When you get to the really old stuff, it’s almost impossible already. Example is my original H-14 (King) Autopilot installed in the 680V. We’re talking an A/P from the 60’s here. After my panel upgrade, couldn’t get it to work, so I had Autopilot Central in Tulsa do a little number on it and it worked fine after that. But the guy who knows everything about these was already retired – they brought him back in to supervise the tune up on mine. When he’s gone, will they be able to fix it? Probably, but when all the old-timers are gone, I doubt it.
And installing a new one is just cost prohibitive. It would be $100K+ and almost no avionics shop would take it on, as it always means some sort of custom manufacturing. Besides, the only “modern” A/P certified for it is the S-TEC 65 at $60K and that’s by no means a modern A/P at all. Maybe the new Garmin will one day be certified, but as long as the H-14 chugs along, I’m happy with it.
The ability to repair this kind of kit hangs on two things
and these in turn depend on how much business the company has; in the US it will have 10x more than in Europe, and by the time you look at Europe’s multiple cultures and languages and tribal allegiances, probably way more than 10×. That makes a huge difference. I could set up a shop with all the kit and I could repair the stuff but I would get business only from the UK, Benelux, Norway, Sweden, and then the ex Soviet Bloc countries but most of those still have plenty of “ex USSR era” expertise (a legacy of a decent engineering education system) and just do repairs off the books.
It is very true the analog people are getting old; I am close to “official retirement age” 
But with enough business, you can find people.
Peter wrote:
It’s made me realise that in the US you can actually get this stuff installed
I’d like to discuss this topic a bit more, because I’ve got the feeling that things might be changing in Europe at the moment.
Assuming you would find some nice working but somewhat “aged” autopilot system, which had been ripped from another plane. Of course it doesn’t have to be SO old like the pictures from the initial posting, maybe some late autopilot, pre-digital era or even a digital one, but, hell, not so costly than a new one. Including all servos and stuff you would need to put it into another plane (say of the same type to simplify things a bit). In principal you should be able to find good working pre-owned avionics in any maintenance shop whenever anybody wants to replace his good working autopilot with the latest stuff.
Now assume that the owner of the other plane would take over any responsibility for what’s installed in his plane because he’s flying it alone anyways. Is there any chance according to the new “Part ML” regulations, that such stuff can be declared airworthy and in fact be installed in the other plane? I believed this to be true, which could be a game-changer for the European market regarding prices for avionics like autopilots, but also for spare parts. Of course it would have to be released to service by an avionics specialist, but the question is, if it could be re-used.
According to Part 145.A.50 -AMC No2 to 145.A.50(d)2.7. it states “Used aircraft components removed from an aircraft withdrawn from service.Serviceable aircraft components removed from a Member State registered aircraft withdrawn from service may be issued with an EASA Form 1 by a maintenance organisation approved under Part-145 subject to compliance with this subparagraph.”
Item 2.8 further allows for usage of aircraft components removed from any other aircraft.
Can anybody provide some more insight here, to the extent of what would be needed for this? Does this mean extensive testing and so on, where in the end it gets cheaper to buy new?
This is the famous concession on which people are quite sharply divided (those who say it works, and those who say their CAMO / maintenance company won’t touch it) and it has been discussed e.g. here but I wonder whether an autopilot system would qualify as a “non critical” part?
You also do not need an EASA-a form for a lot of stuff – see e.g. here and some related threads here. I’d say the same issues might apply with an autopilot system on this one.
Peter wrote:
and it has been discussed e.g. here
Ah interesting. I missed that topic, but will go through it. Thanks for pointing this out.
