Interesting de-iceing stuff?

[John Baker]

I have no clue if this would work or not. My brother lives up on a mountain, Idylwilde, CA. Anyway, he waxes his car once a year with a product called Starbright marine Teflon wax. The last time he did it was in August of 09.

We were talking on the phone a few minutes ago and he said they had a bunch of freezing rain yesterday and his car had a very thick layer of ice covering it. He went out this morning thinking it was going to be a major project just getting it so he could drive. He said all he did was barely touch it and the ice just slid right off the car, in large sheets and chunks. He couldn't believe it.

As he was relating this story, I started thinking of wings. Anyone ever tried this stuff on your airfoils? Ice is not a huge issue in Indian country around San Diego, however, for you unlucky aviators who live up north, this might be something handy.

John

 

[weilke]

Various teflon concoctions have been tried and found to not work on aircraft. There is some stuff you put on the rubber boot to keep the ice from adhering, but it still takes the mechanical action of the boot to kick it off.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I know... I'll put some Rain-X on the plane, and then it won't get wet either!

It might help trace ice from adhering momentarily, but I doubt it'd do much.

 

[dmccormack]

I know... I'll put some Rain-X on the plane, and then it won't get wet either!

It might help trace ice from adhering momentarily, but I doubt it'd do much.

Not so sure about that...

If you can slow or even prevent the initial accumulation, you buy more time -- the most valuable commodity in icing. Certainly a slick surface layer is less prone to ice than a rough one?

 

[Ted]

I've not noticed a measurable difference in ice accumulation between when my boots are properly polished vs. not. What I do notice is whether or not the ice is as willing to come off after blowing them. The liquid I put on them is supposed to prevent the ice from sticking, which makes it come off better. However the layer that gets on the wing is still pretty solid and most definitely does get on there.

 

[dmccormack]

Maybe a test of slick vs rough surface would be to compare the ice accumulation on a low-wing walkway vs the wing surface adjacent.

 

[Ted]

Maybe a test of slick vs rough surface would be to compare the ice accumulation on a low-wing walkway vs the wing surface adjacent.

It's something of a matter of comparative roughness. I've yet to come across a wing that truly feels like sandpaper.

When flying, you have the whole forward velocity thing, which makes a difference. When driving in freezing rain, I've not generally had accumulation on my car/truck. The only time I once had some accumulation on my truck was once driving in heavy snow. I noticed the truck was starting to run hot, which seemed very odd. Pulled over, found out the grille was completely covered in about 1" thick packed snow. Punched it a few times and it came off. Much better. I digress.

When flying, you'll have a lot of factors that come into accumulation. The surface and profile of the surface is a major one. Thinner, sharper airfoils are better accumulators. On the Aztec, the wing itself is this giant brick. This is great for ice because not only does it take a lot to disturb it, but it also is not a very good ice accumulator (i.e. slow accumulation). That's why you really don't want to take a Mooney into ice. However if you look out the window on the Aztec and look at the stabilator, you'll notice it build up ice before the wings. This is probably the case on most planes. You want to have the boots on your plane polished anyway because that helps the ice come off easier. As to what to polish it with? I use PBS boot prep/sealant, but I've heard of lots of other things (none of which I've used, but all sound like they should work).

If you wax your non-deiced plane with the thought that it might buy you a few extra minutes, I'd question what sort of flying you intended to do and whether you really had the right plane. I also don't think it would work.

 

[tonycondon]

except that airframe icing builds up on leading eges. if you had enough ice build up to get to the walkway on the wing you'd have a lot bigger problems to deal with

 

[dmccormack]

except that airframe icing builds up on leading eges. if you had enough ice build up to get to the walkway on the wing you'd have a lot bigger problems to deal with

I've seen some airplanes where the black friction paint extends pretty far forward. But, you're right, none on the leading edge.

 

[Ted]

except that airframe icing builds up on leading eges. if you had enough ice build up to get to the walkway on the wing you'd have a lot bigger problems to deal with

Yep. You'd also be flying in significant freezing rain. That would be an inherently bad thing.

I've not had ice build on the walkway of the wing. I have had some rime build up on the underside while climbing through a layer, primarily experimenting on a day when conditions were favorable for experimenting. Yeah, that's not fun. Plane doesn't fly worth a darn and the controls get very heavy. And it doesn't want to climb very well, either.

 

[John Baker]

My brother has always been very fastidious about his sailboats and cars. He has always kept them both in pretty much showroom condition. He has used many different waxes over the years but the de-icing quality seems to be in this one brand and type of wax. http://www.shipstore.com/SS/HTML/STA/STA85732.html

The stuff is not inexpensive, but one bottle would go a long way if it was used solely on airfoils. He talked me into using it on my plane a few years ago and it does give a nice shine, but it takes some elbow grease and a buffer. I found a guy who will wash and wax my plane (warrior) for only $60.00, so I haven't bothered with the stuff since. I rarely fly above ten thousand, so ice is not a big concern for me around here.

Please understand that I am not recommending this wax at all for de-icing your airplane. This whole thing stems from a phone conversation with my brother. I have never flown in icing conditions. I have never experienced ice on my plane. I do not know squat about icing other than what I have read.

I put this out there for y'all to take into consideration, nothing more.



John

 

[Ted]

I rarely fly above ten thousand, so ice is not a big concern for me around here.

I see you're in a disgustingly warm part of the country (of which I am supremely jealous, while sitting here in my ~20F latitude :smile, but I'm sure you're aware that ice can and does happen at lower altitudes. I had ice over Texas two weekends ago at 4,000 MSL. In your area it might generally not be an issue.

I put this out there for y'all to take into consideration, nothing more.

Understood as such. :smile:

 

[John Baker]

I see you're in a disgustingly warm part of the country (of which I am supremely jealous, while sitting here in my ~20F latitude :smile, but I'm sure you're aware that ice can and does happen at lower altitudes. I had ice over Texas two weekends ago at 4,000 MSL. In your area it might generally not be an issue.



Understood as such. :smile:

We had an icing report at twelve thousand last Tuesday, so I guess it could happen around here. I've never had my service ceiling of 11,500' warrior up to twelve thousand. I know you've heard of fair weather sailors, I'm a fair weather flier.

John

 

[twdeckard]

I have heard about spraying silicone lubricant on your prop to help it shed ice, like poor mans IceX I guess. No warranty implied or expressed, just that I have heard about folks doing it.

 

[bbchien]

I still think you need 4 runs of heat tape, a 2000W AC inverter, and a 4 position switch....

 

[gismo]

I have heard about spraying silicone lubricant on your prop to help it shed ice, like poor mans IceX I guess. No warranty implied or expressed, just that I have heard about folks doing it.

I've used a product called "Sno-Jet" on my alky props and boots and it seems to help shed ice but it's hard to say for sure. I suppose I could just spray one side and see if there's a difference but if it was a big difference things might get nasty. Sno-Jet is intended for use with snowblowers and shovels to keep snow from sticking.

 

[Ted]

The concept seems reasonable. I've also heard of people spraying Pam on their boots prior to going into ice. I have a can of Pam that I've been meaning to try that with, but keep on forgetting. Stuff actually meant to keep snow from sticking makes sense.

One question, would the alcohol on the alcohol props potentially wash away whatever you put on? I suppose that the precipitation you're flying through could do that just as easily, just theorizing. I haven't put any treatment on my hot props and they seem to have done a good job, but it's hard to assess that in flight. I know that when I land I don't see ice on them.

 

[dmccormack]

I have heard about spraying silicone lubricant on your prop to help it shed ice, like poor mans IceX I guess. No warranty implied or expressed, just that I have heard about folks doing it.

That's what I spray on snow shovels....

 

[N801BH]

Someone please que up the pic of Ted and his bag of aircraft deice.

 

[Ted]

Someone please que up the pic of Ted and his bag of aircraft deice.

You mean this one?

Don't leave home without it!

 

[gismo]

One question, would the alcohol on the alcohol props potentially wash away whatever you put on? I suppose that the precipitation you're flying through could do that just as easily, just theorizing

Hard to say. The rate of alcohol application is really low (15-30 oz per hour) so there might not be a lot of "washing". In any case it might be considered a backup in case the alcohol fails to flow.

 

[Ted]

Hard to say. The rate of alcohol application is really low (15-30 oz per hour) so there might not be a lot of "washing". In any case it might be considered a backup in case the alcohol fails to flow.

Makes sense. I should consider it on my props - it would be a backup in case the prop boots fail to heat up like they're supposed to. That could be really bad on one blade...

 

[taters]

Hard to say. The rate of alcohol application is really low (15-30 oz per hour) so there might not be a lot of "washing". In any case it might be considered a backup in case the alcohol fails to flow.

From my experience I would say yes if this is coming from a TKS system....my 2c

 

[fastair5]

When I first started ferrying, I was deathly afraid of icing despite being exposed to it at once during a trip. So, I actually tried waxing the leading edges of the wing due to the same thought process...can't remember the type or brand of wax but alas, it did NOTHING. I was still sitting there scared sh*tless building ice...I love the Atlantic route!!

 

[TangoWhiskey]

Makes sense. I should consider it on my props - it would be a backup in case the prop boots fail to heat up like they're supposed to. That could be really bad on one blade...

Hopefully the violent shaking that would ensue would clear the other blade.

 

[Ted]

Hopefully the violent shaking that would ensue would clear the other blade.

Hmm... somehow I can't imagine that to be good for the airframe...

So here's a question, what do people think of TKS? I've never flown in ice with it. One of the guys at the airport bought an SR22 turbo with TKS on it (not FIKI). I can't say I have any desire to try it myself, but he's pretty thrilled with it.

 

[Trapper John]

One of the guys at the airport bought an SR22 turbo with TKS on it (not FIKI). I can't say I have any desire to try it myself, but he's pretty thrilled with it.

Well, if the TKS doesn't work, the ensuing post-crash fire will take care of it...


Trapper John

 

[Ted]

Well, if the TKS doesn't work, the ensuing post-crash fire will take care of it...

I'm not a big Cirrus fan in the first place for other reasons. The TKS just seems like an accident waiting to happen.

 

[Trapper John]

I'm not a big Cirrus fan in the first place for other reasons. The TKS just seems like an accident waiting to happen.

If I had scads of money, I'd buy something that uses bleed air. Absent that, I'd pick pneumatics/hot props/hot plate, then TKS. It sure would stink to run out of fluid before escaping the ice...


Trapper John

 

[Everskyward]

If I had scads of money, I'd buy something that uses bleed air. Absent that, I'd pick pneumatics/hot props/hot plate, then TKS. It sure would stink to run out of fluid before escaping the ice...

I don't know how it does on a small airplane but I didn't like the TKS on the Hawker. I much preferred the boots on the King Air. Of course bleed air is the best.

 

[vontresc]

JOOC did they ever tell you why they didn't use bleed air on the Hawker? It just seems like less to go wrong with that than the TKS.

 

[Everskyward]

JOOC did they ever tell you why they didn't use bleed air on the Hawker? It just seems like less to go wrong with that than the TKS.

Not enough thrust. Bleed air robs power from the engine, sometime big time. The newer Hawkers have more thrust but I have heard that they don't go to bleed air because it would require new certification... or something. I guess that is a major enough change.

 

[Ted]

To be FIKI certified (which I'm guessing the Hawker is?) you need to go through FIKI certification process. That's a lot of work.

One question, I've heard you're supposed to keep the TKS on if you think you may encounter icing, whereas with the de-ice stuff you wait until you build enough to hit the boots. What'd you do in the Hawker, Mari? I'll leave props, windshield, and pitot heat on (but there's no bottle associated with those) if I think I may encounter icing, and then blow the boots when I build up enough to do something about it.

 

[Everskyward]

To be FIKI certified (which I'm guessing the Hawker is?) you need to go through FIKI certification process. That's a lot of work.

That is true, but I think they might sell more airplanes if it had bleed air instead of TKS. If I was going to buy an airplane of this class (haha) TKS would be a big negative for me.

One question, I've heard you're supposed to keep the TKS on if you think you may encounter icing, whereas with the de-ice stuff you wait until you build enough to hit the boots. What'd you do in the Hawker, Mari? I'll leave props, windshield, and pitot heat on (but there's no bottle associated with those) if I think I may encounter icing, and then blow the boots when I build up enough to do something about it.

Windshield heat and pitot heat were always on in flight regardless of icing. You had to turn the TKS on in advance of entering possible icing conditions (supposedly 2 minutes, if I remember right, but in reality more like 5) because if the fluid was not already flowing out of the holes and the holes got iced up... you get the picture. Sometimes it was hard to estimate when you were going to enter potential icing conditions too, like at night. Plus I thought the whole system was a PITA. You had to prime it before flight for a couple minutes to get the fluid out into the wings and tail and make sure it was working. It was also a bit of a mess. We never had problems with running out though because this particular airplane was fitted with double capacity tanks.

I have spoken to someone who has TKS in a small airplane (Mooney) and he thinks it works well. I guess the fluid comes out and covers quite a bit of the wing, which it didn't in the Hawker. I'm sure the system is just engineered differently. Besides, the wings in a Mooney are much shorter and the fluid doesn't have to travel as far.

 

[dmccormack]

I'll leave props, windshield, and pitot heat on (but there's no bottle associated with those) if I think I may encounter icing, and then blow the boots when I build up enough to do something about it.

uh oh.. cue up the "bridging" debate...

 

[Ted]

uh oh.. cue up the "bridging" debate...

I can't tell you whether or not bridging exists, all I know is what I've observed in my plane.

 

[Ted]

That is true, but I think they might sell more airplanes if it had bleed air instead of TKS. If I was going to buy an airplane of this class (haha) TKS would be a big negative for me.

Agreed. I suppose it's a question of how many sales they figure they lose vs. how much money it would cost them to reengineer and recertify the aircraft. I would think the latter would cost them a whole ton of money. It might just not be worth it until they come up with a next generation aircraft.

Windshield heat and pitot heat were always on in flight regardless of icing. You had to turn the TKS on in advance of entering possible icing conditions (supposedly 2 minutes, if I remember right, but in reality more like 5) because if the fluid was not already flowing out of the holes and the holes got iced up... you get the picture. Sometimes it was hard to estimate when you were going to enter potential icing conditions too, like at night. Plus I thought the whole system was a PITA. You had to prime it before flight for a couple minutes to get the fluid out into the wings and tail and make sure it was working. It was also a bit of a mess. We never had problems with running out though because this particular airplane was fitted with double capacity tanks.

Right, and that's what seems to be problematic. I don't necessarily have a very good idea of when I'm going to be enterting icing conditions other than "There's a cloud, and it's winter." Trying to get a 2-5 minute lead time on that seems to be difficult, especially if you can't get see when you're entering a cloud. Plus if you screw up then you may be in a situation where you can't get the ice off.

I have spoken to someone who has TKS in a small airplane (Mooney) and he thinks it works well. I guess the fluid comes out and covers quite a bit of the wing, which it didn't in the Hawker. I'm sure the system is just engineered differently. Besides, the wings in a Mooney are much shorter and the fluid doesn't have to travel as far.

I can see that making sense. Flying the Hawker I'm sure also put you through a lot more stuff than what many of us in smaller planes deal with.