M7 Landing / Taxi Lights

[drak130]

Thanks on the info regarding the switch/breaker combo. That must be the deal. I have no dedicated breakers for the landing lights, nav lights or pitot heat. I'll look closer at the rocker switches and see if they are labeled with amps. Installed the lights yesterday. Only casualty was a fat lip (don't ask). Waiting for the winds to die down to my personal limits (calm) and will give them a try. Landing in left, taxi in right.

[andy]

Did you get Whelen or AeroLED?

[drak130]

I went with the Whelen. No particular reason other than name brand recognition and still feeling my way through the STC / PMA minefield.

[gbarrier]

Whelen approved for Maule. Just logbook entry.

[andy]

As I understand it, any alteration listed in the manufacturer's specifications is considered by the FAA to be a minor alteration requiring only a logbook entry per Appendix 1 in AC-120-77. That means that anything listed in Maule's Required Equipment List or Optional Equipment List can be performed as a minor alteration. True?

Maule's REL and OEL for all MX7 and M7 models with Lycoming engines are available at
REL
OEL

While the REL includes Whelen navigation and tail position lights, I didn't see the Whelen LED landing or taxi lights listed in either one.

That means that the installation must be done by STC. However, it might still be considered a minor alteration under AC-120-77 if it doesn't alter the aircraft's weight, performance, etc. I'm guessing that the .52 lb weight of the Whelen landing or taxi light is close to the weight of the Q4509 filament light. It doesn't appear that any other boxes on the flowchart would be affected so it would still be a minor alteration. Some A&Ps err on the side of caution and still complete a 337 and send it to the FAA.

I'm not an A&P so I'd be interested in hearing what A&Ps who have done the Whelen installation think about this.

[Lmjr]

My understanding of “doesn’t alter the weight and balanceâ€￾ only applies to altering the LIMITS of the weight and balance. Just adding a few pounds to aircraft does not in its self constitute a major alteration. If you want to increase gross weight or expand CG limits different story.

I have found over the years many “old wives tales in aviationâ€￾

[Andy Young]

Lots of A&Ps assume things to be major alterations that are not. Even some FAA inspectors have a false sense of that. Here’s the rule:

Appendix A to Part 43 - Major Alterations, Major Repairs, and Preventive Maintenance
(a) Major alterations -

(1) Airframe major alterations. Alterations of the following parts and alterations of the following types, when not listed in the aircraft specifications issued by the FAA, are airframe major alterations:

(i) Wings.

(ii) Tail surfaces.

(iii) Fuselage.

(iv) Engine mounts.

(v) Control system.

(vi) Landing gear.

(vii) Hull or floats.

(viii) Elements of an airframe including spars, ribs, fittings, shock absorbers, bracing, cowling, fairings, and balance weights.

(ix) Hydraulic and electrical actuating system of components.

(x) Rotor blades.

(xi) Changes to the empty weight or empty balance which result in an increase in the maximum certificated weight or center of gravity limits of the aircraft.

(xii) Changes to the basic design of the fuel, oil, cooling, heating, cabin pressurization, electrical, hydraulic, de-icing, or exhaust systems.

(xiii) Changes to the wing or to fixed or movable control surfaces which affect flutter and vibration characteristics.

(2) Powerplant major alterations. The following alterations of a powerplant when not listed in the engine specifications issued by the FAA, are powerplant major alterations.

(i) Conversion of an aircraft engine from one approved model to another, involving any changes in compression ratio, propeller reduction gear, impeller gear ratios or the substitution of major engine parts which requires extensive rework and testing of the engine.

(ii) Changes to the engine by replacing aircraft engine structural parts with parts not supplied by the original manufacturer or parts not specifically approved by the Administrator.

(iii) Installation of an accessory which is not approved for the engine.

(iv) Removal of accessories that are listed as required equipment on the aircraft or engine specification.

(v) Installation of structural parts other than the type of parts approved for the installation.

(vi) Conversions of any sort for the purpose of using fuel of a rating or grade other than that listed in the engine specifications.

(3) Propeller major alterations. The following alterations of a propeller when not authorized in the propeller specifications issued by the FAA are propeller major alterations:

(i) Changes in blade design.

(ii) Changes in hub design.

(iii) Changes in the governor or control design.

(iv) Installation of a propeller governor or feathering system.

(v) Installation of propeller de-icing system.

(vi) Installation of parts not approved for the propeller.

(4) Appliance major alterations. Alterations of the basic design not made in accordance with recommendations of the appliance manufacturer or in accordance with an FAA Airworthiness Directive are appliance major alterations. In addition, changes in the basic design of radio communication and navigation equipment approved under type certification or a Technical Standard Order that have an effect on frequency stability, noise level, sensitivity, selectivity, distortion, spurious radiation, AVC characteristics, or ability to meet environmental test conditions and other changes that have an effect on the performance of the equipment are also major alterations.

[Spiff]

Brent Maule told my that the Whelen lights are now on the TC for the M4-180V. I don't know if that is also true for the other models. I would give them a call before I got to far into the weeds with A&P sign offs, STCs etc.

[Spiff]

Brent Maule told my that the Whelen lights are now on the TC for the M4-180V. I don't know if that is also true for the other models. I would give them a call before I got to far into the weeds with A&P sign offs, STCs etc.

[andy]

There are separate RELs and OELs for the M4, M5-210C and M9 models. I looked through all of them on the Mauleairinc.com website but didn't seen any Whelen landing or taxi lights. Whelen navigation and tail position lights are in some of them but not the landing or taxi light. Correct me if I'm wrong but if they were on the TC, wouldn't they show up in the REL or OEL?

[Spiff]

I just got the Wheelen LED lights from Maule. I put the taxi light in the left wing and the landing light in the right wing. What a difference! Great lighting! They are expensive, but money well spent I think.

[Duane]

The website is handled and kept up with a website designer/maintainer. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the info was out of date.
As far as the legality of the Whelen lights, that is covered on print 9030E rev G and they are approved for all models. Both the landing and taxi lights.

[andy]

Thanks, Duane. My parts DVD only has 9030E rev F that still shows a sealed beam lamp. Do I need to buy a new parts DVD to get all the latest revisions? There doesn't seem to be a distribution network for revisions.

[andy]

That brings up an interesting question that probably affects most of us Maule owners. How can we determine if a new part is on the TC if it's not reflected on the published website REL or OEL? If the drawings are the best data source for new parts and modifications, then it would be really great if Maule would put an updated index of drawings and revision numbers on the website. It would be even better if we could order revised drawings by email to Maule Parts without having to buy a brand new DVD.

[Dan3197]

When I had my Maule m6 rebuilt. The factory has an approved mod to have a total of 4 landing light bays. 2 on each side. Which I did.

Originally I installed a pair, one on each side, of the standard cheap filament lights lights and a pair of aero led 45watt Version. One landing and one taxi.

The two 45 watt led were much brighter than the two filament bulbs to a point point and that i could hardly see the difference turning the Filament on and off with the leds on. So about a month after I started flying it, the old style bulbs burnt out as expected. I really didn’t see much advantage of the led taxi light and taxi lighting wasn’t the main issue. It’s long light penetration. So I replaced the two old filament bulbs with the aero led high power 100watt versions. And wow they are bright.

Now I had the opposite. The new 100watt leds are so much brighter than when I would turn on/off the 45 watt led ones I could hardly tell the 45watt Leds were on. At $600 a piece they are pricey. After about a year I just swapped out the two 45watt bulbs (for sale) with a 2nd pair of 100 watt leds. Now I have 4 total 100watt leds. It’s a super amount of light. To a point I been practicing landings on unlit runways. I can see about 2000ft at about 200agl. I am also using the gtn 750 visual glide path with a g500 to get perfect alignment coming in. Using it on runways without obstacles and ones I know well during the day. It’s Illinois midwest it’s all flat land. For the most part if ur up 300agl nothing to hit for miles around the airport.

Now for land versus taxi. The two 100watt pair as landing have ample light for any taxi purpose. Now I have 4 100 watt all landing style. I did point one pair. Tail down and one pair for 65 knots flying attitude. No longer have to dive bomb the ground on final to see the runway.

My option the 100watt is twice the cost as the 45watt about $600 versus $320. I would do 2 100 watt landing. It be the same light as more than 4 45watt leds. 4 100 watt is sort of an over kill now But if they really last 20,000 hrs or some crazy amount it’s a one time expense. Also as I gotten older, never can have enough light. I gotten comments during the day my lights are super bright. Looks more like a Lear jet coming in.