FIKI flights ok?

[Roadracin]

I’m in SoCal and want a plane I can fly to 7000’ airports. Ie:
flagstaff, AZ. mammoth, CA, Utah etc.
winter would create ice obviously.

is a FIKI system safe? Cirrus SR22T and Beechcraft Barron G58 maybe.

Is my mission unrealistic?

 

[GRG55]

I wouldn't deliberately be going looking for trouble (ice) in a piston airplane no matter what it has for anti-ice or de-ice equipment. I'll punch through a thin layer if necessary. But mostly I treat mine as there to get me out of trouble if I stumble into it. Nothing more.

I'm sure there's ample winter days where you can get into those locations when the weather is clear enough to avoid a scheduled encounter with ice while IMC.

 

[bbchien]

It’s that Flying 2.0 campaign, again.
Have FIKI seneca II....what GRG said....

sigh.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Looking at your destinations, I'm not sure I'd bother with FIKI. You need visible moisture to have ice.

The mission isn't unrealistic if your expectations are realistic. There are days the jets don't fly. However, by making sure I've got a little bit of flexibility in my schedule, I've done lots of GA personal and business travel without any trouble at all, and my bird isn't even FIKI. And I live in Wisconsin, right along the Great Lakes Ice Machine. No, I'm not going to do weekly trips to Buffalo in the winter... But "realistic" to go from SoCal to AZ in the winter? I wouldn't think that'd be a problem. It's worth finding someone relatively local who does it a lot to ask that question, though.

 

[RyanB]

is a FIKI system safe?

If working correctly, I’d say yes, but I still wouldn’t deliberately fly in icing conditions if I could help it.

 

[Tantalum]

is a FIKI system safe? Cirrus SR22T

I've had more than a couple flights in SR22T and TN that needed FIKI. One of the most serious was for a Mammoth landing. It's a fantastic system and works great, serious lifesaver.. *if* you know how to use it and have reasonable expectations with its abilities

IE - don't plow through serious icing stretching the range of the TKS. But, it's a great tool to help you get home

 

[Roadracin]

Got it. So, obviously plan good weather flights but snowy mountain towns can still have safe conditions. Its a sold backup for something unforeseen. And always make schedules adjustable as the risk is never worth the cost.

I’m VFR and will be doing IFR certs this yr then looking for a plane but trying to research now. Thanks.

 

[Palmpilot]

...But "realistic" to go from SoCal to AZ in the winter? I wouldn't think that'd be a problem. It's worth finding someone relatively local who does it a lot to ask that question, though.

Flying from SoCal to the destinations he lists involves crossing significant mountain ranges, and there can definitely be significant weather along those routes in the winter. My impression is that mountains can be significant ice makers. Furthermore, on high-wind days, the downdrafts can exceed the climb capability of the airplane and the turbulence can be severe.

 

[MooneyDriver78]

I’ve been told even FIKI planes are only required to handle moderate icing for a maximum of 30 minutes.

 

[Sluggo63]

It’s that Flying 2.0 campaign, again.
Have FIKI seneca II....what GRG said....

sigh.

@bbchien, I had a Seneca II question for you. I tried to PM you but was unable. Any chance I could zap you a question? Thanks

 

[bobmrg]

"I’ve been told even FIKI planes are only required to handle moderate icing for a maximum of 30 minutes."

FAR Part 23.2540, which incorporates Part 25 by reference. You could look it up. FIKI certification provides an escape mechanism, not permission to fly in icing conditions with no attempt to escape.

Bob Gardner

 

[GRG55]

I’ve been told even FIKI planes are only required to handle moderate icing for a maximum of 30 minutes.

Regardless of the certification, the icing systems shouldn't be considered capable of allowing one to continue flying in any but the most benign icing conditions instead of getting out. Here's a good example of what can happen when you don't:

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2013/december/pilot/unpredicted-unadvised-unaware​

"The loss of a TBM 700 turboprop over New Jersey two years ago surprised many pilots. The Pratt & Whitney-powered single-engine turboprop is certificated for flight into known icing (FIKI). For many experienced pilots, all FIKI means is that when the aircraft starts to collect ice, it’s time to move elsewhere. Turbine aircraft don’t usually succumb to a hazard that catches roughly five to eight non-FIKI piston-powered aircraft every winter—and although this accident occurred in some of the highest-traffic-density airspace in the world, surprisingly little warning was relayed to the pilot...

...The TBM entered instrument meteorological conditions while climbing through 12,800 feet and was advised of moderate rime icing from 15,000 feet through 17,000 feet. The controller asked the pilot to advise him if the icing worsened, and the pilot said, “We’ll let you know what happens when we get in there and if we could go straight through, it’s no problem for us.”...

...While at 16,800 feet, the pilot confirmed that, “Light icing has been present for a little while and a higher altitude would be great.” About 15 seconds later, the pilot stated that he was getting a “little rattle” and requested a higher altitude as soon as possible. About 25 seconds after that, the flight was cleared to Flight Level 200, and the pilot acknowledged. One minute later, at 10:04 a.m., the airplane reached a peak altitude of 17,800 feet “before turning sharply to the left and entering a descent.” While descending through 17,400 feet, the pilot’s last radio call was “and N-Seven-Three-One-Charlie-Alpha’s declaring....”

The TBM came down very quickly from altitude, according to several witnesses, losing a wing and taking out part of the empennage before hitting the ground...

...The NTSB determined the probable cause of this accident to be: “The airplane’s encounter with unforecasted severe icing conditions that were characterized by high ice accretion rates and the pilot’s failure to use his command authority to depart the icing conditions in an expeditious manner, which resulted in a loss of airplane control.”​

 

[jordane93]

If I was climbing through a layer I’d do it. I wouldn’t want to be in ice for an extended period of time. Always have an out.

 

[Roadracin]

I would of thought to descend (for warmth) if ice hits but read ascending is ok. So the icing issue is a function of pockets of moisture and not necessarily temp/altitude.

 

[GRG55]

I would of thought to descend (for warmth) if ice hits but read ascending is ok. So the icing issue is a function of pockets of moisture and not necessarily temp/altitude.

It's a function of temperature, of course, and moisture content. Higher altitudes means less moisture, which means you can often get above the clouds. So if your airplane is capable enough you may be able to climb up out of the ice as an alternative to descending. No matter what, you don't want to extend your time in the ice.

 

[PaulS]

I’m in SoCal and want a plane I can fly to 7000’ airports. Ie:
flagstaff, AZ. mammoth, CA, Utah etc.
winter would create ice obviously.

is a FIKI system safe? Cirrus SR22T and Beechcraft Barron G58 maybe.

Is my mission unrealistic?

The FIKI system in the 22 works great, allows you to get out of up to moderate ice without any buildup. Allows you to legally punch through a layer of ice to an approach legally. I've done both now. It is not approved for heavy ice or SLD. Also, you always need an out, if you don't have a way to escape ice, don't go.

Droning through an ice layer for an extended time? Don't do it.

Cirrus had a great icing course that you need to take to legally use the system, you have to take it every 2 years to fly in ice. I believe the new edition of the course is out now, they've made it better I'm told, will be taking it again in the fall.

 

[Tantalum]

Boots in general freak me out. There's so much old-wives-tales hearsay and 'experts' out there talking about how much ice to let build up, how often to cycle, ice bridging, etc

With TKS (Cirrus, Kodiak, others) it's as close as about can get to a got wing - ice doesn't build up at all. You'll see a big chunk of it on your wingtip, but the wing and leading edge are clean as a whistle

It's a fantastic system. And with the spray back from the prop you get some marginal windshield and airframe protection too

Love
It

The TBM guy.. who knows how he was using (if he even was) the boots

Having said that.. FIKI is a temporary get out of jail card, not a license to kill. No one loiters in ice.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Regardless of the certification, the icing systems shouldn't be considered capable of allowing one to continue flying in any but the most benign icing conditions instead of getting out. Here's a good example of what can happen when you don't:

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2013/december/pilot/unpredicted-unadvised-unaware​

"The loss of a TBM 700 turboprop over New Jersey two years ago surprised many pilots. The Pratt & Whitney-powered single-engine turboprop is certificated for flight into known icing (FIKI). For many experienced pilots, all FIKI means is that when the aircraft starts to collect ice, it’s time to move elsewhere. Turbine aircraft don’t usually succumb to a hazard that catches roughly five to eight non-FIKI piston-powered aircraft every winter—and although this accident occurred in some of the highest-traffic-density airspace in the world, surprisingly little warning was relayed to the pilot...

...The TBM entered instrument meteorological conditions while climbing through 12,800 feet and was advised of moderate rime icing from 15,000 feet through 17,000 feet. The controller asked the pilot to advise him if the icing worsened, and the pilot said, “We’ll let you know what happens when we get in there and if we could go straight through, it’s no problem for us.”...

...While at 16,800 feet, the pilot confirmed that, “Light icing has been present for a little while and a higher altitude would be great.” About 15 seconds later, the pilot stated that he was getting a “little rattle” and requested a higher altitude as soon as possible. About 25 seconds after that, the flight was cleared to Flight Level 200, and the pilot acknowledged. One minute later, at 10:04 a.m., the airplane reached a peak altitude of 17,800 feet “before turning sharply to the left and entering a descent.” While descending through 17,400 feet, the pilot’s last radio call was “and N-Seven-Three-One-Charlie-Alpha’s declaring....”

The TBM came down very quickly from altitude, according to several witnesses, losing a wing and taking out part of the empennage before hitting the ground...

...The NTSB determined the probable cause of this accident to be: “The airplane’s encounter with unforecasted severe icing conditions that were characterized by high ice accretion rates and the pilot’s failure to use his command authority to depart the icing conditions in an expeditious manner, which resulted in a loss of airplane control.”​

Based on that narrative, I’d also bet that he wasn’t flying the appropriate airspeed to keep ice accumulation on the protected surfaces instead of behind them.

 

[GRG55]

Boots in general freak me out. There's so much old-wives-tales hearsay and 'experts' out there talking about how much ice to let build up, how often to cycle, ice bridging, etc

With TKS (Cirrus, Kodiak, others) it's as close as about can get to a got wing - ice doesn't build up at all. You'll see a big chunk of it on your wingtip, but the wing and leading edge are clean as a whistle

It's a fantastic system. And with the spray back from the prop you get some marginal windshield and airframe protection too

Love
It

The TBM guy.. who knows how he was using (if he even was) the boots

Having said that.. FIKI is a temporary get out of jail card, not a license to kill. No one loiters in ice.

The boots are a de-ice system. TKS is an anti-ice system.
Your implication that one is "better" than the other is nonsense. TKS isn't foolproof either.
Mishandle the way you apply either system in icing conditions and you'll be courting trouble.

 

[Tantalum]

The boots are a de-ice system. TKS is an anti-ice system.
Your implication that one is "better" than the other is nonsense. TKS isn't foolproof either.
Mishandle the way you apply either system in icing conditions and you'll be courting trouble.

Didn't say it was fool proof, but there have been plenty of boot related icing accidents and not a single fiki TKS related accident (that I'm aware of). One or two early non fiki TKS Cirri crashed, but the exact cause and how TKS was used in those accidents is dubious

Given the choice of a TKS Kodiak or booted Caravan I'd feel safe in the Kodiak

But ice has brought down airliners too, so ice is certainly not something anybody should tangle with

And OP would be mistaken to use his fiki plane assuming commercial airline like dispatch rates flying in and out of mountain airports in the winter

 

[Tantalum]

^I think principally we are in agreement

 

[iamtheari]

Cirrus had a great icing course that you need to take to legally use the system, you have to take it every 2 years to fly in ice. I believe the new edition of the course is out now, they've made it better I'm told, will be taking it again in the fall.

That’s interesting. Where is that written into law?

Having said that.. FIKI is a temporary get out of jail card, not a license to kill. No one loiters in ice.

The key with all get out of jail cards is to play them and, you know, actually get out of jail, rather than just hanging out there waiting for things to improve on their own.

 

[Rockymountain]

That’s interesting. Where is that written into law?

in the POH. The FIKI 22 system is a good one. Surviving ice is complex, relying on an understanding of what causes icing, weather knowledge, understanding how to flight plan the weather, how to leverage ATC, understanding the deice anti-ice systems (completely) for your aircraft and lastly the intrinsic capability of the aircraft. I would not be lulled into false confidence of how well TKS keeps the ice of the wings. In the Cirrus a lot of ice builds up on the unprotected surfaces, the prop can ice losing efficiency, you can deplete the TKS quickly, and the system can be overwhelmed leading to severe performance degredation. I have flown TKS and Boots. Overall I would take boots over heavy, messy, perishable TKS, as long as the rest of the plane is robust. Cirrus feels the same way, leaving TKS for boots on the Cirrus jet. It is just more robust and better for day in and day. Out ice exposure.

 

[AA5Bman]

The MEAs are so high for either of those routes that if there are clouds there is going to be an icing layer. I would say if you want to do those flights on a regular basis when there is less-than-VFR weather basically at all, you’re going to want FIKI. I think the corollary to that point is that if there is less-than-VFR weather, you might not want to go to those locations at all, FIKI notwithstanding. I know at least for me, when I go to Mammoth I want it to be a pretty perfect day. If there’s even a tiny low pressure system the winds will be howling across the crest whether or not it’s actually storming/snowing. Recording 100mph winds at the top of Mammoth is a regular occurrence and ice or no-ice won’t change that.

 

[Tantalum]

In the Cirrus a lot of ice builds up on the unprotected surfaces, the prop can ice losing efficiency, you can deplete the TKS quickly, and the system can be overwhelmed leading to severe performance degredation

How much experience do you have with Cirrus and FIKI TKS? I think you might be talking about the non FIKI early g1 planes that had only a very limited TKS..

I'm asking because the FIKI Cirrus has all major surfaces, including the propeller, horizontal, and vertical stabs protected, as well as the full leading edge of the wing protected and a robust and redundant system. There are multiple flow rate modes and you'll get over 2.5 half hours in normal and well over 1 hr in high, even in "holy crap" MAX mode you get over half an hour. Everyone here has agreed that whether boots or TKS you don't hang out in the ice.. if you need more than the above quoted times for ice protection you've made some errors in planning whether your flying a plane with boots or TKS

The note about Cirrus "feeling the same way" is not totally true. The jet actually does have TKS on some surfaces (radome and windshield), bleed air for others, and boots for still others. This was likely a weight/flow/plumbing etc compromise rather than a "gee, we goofed, boots are better" choice.. plus the jet is likely going to spend far less time in an icing environment

The Caravan has boots and it has a rather ominous history with icing related crashes, as do several other planes with boots. Cessna upgraded the caravans and the new ones come with TKS, as opposed to boots, due to the benefits and advantages TKS offers. Same is true for Kodiak, opting for TKS. FedEx has upgraded their caravan fleet to TKS as well citing the objective benefits it offers and fewer poh limitations

To date, I'm not aware of any FIKI TKS icing related accidents.. with the high amount of criticized "magenta line" guys out there in their Cirri you'd think we'd have seen some accidents by now, however the accidents that relate to icing continue to come from planes with boots

Both system have their pro's and con's. I'd prefer to keep the whole wing clean, focus on flying (as opposed to how much ice am I allowing to build up), have additional flow back protection, and use that additional mental resource to look for a way out. With boots you are always carrying *some* ice.. I'll take the extra weight and 2 hr time limitation to have a clean wing

 

[Rockymountain]

How much experience do you have with Cirrus and FIKI TKS? I think you might be talking about the non FIKI early g1 planes that had only a very limited T

I had one of the first certifies FIKI Cirrus. Have about 550 hours flying in the Rockies with the TN22. Did pretty well, but found myself canceling more trips, and getting more anxiety about trips and canceling. The biggest problem in the Rockies with the 22 is not being able to get out if the ice. Icing goes from below the MEAs, to the low 20’s. Flying in the low 20’s without pressurization is less than safe, especially with passengers. So moved to pressurized equipment. Much less stress, especially in the winter. But pretty good system, just have to know the limits.

 

[Tantalum]

I had one of the first certifies FIKI Cirrus. Have about 550 hours flying in the Rockies with the TN22. Did pretty well, but found myself canceling more trips, and getting more anxiety about trips and canceling. The biggest problem in the Rockies with the 22 is not being able to get out if the ice. Icing goes from below the MEAs, to the low 20’s. Flying in the low 20’s without pressurization is less than safe, especially with passengers. So moved to pressurized equipment. Much less stress, especially in the winter. But pretty good system, just have to know the limits.

Thanks, and after rerearding my post I didn't meant to sound like a dick.. so sorry! Just trying to objectively understand why one may be better than the other

I agree that the Cirrus' big limiting factor is the altitude and lack of pressurization. The Cirrus sweet spot to me always felt like 16K-17K.. good TAS and if you have an issue with O2 you're not going to immediately die (if you have an O2 issue at FL230.. that's could turn south quick!). But yes, if you're cruising around the rockies or Sierra Nevadas you're square in the middle of the icing. I've had one or two flights where I kept asking for higher.. forecast showed tops at X, and you keep thinking you see light up there.. but eventually you're at like 16K+ and still in the clouds and ice. It is not fun.

Granted. If I had a choice between a boot and TKS Cirrus I'd still prefer the TKS.

The TBM story that GRG55 posted above is too bad.. guy had all the resources he reasonably could have had

 

[Rockymountain]

The TBM story that GRG55 posted above is too bad.. guy had all the resources he reasonably could have had

for sure. My read on that is he probably glossed over the weather briefing, didn’t think about his plan B. If I get in bad ice, can I go up? Can I descend to warmer air? Seems he was not completely familiar/experienced/versed in his airplanes deice/anti-ice systems as he forgot to turn on the windscreen heat resulting in performance robbing drag on the largest forward facing surface of the plane, the windscreens, and did not protect the Engine with the inertial separator and the rattle
could have been ice ingestion or compressor stalling further robbing performance, and then failed to exhibit command authority and execute some change in plans to ensure safety of flight, even if that entailed declaring an emergency. It is unknown if the AP may have kicked off causing disorientation, or if he got too slow before departing controlled flight, but this should not have ended as a fatal event. If you regularly fly in ice, you almost definitely will encounter severe icing at some point in your flying career. In a certified aircraft, that should not result in a loss of an airframe. You just need to know what to do before it gets to the point where the plane is no longer flyable.

 

[Geosync]

I wouldn't deliberately be going looking for trouble (ice) in a piston airplane no matter what it has for anti-ice or de-ice equipment. I'll punch through a thin layer if necessary. But mostly I treat mine as there to get me out of trouble if I stumble into it. Nothing more.

I'm sure there's ample winter days where you can get into those locations when the weather is clear enough to avoid a scheduled encounter with ice while IMC.

What he said, times 10. Plenty of clear days in the winter to make these flights.

 

[schmookeeg]

I don't see how a SR22T and a "Barron" G58 are comparable aircraft. For that money, I'd be looking at turbines.

 

[GRG55]

for sure. My read on that is he probably glossed over the weather briefing, didn’t think about his plan B. If I get in bad ice, can I go up? Can I descend to warmer air? Seems he was not completely familiar/experienced/versed in his airplanes deice/anti-ice systems as he forgot to turn on the windscreen heat resulting in performance robbing drag on the largest forward facing surface of the plane, the windscreens, and did not protect the Engine with the inertial separator and the rattle
could have been ice ingestion or compressor stalling further robbing performance, and then failed to exhibit command authority and execute some change in plans to ensure safety of flight, even if that entailed declaring an emergency. It is unknown if the AP may have kicked off causing disorientation, or if he got too slow before departing controlled flight, but this should not have ended as a fatal event. If you regularly fly in ice, you almost definitely will encounter severe icing at some point in your flying career. In a certified aircraft, that should not result in a loss of an airframe. You just need to know what to do before it gets to the point where the plane is no longer flyable.

I had the feeling he was deferring to the controller and not decisive enough to exercise control over the situation. He did tell the controller it would be "no problem if they could climb straight through", or words to that effect. When he didn't get that, and instead had to hold in the ice waiting for a clearance to climb, as you noted it seemed like he wasn't really prepared for that. And as time ticked by I was left with the impression from the comm exchange he was expecting the controller to do something about his situation. The classic "hope triumphs over experience (reality?)" again.

 

[Tantalum]

Seems he was not completely familiar/experienced/versed in his airplanes deice/anti-ice systems as he forgot to turn on the windscreen heat resulting in performance robbing drag on the largest forward facing surface of the plane, the windscreens, and did not protect the Engine with the inertial separator and the rattle
could have been ice ingestion or compressor stalling further robbing performance, and then failed to exhibit command authority and execute some change in plans to ensure safety of flight, even if that entailed declaring an emergency. It is unknown if the AP may have kicked off causing disorientation, or if he got too slow before departing controlled flight, but this should not have ended as a fatal event.

*that's the thing, that I am curious about. What about the ice finally broke the camels back? Steveo's videos on YouTube treat ice very seriously in the TBM and he often mentions the inertial separator.. and the rattle seems to maybe be a clue? Either way, sucks.

I had the feeling he was deferring to the controller and not decisive enough to exercise control over the situation.

..yeah, most likely. Controllers don't really seem to be care. I've reported ice and their response is basically "okay, and I like peanut butter" - I can understand why someone, in a FIKI plane, especially something like a TBM/PC-12, etc., would be hesitant to pull the "I need to go up or down, or make a U turn - NOW!" card. Not excusing it.. but where on that continuum do you eventually say you've had enough? My IR DPE grilled me on this.. "what if the controller says not for 10 minutes due to traffic.. what if it's 20 minutes.. what it it's a simple 'unable'"?? lots of variables.

If you regularly fly in ice, you almost definitely will encounter severe icing at some point in your flying career.

Not looking forward to that day! FWIW "Norm" mode in an SR22 is really not sufficient to keep all but light occasional ice off and use as a preemptive *prior* to entering clouds. I've never had accumulation on "high" even in the handful of forecast (and pirep'd) moderate I've been in. Each time just during approach/climb

However, as one of the others here has direct experience flying with me in ice I feel about ice the same way I feel about overwater flying.. IE, keep that s*** on high and climb/descend/get an out

PS - I wonder how many Cirrus guys wet their wings out routinely? If you haven't done it in a while it can be a few minutes before you see the TKS coming out

 

[flyingcheesehead]

The TBM guy.. who knows how he was using (if he even was) the boots

Yeah... That was a bad one. The big problem was that the aircraft owner/pilot, who was a private pilot and not a CFI, was flying from the right seat and had his buddy in the left seat. The de-icing control panel in the TBM is on the far left-hand side of the lower sub-panel and kind of difficult to see from the right seat.

It is highly likely that caused some significant confusion. Apparently both the windscreen and inertial separator switches were off, when they shouldn't have been.

In addition, that was some BAD ice. A 38-year Mad Dog pilot in the area said it was the worst he'd ever seen, and a CRJ reported 2.5 inches of ice accumulation on the protected surfaces in just 5 minutes.

Bad deal all around.

 

[WillFly4Food]

It's a function of temperature, of course, and moisture content. Higher altitudes means less moisture, which means you can often get above the clouds.

Yes, but gotta be careful with this. The Cascades and Sierra Nevada are a good case in point. Moist Pacific air flows inland, hits those mountain ranges and has nowhere to go but up. If you’re crossing from the east, or crossing from east and descending, your chilled sub zero airframe can plunge into a layer of juicy super cooled droplets at the tops of the clouds that are climbing the west faces of these ranges. Just a “whoosh,” and your plane can be covered in 1/4 to 1/2 inch of ice in a few minutes. Particularly with cold fronts driving the inland flow. Rule of thumb: in these conditions, clear the ridge by at least 5000 feet. Also, if you’re entering cumulus clouds, the air currents cause heavy droplets to be all over in there, including the top portion of the clouds.

With ice you always want to think ahead about escape routes, quickest way outta there, that kind of thing. If you start accumulating ice, follow your escape plan.

 

[Roadracin]

I don't see how a SR22T and a "Barron" G58 are comparable aircraft. For that money, I'd be looking at turbines.

They’re both can do 200kts, adequate load capacity, and cost about 800k reasonably equipped. Barron G58 being a bit more. As piston twins I didn’t feel they get into the “next level” like a turbine. And, all the turbines I liked were well over a million. It seemed to be more then I wanted for my first plane.

 

[Gilgamesh]

Just gonna put this right here...

 

[Kritchlow]

Just gonna put this right here...

View attachment 88164

Many airplanes are certified FIKI if ice does not accumulate on certain surfaces, or if it does those surfaces are deemed inconsequential.

Not sure about some airplanes, but I’m familiar with a few that have limited or no tail de-ice.

 

[Tantalum]

Just gonna put this right here...

View attachment 88164

Yeah the wing tips load up since they're unprotected. The rest of the wing stays beautifully clean, as your picture demonstrates. I don't mind because it helps give you an idea of how bad the icing is by looking at the tips. Vertical and horizontal stabs are protected as is the prop and windshield

This was on descent into KOAK, moderate forecast, moderate pirep'd. System on high, this is a far more acceptable level of ice (zoom in on the edge and tips) in my opinion than what boots give you. But you only have 2.5 hrs of TKS.. so use it wisely

 

[DavidWhite]

The boots are a de-ice system. TKS is an anti-ice system.
Your implication that one is "better" than the other is nonsense. TKS isn't foolproof either.
Mishandle the way you apply either system in icing conditions and you'll be courting trouble.

I never had to choose between altitude or airspeed when flying a TKS caravan, but did plenty in a booted caravan. TKS is a much better system when running and operated properly.

 

[DavidWhite]

I don’t recommend taking anything into forecast ice without a turbine on it. Sometimes the weather guessers are wrong about exactly how bad it's gonna be.