FAA proposes tougher icing rules

[Dave Siciliano]

We all know this was in the works.

Best,

Dave
==============================================

The Federal Aviation Administration, among other things, wants future testing of models considered susceptible to problems to indicate whether they can fly safely through freezing rain and drizzle, hazardous icing conditions known as "supercooled large drops."

The proposal also would extend more stringent icing-certification requirements to engines, certain engine parts and outside airspeed indicators and other sensors.

"These regulations will help ensure future aircraft can operate safely in some of the toughest icing conditions," according to FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt.

The document released by the agency Tuesday follows nearly 16 years of scientific research and analysis focused on icing hazards The proposed rules also require demonstration of the ability to fly safely through ice crystals and a mix of crystals and freezing rain or drizzle.

http://tinyurl.com/3yqnjco

 

[gismo]

Given the variety of icing conditions and the shapes of ice accumulation I can't see it ever being possible to design and/or test for infallible ice protection. Hopefully this will be aimed solely at air transport airplanes.

We all know this was in the works.

Best,

Dave
==============================================

The Federal Aviation Administration, among other things, wants future testing of models considered susceptible to problems to indicate whether they can fly safely through freezing rain and drizzle, hazardous icing conditions known as "supercooled large drops."

The proposal also would extend more stringent icing-certification requirements to engines, certain engine parts and outside airspeed indicators and other sensors.

"These regulations will help ensure future aircraft can operate safely in some of the toughest icing conditions," according to FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt.

The document released by the agency Tuesday follows nearly 16 years of scientific research and analysis focused on icing hazards The proposed rules also require demonstration of the ability to fly safely through ice crystals and a mix of crystals and freezing rain or drizzle.

http://tinyurl.com/3yqnjco

 

[Ted]

Given the variety of icing conditions and the shapes of ice accumulation I can't see it ever being possible to design and/or test for infallible ice protection. Hopefully this will be aimed solely at air transport airplanes.

It's interesting that they do this. My understanding is that, back a number of decades ago, there was a whole lot of government-funding flying that established a 95% icing envelope, and that's where a lot of the initial regs came from. Near as I can tell, that's proven pretty safe overall, with a few exceptions that I doubt the new rules would help (i.e. guy flying into icing in a Sierra without any de-ice).

We'll see what happens. For now, the de-ice in my Aztec works just fine for my icing tolerance.

 

[Steve]

Without reading the link I wonder if this will entail rescinding previously issued FIKI certification.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Seems to be geared more for propeller air transport planes for now (I wonder why)?

Don't know where it will go, but it's interesting that we keep trying to solve human judgment issues with more (expensive) technology. It would be different if the existing systems weren't sufficient. In the instance upon which folks are focusing, the plane and systems didn't seem to be a problem.

Best,

Dave

 

[Steve]

in a word - Colgan

despite evidence to the contrary regarding the influence of icing on the outcome at BUF

Seems to be geared more for propeller air transport planes for now (I wonder why)?

Dave