Any thoughts on maintenance free (sealed) vs. the old style batteries?
I have always had good luck with the "normal" kind; 49V has a sealed battery, and when we went to start her today the battery was dead. We're charging it overnight tonight, but if it happens to be shot I was thinking I'd go back to the non-sealed battery.
Thoughts?
Thomas
Battery
Moderators: GAHorn, Karl Towle, Bruce Fenstermacher
-
Dave Clark
- Posts: 894
- Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 6:25 pm
-
Green Bean
- Posts: 163
- Joined: Tue May 06, 2003 2:13 am
Gell Cell Battery
Since you asked.
I switched to a Gell Cell Battery. Moved it off of the firewall and put it under the floor, on its side, under the copilot/passenger seat. The battery weighs the same but has two more amps, than the lead acid battery (26 amps).
I was told it would only last a couple of years, but it has lasted 12 years. Also traded out the starter to a Flight Lite. End result was a minus 7 pounds and a aft movement of the CG.
The battery is a Power Sonic PS 12280, 12V 28Amp battery. Battery box was constructed of 20 gage SS. with a removal top, under the right side cabin floor at station 44.
I switched to a Gell Cell Battery. Moved it off of the firewall and put it under the floor, on its side, under the copilot/passenger seat. The battery weighs the same but has two more amps, than the lead acid battery (26 amps).
I was told it would only last a couple of years, but it has lasted 12 years. Also traded out the starter to a Flight Lite. End result was a minus 7 pounds and a aft movement of the CG.
The battery is a Power Sonic PS 12280, 12V 28Amp battery. Battery box was constructed of 20 gage SS. with a removal top, under the right side cabin floor at station 44.
-
Green Bean
- Posts: 163
- Joined: Tue May 06, 2003 2:13 am
It was completed with a 337, and yes in Alaska, with no restriction. Power Sonic a registred brand, try a electrionic dealer. Most Gel's will give more AMP for the same weight as lead acid.
There are two out fits here that are selling gels, STC approved, with smaller battery boxes, moved or same location, approved from PA-18's through Cessna 185's.
One is Sky Craft. You will need to change to the Skyteck starter. Could get more info if you are interested.
There are two out fits here that are selling gels, STC approved, with smaller battery boxes, moved or same location, approved from PA-18's through Cessna 185's.
One is Sky Craft. You will need to change to the Skyteck starter. Could get more info if you are interested.
-
cessna170bdriver
- Posts: 4068
- Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 5:13 pm
Since I converted to the Jasco 50-Amp alternator/regulator system in 1990 I've had extremely good experience with the standard 25-amp-hour lead-acid aircraft batteries (Gill, Concorde, etc.). I usually get 4 to 5 years out of them, and the only boil over I had was trying to let the alternator charge a nearly dead battery in the airplane. Now that I know that is a no-no, I've not had any further problems.
My airplane just recently sat idle for 6 months, and the 2-year old standard battery still had enough oomph to pull in the master switch, but just barely. Last weekend I took the battery out of the airplane, added an ounce or two of distilled water to each cell to bring it up to the proper level, put it on an automotive trickle charger (about 3- to 5-amp charge rate) for about 6 hours, and it spun the engine well on about 5 starts over the course of 3 days. Your mileage may vary.
I guess the bottom line is that with the system I have now, I personally wouldn't go to any extra expense or paper work to switch to a different type of battery.
Miles
My airplane just recently sat idle for 6 months, and the 2-year old standard battery still had enough oomph to pull in the master switch, but just barely. Last weekend I took the battery out of the airplane, added an ounce or two of distilled water to each cell to bring it up to the proper level, put it on an automotive trickle charger (about 3- to 5-amp charge rate) for about 6 hours, and it spun the engine well on about 5 starts over the course of 3 days. Your mileage may vary.
I guess the bottom line is that with the system I have now, I personally wouldn't go to any extra expense or paper work to switch to a different type of battery.
Miles
Miles
“I envy no man that knows more than myself, but pity them that know less.”
— Thomas Browne
“I envy no man that knows more than myself, but pity them that know less.”
— Thomas Browne
Tom Rogers of Avionics West wrote an informative article about aircraft battery installation, which made valid points with regard to installing batteries other than the original or approved replacements. He wrote, (notice the fine point he made about PMA's. I added the underlining for emphasis.):
"Kevin and the Battery
Recently Avionics West completed an installation in a Cessna 182 that had a battery problem upon arrival. We found after the avionics installation that the battery did not have enough capacity to start the aircraft regardless of how much it was charged, thus it was time for replacement. The existing battery was a Concorde CB-35 and the customers desire was to stick with Concorde due to the fact it had given him good service over the years. Lets face it, what could be more boring than installing an aircraft battery after weeks of fabricating a custom avionics panel and a center stack full of Garmin radios and a PS-Engineering audio panel with a high class CD player but someone had to do it and the aircraft wouldn’t start without a jump.
Kevin then unpackaged the battery and started reading the servicing procedures; the battery came with the acid already in the cells. By the way, don t just slap a new battery in your aircraft and fly away; follow the servicing procedures and you’ll get a lot more life out of your new battery. He then placed a call to the vendor that sold us the battery and they said The “A†meant the battery came with the acid. This answer didn’t seem quite right to Kevin, he also noticed that the new battery looked somewhat different than the original CB-35 in that it had bolts that held the battery cables in place rather than wing nuts. OK, now we have two batteries, each having a different part number and both somewhat physically different from each other; what should one do at this point? It was time to visit the Concorde website.
After some research, here’s what Kevin found. The Cessna 182 in question came from the factory with a Gill G-35 installed and was listed on the aircraft type certificate. Further research revealed to Kevin that the Concorde CB-35 could also be installed in this aircraft via a DDA. A DDA means that a part is approved for installation via the FAA based on Design Data Approval as a substitute part. Often manufacturers will have Design Data Approval on more than one part just in case they go out of business or decide not to manufacture the product in the future. In other words either the Gill G-35 or the Concorde CB-35 could have been installed in this aircraft with just an aircraft records entry, simple and easy. A call to Concorde gave us more information. A Concorde sales person said the CB-35 was no longer made and the CB-35A was a direct substitute for the out of production CB-35. But, according to Cessna only the G-35 and the CB-35 are approved for the aircraft in question under the DDA. At that point another call to Concorde was made and our conversation to Cessna was given to the sales person. His answer, “Ohâ€. No doubt the CB-35A is PMA (Parts Manufacturing Approval) approved but how do we legally install this battery in the Cessna?
You see; PMA approval doesn’t mean you can just install in your flying machine, there has to be some basis for the installation. We couldn’t install the CB-35A under Cessna s DDA because it didn’t cover this battery. After some research, we found that a company called Wilco owned a STC that would allow installation of the CB-35A in this Cessna. Then another problem arose in that the STC holder wanted to sell us the STC for $125.00. I can understand that; they have a lot of money and time invested in obtaining the STC. Kevin got Concorde, Wilco and the original vendor together and Concorde decided to pick up the tab for the STC. The original vendor agreed to either pay for the STC or replace the battery with a Gill G-35 at no charge. I feel Concorde and the vendor acted appropriately. It’s been my experience that most aircraft parts vendors go to the edge to please their customers. Lets look at what happened in what should have been a slam-dunk battery installation. First the vendor didn’t ship the exact item we ordered. Second the vendor told us the battery in question was certified for the aircraft (as a direct replacement) and the battery manufacturer said the same; both were wrong. Hours of research time were incurred that had to be billed to someone. The CB-35A is illegal in this aircraft unless it is installed via a STC and a 337 form is completed. Yes, one could try to get a Field Approval through the local feds but that wouldn’t fly in our area.
The moral of the story is this; don’t believe everything you hear and only half of what you see. What should have been an easy installation turned into a paperwork headache. We’ve run into this type of problem before, for example, replacing engine instruments and fuel gages; we have to verify that the aircraft we wished to modify can legally be modified. Even today the Concorde website shows that the CB-35A is certified under Design Data Approval from Cessna but as of this writing, that simply isn’t true. Did our “kicking the hornets nest†help other aircraft owners in the future? I d like to think so. My suggestion would be to research after-market products you wish to purchase, make sure BEFORE you purchase them that the parts can legally be installed on your make, model and serial number aircraft. Yes, there’s legal ways to replace those old Cessna 182 CHT, Oil Pressure and Temp gages but double check the documentation before you purchase them. Now I wonder how many Cessna 182’s have CB-35A batteries installed… "
"Kevin and the Battery
Recently Avionics West completed an installation in a Cessna 182 that had a battery problem upon arrival. We found after the avionics installation that the battery did not have enough capacity to start the aircraft regardless of how much it was charged, thus it was time for replacement. The existing battery was a Concorde CB-35 and the customers desire was to stick with Concorde due to the fact it had given him good service over the years. Lets face it, what could be more boring than installing an aircraft battery after weeks of fabricating a custom avionics panel and a center stack full of Garmin radios and a PS-Engineering audio panel with a high class CD player but someone had to do it and the aircraft wouldn’t start without a jump.
Kevin then unpackaged the battery and started reading the servicing procedures; the battery came with the acid already in the cells. By the way, don t just slap a new battery in your aircraft and fly away; follow the servicing procedures and you’ll get a lot more life out of your new battery. He then placed a call to the vendor that sold us the battery and they said The “A†meant the battery came with the acid. This answer didn’t seem quite right to Kevin, he also noticed that the new battery looked somewhat different than the original CB-35 in that it had bolts that held the battery cables in place rather than wing nuts. OK, now we have two batteries, each having a different part number and both somewhat physically different from each other; what should one do at this point? It was time to visit the Concorde website.
After some research, here’s what Kevin found. The Cessna 182 in question came from the factory with a Gill G-35 installed and was listed on the aircraft type certificate. Further research revealed to Kevin that the Concorde CB-35 could also be installed in this aircraft via a DDA. A DDA means that a part is approved for installation via the FAA based on Design Data Approval as a substitute part. Often manufacturers will have Design Data Approval on more than one part just in case they go out of business or decide not to manufacture the product in the future. In other words either the Gill G-35 or the Concorde CB-35 could have been installed in this aircraft with just an aircraft records entry, simple and easy. A call to Concorde gave us more information. A Concorde sales person said the CB-35 was no longer made and the CB-35A was a direct substitute for the out of production CB-35. But, according to Cessna only the G-35 and the CB-35 are approved for the aircraft in question under the DDA. At that point another call to Concorde was made and our conversation to Cessna was given to the sales person. His answer, “Ohâ€. No doubt the CB-35A is PMA (Parts Manufacturing Approval) approved but how do we legally install this battery in the Cessna?
You see; PMA approval doesn’t mean you can just install in your flying machine, there has to be some basis for the installation. We couldn’t install the CB-35A under Cessna s DDA because it didn’t cover this battery. After some research, we found that a company called Wilco owned a STC that would allow installation of the CB-35A in this Cessna. Then another problem arose in that the STC holder wanted to sell us the STC for $125.00. I can understand that; they have a lot of money and time invested in obtaining the STC. Kevin got Concorde, Wilco and the original vendor together and Concorde decided to pick up the tab for the STC. The original vendor agreed to either pay for the STC or replace the battery with a Gill G-35 at no charge. I feel Concorde and the vendor acted appropriately. It’s been my experience that most aircraft parts vendors go to the edge to please their customers. Lets look at what happened in what should have been a slam-dunk battery installation. First the vendor didn’t ship the exact item we ordered. Second the vendor told us the battery in question was certified for the aircraft (as a direct replacement) and the battery manufacturer said the same; both were wrong. Hours of research time were incurred that had to be billed to someone. The CB-35A is illegal in this aircraft unless it is installed via a STC and a 337 form is completed. Yes, one could try to get a Field Approval through the local feds but that wouldn’t fly in our area.
The moral of the story is this; don’t believe everything you hear and only half of what you see. What should have been an easy installation turned into a paperwork headache. We’ve run into this type of problem before, for example, replacing engine instruments and fuel gages; we have to verify that the aircraft we wished to modify can legally be modified. Even today the Concorde website shows that the CB-35A is certified under Design Data Approval from Cessna but as of this writing, that simply isn’t true. Did our “kicking the hornets nest†help other aircraft owners in the future? I d like to think so. My suggestion would be to research after-market products you wish to purchase, make sure BEFORE you purchase them that the parts can legally be installed on your make, model and serial number aircraft. Yes, there’s legal ways to replace those old Cessna 182 CHT, Oil Pressure and Temp gages but double check the documentation before you purchase them. Now I wonder how many Cessna 182’s have CB-35A batteries installed… "
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons.
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons.
The above story is a magnificent example of how to construct a really big mountain out of a really small mole hill. All over the suffix "A" on a battery.
They would really s--t if they saw the Pep Boys garden tractor battery that I use. They cost $19.95 and you toss them out at annual, point to the old aircraft battery on the charger, and then put in a new tractor battery for the next year.
They would really s--t if they saw the Pep Boys garden tractor battery that I use. They cost $19.95 and you toss them out at annual, point to the old aircraft battery on the charger, and then put in a new tractor battery for the next year.
BL
Is there a PMA approval for a 170 battery? I am not so sure
The Light Plane Maintenance Library 2nd edition of Systems Maintenance (COPYRIGHT 1987 AND 1996) pg 153-154 has the following quote:
"The first thing to understand about chosing a replacement battery for your aircraft is that you do not need to buy the same make and model of battery that originally came with the plane.....
"...Nor are aircraft batteries manufactured under PMA approval..."
"According to Gene Sherman, of the Office of General Aviation, FAA headquarters, Washington, DC, : "The only rule governing the installation of lead-acid batteries is that which says that an airplane must - upon completion of any maintenance, be its original or properly altered condition, (FAR 43.13)
"The FAA does not monitor the manufacture of aircraft batteries," Sherman says, "which means it is up to the owner-operator to ensure that the battery in his plane is of a type equal to or better than the original battery which was in the plane when it received its type certification."
The book then goes on to say that a replacement battery must be of aircraft-style construction, same size and weight, and equal to or greater capacity, etc.. If its moved or heavier than the original, approval must be obtained...
This seems to make eminent sense, so it must some how conflict with current FAA regs or capricious local FSDO interpretations. I am not an expert. Can anyone shed more light on this? Have the regs changed since 1996 or was the author wrong?
"The first thing to understand about chosing a replacement battery for your aircraft is that you do not need to buy the same make and model of battery that originally came with the plane.....
"...Nor are aircraft batteries manufactured under PMA approval..."
"According to Gene Sherman, of the Office of General Aviation, FAA headquarters, Washington, DC, : "The only rule governing the installation of lead-acid batteries is that which says that an airplane must - upon completion of any maintenance, be its original or properly altered condition, (FAR 43.13)
"The FAA does not monitor the manufacture of aircraft batteries," Sherman says, "which means it is up to the owner-operator to ensure that the battery in his plane is of a type equal to or better than the original battery which was in the plane when it received its type certification."
The book then goes on to say that a replacement battery must be of aircraft-style construction, same size and weight, and equal to or greater capacity, etc.. If its moved or heavier than the original, approval must be obtained...
This seems to make eminent sense, so it must some how conflict with current FAA regs or capricious local FSDO interpretations. I am not an expert. Can anyone shed more light on this? Have the regs changed since 1996 or was the author wrong?
Pete Brown
Anchorage, Alaska
N4563C 1953 170B
http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2366/2527 ... 4e43_b.jpg
Anchorage, Alaska
N4563C 1953 170B
http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2366/2527 ... 4e43_b.jpg
BL, I can never tell if your serious or just pulling our chains.blueldr wrote:The above story is a magnificent example of how to construct a really big mountain out of a really small mole hill. All over the suffix "A" on a battery.
They would really s--t if they saw the Pep Boys garden tractor battery that I use. They cost $19.95 and you toss them out at annual, point to the old aircraft battery on the charger, and then put in a new tractor battery for the next year.
Karl
'53 170B N3158B SN:25400
ASW-20BL
'53 170B N3158B SN:25400
ASW-20BL
Devil's Advocate here In Texas the lawn tractor batteries cost $19-$29, with $5 disposal fees added on for the old battery, whether or not you turn it back in. Taking the average of that, $24, plus the fee equals $29 plus sales taxes and you're back up to $30 plus.
With that and his past experience, Miles would spend $120 every four years on illegal tractor batteries and run the risk of additional costs if he were caught, and perhaps much higher additional costs if something went wrong over it.
New Gill G-25 batteries are $103 including shipping and acid from discount suppliers. Sounds cheaper and a whole lot safer to just use the correct battery.
If you've never thought about it, consider this: Aircraft batteries are designed with seperators within each cell which keep individual plates from vibrating loose and touching each other and thereby shorting out with the very real potential to start a battery fire in an UN-extinguished compartment. That little aluminum box is not a fire-proof box. In fact it won't likely last long enough to get you on the ground if the battery explodes or catches fire. (And if your battery has been relocated back behind the baggage compartment, it'll be sitting right there in your own breathing atmosphere, right there above/next to your elevator cables.) There is more to aircraft batteries than what is apparent to the casual observer who looks only at the outside of the case. Genuine Aircraft batteries are a good investment for the money.
(And just as a reminder: The battery is NOT for starting your airplane. We just find that convenient. The real purpose of a battery is as a source of emergency power in case of failure of generated electricity, to get you somewhere back on the ground on a dark/cloudy night. I want the right tool for the job, and I want to protect my rear end as well as my license.) IMHO
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons.
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons.
All,
Perhaps I am misreading the contents of this post, but no one has mentioned the Odessey PC680 battery which is approved for some Piper aircraft. Has this battery fallen out of favor with the 170 crowd?? If so, Why??
Reason is: I just purchased a used PC680 which I plan to "try" in my 170.
Comments??
chuck
Perhaps I am misreading the contents of this post, but no one has mentioned the Odessey PC680 battery which is approved for some Piper aircraft. Has this battery fallen out of favor with the 170 crowd?? If so, Why??
Reason is: I just purchased a used PC680 which I plan to "try" in my 170.
Comments??
chuck
hello
i'm brand new to this forum!
but have flown about 40 years,
most of it in a 1951 C170A.
battery holder is original i think.
i would like to put in a new battery.
i don't care if it doesn't last long,
as stated above, the tractor battery
would be fine
i could change it
with each annual.
i do a lot of propping now.
whitch one should i get?
thanks
dave
i'm brand new to this forum!
but have flown about 40 years,
most of it in a 1951 C170A.
battery holder is original i think.
i would like to put in a new battery.
i don't care if it doesn't last long,
as stated above, the tractor battery
would be fine
i could change it
with each annual.
i do a lot of propping now.
whitch one should i get?
thanks
dave