What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

pitot/static checks?

airguy

Unrepentant fanboy
Sponsor
Short of buying a test set, what are others doing for maintenance checks of the static system? Simple manometer and some sort of vacuum source to set it?
 
For static system checks, install a simple tap somewhere in the static system, tape off both static ports and use a small plastic syringe to (carefully) pull a vacuum on the altimeter at the tap. The max allowed leak rate is 100 ft/min. when the alt reads 1000' AGL. Pitot leakage checks are similar.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DN-74HluxC0

Unless you're very rich, DON'T EVER take an airplane in to a shop for IFR cert unless you're absolutely certain there are no leaks in the static or pitot system :)
 
+1 to the syringe method.

I test prior to the IFR cert. I have found that the technician always “discovers” leaks - sometimes, it is the test equipment and how well it seals. If you walk in knowing you meet specs, you can avoid an expensive hunt.
 
Directly opposite experience for IFR pitot/static/transponder/encoder/UAT-out checks.

Regular heated pitot and dual static ports with a nylon in-line fitting behind the seats of a RV-6.

Alt static to cabin switch at the end of the instruments.

Fly to lunch every few years, assist the shop with static connection location, they run up to FL180, check trans/encoder, log entry, pay, grab lunch. About same rate as the folks that will come to your hangar. $225 ish.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately I’m based at a towered airport so it’s a $500 bill every 2 years…

Dang I thought I had it bad at $330.

Unless you're very rich, DON'T EVER take an airplane in to a shop for IFR cert unless you're absolutely certain there are no leaks in the static or pitot system :)

+1

+1 to the syringe method.

I test prior to the IFR cert. I have found that the technician always “discovers” leaks - sometimes, it is the test equipment and how well it seals. If you walk in knowing you meet specs, you can avoid an expensive hunt.

+1 Although I trust the guys at Aerotronics to not screw me over I still test the night before and when I told them there was no leaks what so ever they believed me when they saw a leak and traced it back to their equipment not have a perfect seal. Little bit of speed tape and sure enough no leaks. The guys at Aerotronics gave me a tour and their courtesy car so I didn't mind paying a little extra. Luckily it's only every other year. Not to mention those guys really know their experimental stuff and they are even a VAF advertiser.
 
Maybe all you guys that think we overcharge should open your own business, go get a repair station license from the FAA (which took over a year to get and a huge investment in time writing manuals & meetings along with annual audits from them), rent a facility to work out of, invest 30K plus in state of the art test equipment, spend another 1.5K every year for equipment certification then spend 2-3 hrs actually doing the work.
So, how much would be fair price for this service now?

Oh yea, and like our fearless leader Doug, trying to make a living at the same time in this 'hobby'.
 
Last edited:
We do have multiple avionics shops in OKC area that I have dealt with.
However, I have always flown our RV9 from OKC to Walt at EXP Aircraft on 52F for static/transponder checks and prop balancing. Walt is the go-to knowledgeable guy to work on RVs and their avionics. I feel that he charges a fair price and consider it well worth the cost to fly to Ft. Worth. I easily coordinated with DFW Regional Approach to fly into 52F without a transponder on one occasion.
 
Last edited:
Maybe all you guys that think we overcharge should open your own business, go get a repair station license from the FAA (which took over a year to get and a huge investment in time writing manuals & meetings along with annual audits from them), rent a facility to work out of, invest 30K plus in state of the art test equipment, spend another 1.5K every year for equipment certification then spend 2-3 hrs actually doing the work.
So, how much would be fair price for this service now?

Oh yea, and like our fearless leader Doug, trying to make a living at the same time in this 'hobby'.

that's the way it often is with things in general. The consumer doesn't see or understand the underlying costs, time, and stressors. It's hard to place value on something you don't see or know. And the business at the same time is frustrated that customers don't value their product when it should be so "obvious".
And from the business's perspective there's always a balance.... their primary focus for profit margin vs secondary services or products that they provide either to draw in or support other business or to value add to help them stand apart from competition. Sometimes those are even loss-leaders.
Easy to jump to incorrect conclusions on both sides of the game.
 
that's the way it often is with things in general. The consumer doesn't see or understand the underlying costs, time, and stressors. It's hard to place value on something you don't see or know.

It's also hard to value something when you have too much information. The internet lets us see what the rates are at many locations across the country all at the same time. Armed with only that information, it's hard to not want to pay the lowest price when it's available, even if that lowest price has local conditions that allow it to be lower that don't apply where you are.
 
While 300 or even 500 is small potatoes in the grand scheme of our hobby it does make a guy wonder when he hears that someone can get a 91.411 and 413 for less than 200. I don't really value those tests that much other than to check a box to fly IFR. I don't think someone charging more is giving me more of a service than the cheap guy. Now, if I was going for a panel install and didn't want to do it myself, Walt you would be right up there on the list; even at an increased rate. Long story short, perceived product value has something to do with it.
 
I don’t think any reasonable person can complain too much about the cost of this service; rather, the real complaint is, outside of legal issues, ‘Is this service actually necessary for modern airplanes?’. I can recall (and they’re still out there) cavity tube based transponders that would routinely drift off frequency, mechanical encoders that could have parts stick or fail, etc. I’m sure this would be a bureaucratic nightmare, but I’d like to see longer inspection intervals for digital solid state transponders, same for altitude devices, etc. Or maybe even ‘repair as needed’ based on FAA radar surveillance data, etc.
 
I don’t think any reasonable person can complain too much about the cost of this service; rather, the real complaint is, outside of legal issues, ‘Is this service actually necessary for modern airplanes?’. I can recall (and they’re still out there) cavity tube based transponders that would routinely drift off frequency, mechanical encoders that could have parts stick or fail, etc. I’m sure this would be a bureaucratic nightmare, but I’d like to see longer inspection intervals for digital solid state transponders, same for altitude devices, etc. Or maybe even ‘repair as needed’ based on FAA radar surveillance data, etc.

The very latest generation of SS xpdrs are pretty stable freq wise from what I see, but I routinely adjust the 'old digital' GTX327 as they go out of tolerance pretty regularly anymore (it's an old unit).

As far as altimetry, even my 'megabuck' test set (Laversab 6300) req's an annual check as it can still drift so obviously a relatively inexpensive AHRS will drift, ie: I routinely calibrate Garmin and Dynon AHRS units during certification (certified and experimental). The "digital" Apsen units are routinely out of limits when they come in. So, digital does not mean "never needs adjusting".

For steam gauge panels alt's routinely need adjusting along with thier encoders and I can adjust a KT76A freq with my eyes closed.
 
Last edited:
Required everywhere?

Are pitot-static signoffs by qualified persons required everywhere?

I should know the answer........... but that was obviously one of my brain cells that recently committed suicide! :rolleyes:
 
It's also hard to value something when you have too much information. The internet lets us see what the rates are at many locations across the country all at the same time. Armed with only that information, it's hard to not want to pay the lowest price when it's available, even if that lowest price has local conditions that allow it to be lower that don't apply where you are.

yeah, that's a great point! Also similar is knowing that something is dirt simple and cheap to do but the price is high
 
Are pitot-static signoffs by qualified persons required everywhere?

I should know the answer........... but that was obviously one of my brain cells that recently committed suicide! :rolleyes:

Xpdr/91.413=yes, P-S/91.411 only for IFR.
 
For static system checks, install a simple tap somewhere in the static system, tape off both static ports and use a small plastic syringe to (carefully) pull a vacuum on the altimeter at the tap. The max allowed leak rate is 100 ft/min. when the alt reads 1000' AGL. Pitot leakage checks are similar.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DN-74HluxC0

Unless you're very rich, DON'T EVER take an airplane in to a shop for IFR cert unless you're absolutely certain there are no leaks in the static or pitot system :)

With experimental aircraft can the owner/Light Sport Repairman certificate holder legally perform this test (which I do each annual) and apply it to the 24 month IFR check? I have purchased a GPS175, plan to install in February, and thought I could perform this certification myself. The transponder check I knew would need to be done elsewhere but since I already perform this syringe method of static-pitot check it could be used.
 
My check this year (biannual) came to just under $900 CDN. Done by the avionics shop that I share a hangar with. It was $200+GST more than last time because I added a G5 to my pitot/static system. Not really happy about this expense, when it doesn't turn up anything to fix, but this is my 3rd one and the only one that actually didn't find an issue.
 
With experimental aircraft can the owner/Light Sport Repairman certificate holder legally perform this test (which I do each annual) and apply it to the 24 month IFR check? I have purchased a GPS175, plan to install in February, and thought I could perform this certification myself. The transponder check I knew would need to be done elsewhere but since I already perform this syringe method of static-pitot check it could be used.

Well, you are certainly free to pull a slight vacuum on the static system and hunt down and fix leaks. But the 24 month ifr check involves a lot more than no leaks. e.g., you need to compare all altitude readings at various ‘heights’ to an altimeter with traceable calibration standards.
Does the -175 tap into the static system? If no, not sure why it would be relevant?
Note to Claude from the English police: biannual = every 6 months; biennial = every 2 years.
 
Does the -175 tap into the static system? If no, not sure why it would be relevant?

Just going by the '24 month transponder/static/pitot check' rule for IFR. GPS175 is new to me and all IFR flight experience is in club/rental DA40s equipped with 430W and 530W. I understand that VOR checks will not be necessary (or possible) with GPS175 but assumed that information the unit receives from other avionics relies on static/pitot therefore the 24 month check would still be required. Is this not true?
 
Note to Claude from the English police: biannual = every 6 months; biennial = every 2 years.

My note back to the English police (Scotland Yard?). How about some consistency? Bicentennial=every 2 centuries, biweekly=every 2 weeks, bipartisan=2 parties, biped=2 footed. I suggest we abolish the use of the bi prefix to denote 1/2. That's what semi is for. Not saying you're wrong Bob, just that the whole English language is wrong. Even Merriam-Webster lists both definitions (1. occurring twice a year, 2. biennial sense 1 [occurring every 2 years]) and acknowledges that the use is confusing and inconsistent. The other alternative is that my employer can start paying me my same biweekly pay twice a week now. Yeah, that works, I'd even agree to making the same change to my mortgage payments.
 
Just going by the '24 month transponder/static/pitot check' rule for IFR. GPS175 is new to me and all IFR flight experience is in club/rental DA40s equipped with 430W and 530W. I understand that VOR checks will not be necessary (or possible) with GPS175 but assumed that information the unit receives from other avionics relies on static/pitot therefore the 24 month check would still be required. Is this not true?

The 24 month checks are there to confirm your altimetry meets a specification and that it is properly broadcast via the transponder. It has nothing to do with navigation equipment that may use that same info for other purposes.
So no, P-S check not required if you install a GPS unit.
 
The 24 month checks are there to confirm your altimetry meets a specification and that it is properly broadcast via the transponder. It has nothing to do with navigation equipment that may use that same info for other purposes.
So no, P-S check not required if you install a GPS unit.

Thanks! Liking my GPS175 decision even more!
 
Thanks! Liking my GPS175 decision even more!

Just so there isn't any confusion, if you want to fly IFR, then THAT is what necessitates the need for a 91.411 pitot-static certification every 24 months.

You don't need an IFR GPS like the GPS 175 to fly IFR. You don't need to fly IFR just because you have installed an IFR GPS. But, if you ARE going to fly IFR you do need to have the 91.411 pitot-static certification.

And no, you can't do the 91.411 certification yourself unless you have the correct equipment and are authorized to do so, and that isn't a repairman certificate. See Walt's post on the 1st page of this thread.
 
Not sure I understand this comment. To fly IFR mustn't the aircraft be properly equipped per 91.205(d)?

Yes, it must. The way I believe 91.205(d) is interpreted is that you can still file and fly IFR with just NAV equipment like VORs and ILS.

The reg says "navigation equipment suitable for the route to be flown..."
 
Not sure I understand this comment. To fly IFR mustn't the aircraft be properly equipped per 91.205(d)?

“Properly equipped” means that you have the needed nav equipment on board and useable. If you’re flying a route defined by VORs and your destination (and alternate, if required) have ILS or VOR approaches, then a conventional nav radio is all you need. So the poster is correct - it is possible to fly some ifr without a gps.
 
Yes, it must. The way I believe 91.205(d) is interpreted is that you can still file and fly IFR with just NAV equipment like VORs and ILS.

The reg says "navigation equipment suitable for the route to be flown..."

I see what you mean now. My panel does not include a NAV radio so VOR and ILS are not an option.
 
Regarding Walt's post;. "So no, P-S check not required if you install a GPS unit.",

I have been flying behind a pair of Skyviews for many years using my Apollo SL-30 Nav-Com as my IFR navigation source. I plan to add the GPS-175 gps navigator to my panel. Does this mean I can stop doing the ever increasing $$ of the pitot/static test every 2 years?
 
Regarding Walt's post;. "So no, P-S check not required if you install a GPS unit.",

I have been flying behind a pair of Skyviews for many years using my Apollo SL-30 Nav-Com as my IFR navigation source. I plan to add the GPS-175 gps navigator to my panel. Does this mean I can stop doing the ever increasing $$ of the pitot/static test every 2 years?

No, if you want to fly IFR. The pitot-static check has nothing to do with your installed nav equipment, which I think was the point Walt was trying to make.

§ 91.411 Altimeter system and altitude reporting equipment tests and inspections.
(a) No person may operate an airplane, or helicopter, in controlled airspace under IFR unless -
(1) Within the preceding 24 calendar months, each static pressure system, each altimeter instrument, and each automatic pressure altitude reporting system has been tested and inspected and found to comply with appendices E and F of part 43 of this chapter……
 
Last edited:
Just for comparative information, the Canadian requirement is for transponder testing every 24 months (in all uses) and altimetry device testing in the 24 months preceding IFR flight or flight in class B/C or transponder airspace. [note Canada has different airspace classes than the US] It is found in CAR Standard 625 Appendix C.

13. Altimetry Devices
(amended 2007/12/30)

(a) Altimeters and other Altimetry devices installed in aircraft operating under Instrument Flight Rules, or under visual flight rules in Class B and C Airspace or Class C and D Airspace that is designated as "Transponder Airspace" shall be calibrated at intervals not exceeding 24 months, to the parameters and tolerances outlined in Appendix B of Standard 571, or to equivalent standards acceptable to the Minister.
(amended 2007/12/30)

(b) For the purpose of this section, the term "altimetry devices" includes any air data computer, or other barometric device, providing a flight crew station, or an auto pilot, or automatic pressure altitude reporting system, or altitude alerting system with altitude data derived from static pressure.
(amended 2007/12/30)

14. Air Traffic Control (ATC) Transponders

ATC Transponders, including any associated altitude sensing reporting mechanisms, where installed, shall be tested every 24 months, in accordance with Appendix F of Chapter 571 of the Airworthiness Manual.
(amended 2000/12/01)
 
Back
Top