distant back seat in my priorities.
I'd like to chime in and say that I plan to purchase some of AEC's products, in due time.
My donuts appear to have half of their life left so it will be a while. But I would definately buy them from AEC. They have a good value here.
I will probably be replacing the fuel valve soon and it seems that AEC is the only option out there. I have to say that at a thousand bucks, and this economy, I have thought to just keep servicing the old imperial I've got. I'd like to request suggestions and comments on this one as the fuel valve is an important part.
When it comes to the door handles, it will be a while before I decide to drop $700 to replace two handles even though one is almost shot and the other isn't doing too well either. It doesn't look like their handles will work with my airframe anyway.
As for the door seals, they've got a winner. I will definately be purchasing those very soon. Now that's a fair price and sounds like a good product.
All in all, I am glad to see that AEC is supporting our airplanes, but they don't offer much else. I find it hard to believe that they only offer one product that isn't for our planes. Our fleet is small. They can't reasonably expect us to support their business. If things are tight for them right now, they should be offering deals like what Lo Presti is doing. I'm sure they would move some product that way. As others have said, they don't seem to advertise at all so how are the non-BAC members going to know about them. We are the small portion of owners who own BAC aircraft. The big portioin aren't BAC members. AEC needs to at least mail them a letter to let them know they exist. Sorry if I'm a little harsh. But I don't think that they have marketed their parts properly and I cringe to think that their prices will go up.
Ben
My donuts appear to have half of their life left so it will be a while. But I would definately buy them from AEC. They have a good value here.
I will probably be replacing the fuel valve soon and it seems that AEC is the only option out there. I have to say that at a thousand bucks, and this economy, I have thought to just keep servicing the old imperial I've got. I'd like to request suggestions and comments on this one as the fuel valve is an important part.
When it comes to the door handles, it will be a while before I decide to drop $700 to replace two handles even though one is almost shot and the other isn't doing too well either. It doesn't look like their handles will work with my airframe anyway.
As for the door seals, they've got a winner. I will definately be purchasing those very soon. Now that's a fair price and sounds like a good product.
All in all, I am glad to see that AEC is supporting our airplanes, but they don't offer much else. I find it hard to believe that they only offer one product that isn't for our planes. Our fleet is small. They can't reasonably expect us to support their business. If things are tight for them right now, they should be offering deals like what Lo Presti is doing. I'm sure they would move some product that way. As others have said, they don't seem to advertise at all so how are the non-BAC members going to know about them. We are the small portion of owners who own BAC aircraft. The big portioin aren't BAC members. AEC needs to at least mail them a letter to let them know they exist. Sorry if I'm a little harsh. But I don't think that they have marketed their parts properly and I cringe to think that their prices will go up.
Ben
Rellihan
Touring the Galaxy
Ben, you haven't yet had a chance to read all the other posts on this subject. BAC parts are only a tiny piece of AEC's business. They primarily make things such as airstair door cables and the like, for refurbishing outfits and airlines. They may run off a batch of a thousand cables, to sell to an airline, a refinisher, or a wholesaler. Their business model is not to be a stocking manufacturer on most of their parts. Their onesy-twosy online parts sales capability was set up solely to service their BAC customers, for the things they have made available for us.
Once again, my post came up as Guest, but it was me. Looks like Mike R. posted at the same time.
Now I would like to add that some marketing costs a bunch, and some is very cheap. A simple mailing is the level that I think would benefit AEC. I think that some marketing costs should be built into any venture such as a PMA. Advertising can make or break a business.
Mike, I appreciate what you have done to make these parts available to all of our members. I do try, with my limited budget to support the vendors you have worked with. I just recently purchased ducts from Custom Ducts. I have a healthy list of things to do and things to buy. I will be spending plenty of money with these vendors as the money comes in and I work my way through my list. It seems to me that it just takes time for these vendors to sell the amount of parts that they need to. Therefore, they shouldn't give up on us. I hope they can be patient and work with us as much as they can.
I believe that most of our members (at least the ones that speak up in the forums) appreciate the efforts Mike R. has made. We would all be wise to support his efforts if we would like to see continued support from anyone other than Beech.
Thanks Mike
Ben
Now I would like to add that some marketing costs a bunch, and some is very cheap. A simple mailing is the level that I think would benefit AEC. I think that some marketing costs should be built into any venture such as a PMA. Advertising can make or break a business.
Mike, I appreciate what you have done to make these parts available to all of our members. I do try, with my limited budget to support the vendors you have worked with. I just recently purchased ducts from Custom Ducts. I have a healthy list of things to do and things to buy. I will be spending plenty of money with these vendors as the money comes in and I work my way through my list. It seems to me that it just takes time for these vendors to sell the amount of parts that they need to. Therefore, they shouldn't give up on us. I hope they can be patient and work with us as much as they can.
I believe that most of our members (at least the ones that speak up in the forums) appreciate the efforts Mike R. has made. We would all be wise to support his efforts if we would like to see continued support from anyone other than Beech.
Thanks Mike
Ben
citationbravo
Climbing to Cruise
Mike I for one appreciate all your past, and present efforts..What upsets me is the majority of aircraft owners are really cheap people, who hate to spend money on things that their planes need...Vedors come along, and offer services, and products that these individuals SAY they want and need. Individuals such as yourself approach vendors and ask, and convince them to manufacture items that are needed. You stick your neck out for other owners. These vendors produce these items. Then they, the aircraft owners, see the price tag, and baulk. This makes you, and this organization look very bad. When these vedors go away, and PMA products are no longer avilable these same people comaplain that their planes are now orphans because no one wants to manufacture parts to support them....And to answer a previous question asked by a member, the donut prices are also going up, so AEC can recover some of R&D costs...Flying, and preventive MX has never been cheap...
Off my soapbox for now......
Nick
Off my soapbox for now......
Nick
Ngeddie
Climbing to Cruise
My partner and I just purchased one of Mike's two last aft ballast weights. We did the ducts with him last year and with any luck we will be purchasing 3 sets of donuts late this Spring. Without Mike, Monty, Chad and this group we would not have a clue what our plane really needs. And without the efforts of Mike and our vendors we either wouldn't be able to get the parts that we need or we'd never be able to afford them.
Our first annual was an eye-opener with regard to maintenance costs and requirements. Our second one has been pleasant as we discovered that things that we fixed properly last year, just aren't an issue anymore.
The economy stinks, we all have other priorities, but we have to maintain our planes. Our safety and the safety of those who fly with us depends on it. When you do maintenance/restoration, use the A&P's who support this group. Use the suppliers who support this group. Yes, it costs more than finding an A&P who will pencil whip an annual but our planes and all of us will be better off for it.
Our first annual was an eye-opener with regard to maintenance costs and requirements. Our second one has been pleasant as we discovered that things that we fixed properly last year, just aren't an issue anymore.
The economy stinks, we all have other priorities, but we have to maintain our planes. Our safety and the safety of those who fly with us depends on it. When you do maintenance/restoration, use the A&P's who support this group. Use the suppliers who support this group. Yes, it costs more than finding an A&P who will pencil whip an annual but our planes and all of us will be better off for it.
Years ago & before AEC came on the scene with their fuel valve, a new one went for ~ 5k.
Doubt that what AEC now offers will ever be cheaper. There is also quite a bit of maintenance involved with the Imperial that can add up. Think its supposed to be checked out & lubed (also dismantled, cleaned up & fixed, if & as required) at every annual or 100 hrs.
If there is any incident related to the Imperial fuel selector valve & it is not found to be in tip top shape & maintained as required (via S.I. or S.B. ..forget), that could be very bad news.
Pretty sure there have been incidents where the Imperial valve breaks in use, that can result in no fuel flow.
The Imperial can be up to ~ 47 years old.
I'd also say that having a door secured properly is very important. Nobody wants to deal with doors popping open (if not necessary) in flight..
A Sierra was lost not long ago, after such an incident shortly after liftoff..
Rellihan
Touring the Galaxy
I have one remaining repaired-serviceable Gerdes Fuel Valve. Here is the key info:
"I am selling this repaired used valve for $150 exchange, or $400 outright. Exchange units must be a repairable Gerdes valve, and have a valid data plate-label showing the serial number, to be acceptable. The buyer pays the full $400 price, and I will refund $250 when I find that the serial number is decipherable, and that all the internal parts are good and the valve is repairable. Or you can mail me your valve for repair."
Jon is of course correct in his feedback on the old Imperial brass valve. We rarely see them at KLUX, and they have seldom been serviced as required. Relevant docs were SI0364-289 and SI-0529-289, culminating in SI0838-289 that 'required' complete replacement of the valve with the far better aluminum Gerdes unit.
I personally decline to work on them, as I don't want my name associated with logbook entries related to them. Even just a loose handle screw, or a mis-installed handle that is not correctly located on the stem detent pin, can cause the handle shaft to bind and snap. Since there are almost certainly dozens (if not hundreds) of these valves still flying around out there, and we don't read about smoking holes in the ground every day, they are not causing airplanes to rain out of the sky. If they were, there would already have been an AD out on them. On the other hand, Beech recognized that the servicing required to keep them reasonably safe was both onerous and not being complied with. So they issued the mandatory SI than many owners chose to ignore. Some still do; that doesn't mean that it is wise to postpone dealing with a known risk that can be eliminated at a fairly reasonable cost.
"I am selling this repaired used valve for $150 exchange, or $400 outright. Exchange units must be a repairable Gerdes valve, and have a valid data plate-label showing the serial number, to be acceptable. The buyer pays the full $400 price, and I will refund $250 when I find that the serial number is decipherable, and that all the internal parts are good and the valve is repairable. Or you can mail me your valve for repair."
Jon is of course correct in his feedback on the old Imperial brass valve. We rarely see them at KLUX, and they have seldom been serviced as required. Relevant docs were SI0364-289 and SI-0529-289, culminating in SI0838-289 that 'required' complete replacement of the valve with the far better aluminum Gerdes unit.
I personally decline to work on them, as I don't want my name associated with logbook entries related to them. Even just a loose handle screw, or a mis-installed handle that is not correctly located on the stem detent pin, can cause the handle shaft to bind and snap. Since there are almost certainly dozens (if not hundreds) of these valves still flying around out there, and we don't read about smoking holes in the ground every day, they are not causing airplanes to rain out of the sky. If they were, there would already have been an AD out on them. On the other hand, Beech recognized that the servicing required to keep them reasonably safe was both onerous and not being complied with. So they issued the mandatory SI than many owners chose to ignore. Some still do; that doesn't mean that it is wise to postpone dealing with a known risk that can be eliminated at a fairly reasonable cost.
Thanks Jon and Mike for your responses.
I reviewed the Service Instructions Mike referenced. I have gone through them before, but I understand them a whole lot better this time around. It is now clear to me that my valve needs to be replaced ASAP. I am now considering Mikes offer for the Gerdes, but I understand that they are hard to find parts for and service. I think that I will likely be sending a healthy check to AEC very soon. If I'm gonna replace the valve, I don't want to do a half-a*# job.
Would anyone who has a Gerdes valve care to comment on it and tell what they would do in my situation.
When it comes to my door handles, they do latch the doors shut just fine. Believe me, the passenger one is the bad one, and if Selena thought that it was going to pop open on her, I wouldn't have a choice but to replace it.
It's just that the locking mechanism doesn't work too well so I never unlock that door. I open from the inside to let passengers, and instructors in.
Ben
I reviewed the Service Instructions Mike referenced. I have gone through them before, but I understand them a whole lot better this time around. It is now clear to me that my valve needs to be replaced ASAP. I am now considering Mikes offer for the Gerdes, but I understand that they are hard to find parts for and service. I think that I will likely be sending a healthy check to AEC very soon. If I'm gonna replace the valve, I don't want to do a half-a*# job.
Would anyone who has a Gerdes valve care to comment on it and tell what they would do in my situation.
When it comes to my door handles, they do latch the doors shut just fine. Believe me, the passenger one is the bad one, and if Selena thought that it was going to pop open on her, I wouldn't have a choice but to replace it.
It's just that the locking mechanism doesn't work too well so I never unlock that door. I open from the inside to let passengers, and instructors in.Ben
Rellihan
Touring the Galaxy
The only parts normally required for the Gerdes valve are new o-rings every 25 years or so. The only ones I have ever seen with internal parts failure (such as loss of detent) have been the direct result of one of two factors. Someone took one apart without benefit of the instructions available free to BAC members (via BAC Downloads), and botched the reassembly. Or a valve was in a salvage airplane (or derelict airplane) for years, with water in the fuel system, which led to internal corrosion. Someone then attempted to use it without first servicing it, ignored the obvious binding and rough 'feel', and ruined the valve. I have not yet seen a case of a Gerdes valve actually 'wearing out'; nor any indication that one actually could.
In routine service, and with new inexpensive standard o-rings when a stain appears at the shaft stem, the only service required for the Gerdes valve (or the AECI clone) is the o-ring installation every 25 years or so. A slight spray of Corrosion X or LPS-2 on the shaft at each Annual would probably extend the life almost indefinitely. There is no comparison between the Gerdes and the Imperial, when it comes to service life or servicing requirements.
In routine service, and with new inexpensive standard o-rings when a stain appears at the shaft stem, the only service required for the Gerdes valve (or the AECI clone) is the o-ring installation every 25 years or so. A slight spray of Corrosion X or LPS-2 on the shaft at each Annual would probably extend the life almost indefinitely. There is no comparison between the Gerdes and the Imperial, when it comes to service life or servicing requirements.
markweiss
Headed to Andromeda
aukerinc said:
Ben,
I have the Gerdes and have seen it in pieces for a (25 year) overhaul ($15 parts).
Since you have missed out on the generous intro price that AECI offered to BAC members when they made the Gerdes clones, then Mike's offer is as good a deal as you are likely to get. Put your name on it before somebody else does.
Once installed, it is one less component to think about whilst you are flying (at least for the next 25 yrs)
Mark
In Oz
Thanks Mark. I have actually "put my name" on Mike's valve. He enlightened me to the fact that they are just hard to come by, but if you can get one, it should be just as good as the AECI valve. I mistakenly thought that those $15 in parts would be hard to come by, but that is not the case. In fact, the Gerdes valve has been around for many years so it can offer a more secure track record than the newer AECI valve. But it might not look as good. For less than half the price, I will go with the Gerdes for sure.
I appreciate everyone's help as I struggle through the first couple years of aircraft ownership. :?: :?
Ben
I appreciate everyone's help as I struggle through the first couple years of aircraft ownership. :?: :?
Ben
Though they usually only require '0' ring maintenance, the fact that Mike only had one left on an exchange basis speaks volumes to availability of the part used.aukerinc said:
In a worse case scenario & if AEC were to go belly up (which may have little to do with us anyway..), the only options for what they offer would be ..back to good ol' Beech pricing & scenarios.
Whatever they do from here, or may happen to them, they have stepped up to the plate to date, for the BAC line big time.
I suspect there are at least hundreds of Imperials out there & who knows how many neglected donut jobs that beat up the airframes (wing attach point area, cracks, brackets etc..) & add to landing incidents.
Last I heard, the Beech fuel valve was still available; not sure if parts are still available to fix the wing attach point area when/if cracks are found.
This just goes to show how much, or little, I knew about the fuel valve.
Just think, without this club, I'd probably fly with the imperial forever thinking is was a good one. I was under the understanding that it was replaced because of an AD. But no, its the original. For some reason I thought that there was an AD on the fuel valve which required replacement. All AD's are complied with on my bird, says my mechanic, but I guess SI's were neglected. It was this club that made me realize that the "IMPERIAL" stamped on the handle means its original. It does operate well with no binding so its safe for the short term. Now I have my chance to learn all about the valve. I love owner assisted maintenance. Half the reason I decided to buy a plane was to learn about the "guts" of an airplane. The other half was to fly of course. I'm looking forward to all the flying this summer will bring.What would I do without this club?
Thanks everyone,
Ben
markweiss
Headed to Andromeda
aukerinc said:I appreciate everyone's help as I struggle through the first couple years of aircraft ownership. :?: :?
Ben
It's not a struggle. It's somewhere between a mystery tour and an adventure. But with the help of this group, at least it won't be a blind date.
paulwerbin
Headed to Andromeda
Ben, Think about getting the passenger door lock fixed. In case of a fire on the ground having the door unlocked could make a big difference. I have taken part in a number of airport emergency drills. Every second counts if someone outside the plane is trying to gain access to help those inside. Incapacitation of passengers and pilots is possible in a number of scenarios and unlocking all doors before flight might be the diffefrence.
I knew Struggle was a bad word to use. Mike, you're description is much better. I may take you up on the offer to fix the lock, but the handles are ugly too (corrosion), so I will probably replace them at some point. I wonder if I could clean it all off... Something will have to happen before I repaint the plane, or they will stand out like a sore thumb and seriously bring down the appearance.
Paul, that is an excellent point. I hadn't thought of that. Too bad I can't do everything I would like at once. I guess I'll have to do something about the handle sooner than I thought.
I'm doing my instrument training and I need to put some extra nav equipment in to finish. This has been my priority, but safety does come first. Does anyone know of an inexpensive option for an IFR GPS including annuciator and indicator? I've been thinking of a G430, but the price tag is a little restrictive if you know what I mean. I guess a DME would solve my problem, but then I won't have GPS approach capabilities.
Ben
Paul, that is an excellent point. I hadn't thought of that. Too bad I can't do everything I would like at once. I guess I'll have to do something about the handle sooner than I thought.
I'm doing my instrument training and I need to put some extra nav equipment in to finish. This has been my priority, but safety does come first. Does anyone know of an inexpensive option for an IFR GPS including annuciator and indicator? I've been thinking of a G430, but the price tag is a little restrictive if you know what I mean. I guess a DME would solve my problem, but then I won't have GPS approach capabilities.
Ben