Known ice vs inadvertend ice

Topper

Topper

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Nov 18, 2012
Messages
416
Location
Benton
Display Name
Display name:
Topper
How useful is the Piper inadvertent icing protection system? I am just beginning IR training. I assume that there are times when there is not reports of ice, but conditions are likely to produce ice and a flight without ice protection would be scrubbed. If icing was likely, but not currently known to be happening, would you take off with the inadvertent protection system?

Jim
 
Which airplane? What equipment?

I spent about 1,000 hours in a 69 Aztec D with wing and tail boots (horizontal and vertical), hot props, pitot heat (which was higher amperage than non-de ice), and a hot plate for the windshield. It never changed my decision vs full FIKI. Remember you shouldn't be just sitting around in icing - you use the de-ice to get out of it. How you get out of it varies, sometimes the best answer is just straight ahead.

You would benefit from some training from someone who has de-ice experience.
 
I noticed it on a Saratoga. I really am just wondering what the difference between the two systems affects the way planes are flown in the real world.

Thanks,

Jim
 
This conversation is going to get astray soon, so I will say this. Legally yes it will hinder the go/nogo. Most of the inadvertant systems are just as good if not the exact same and will do just fine.

Out of the 2 Caravans that I fly right now they are exactly the same as far as ice protection goes, but one is FIKI and one is not. The slight difference is a "Min Icing Speed" light on the glareshield is missing so it cannot legaly be launched into icing conditions. If someone was to do so they would be fine.

Would and do some people do it...yes!
 
And then there are people who launch into known icing in a 172...
 
you guys are going to get me into trouble!!

What is this Min Icing Speed light and how does that work?
 
Fearless Tower said:
I suddenly have a craving for bacon...
Click to expand...

We make our own bacon. Cure it for a week, then smoke it. We used mesquite wood last weekend with all natural lump charcoal. Mmm delicious.
 
tmyers said:
you guys are going to get me into trouble!!

What is this Min Icing Speed light and how does that work?
Click to expand...
Part of the certification and OPS manual says that you cannot operate below a certain speed in icing conditions unless you are climbing to exit. So if you have de-ice on and you get slow the light tells you that you are.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
We make our own bacon. Cure it for a week, then smoke it. We used mesquite wood last weekend with all natural lump charcoal. Mmm delicious.
Click to expand...

You have a nice slicer now, don't you? How about a two fisted bacon stretcher?
 
wsuffa said:
You have a nice slicer now, don't you? How about a two fisted bacon stretcher?
Click to expand...

We do have a commercial meat slicer.

Now I want bacon. :D
 
flyingmoose said:
Part of the certification and OPS manual says that you cannot operate below a certain speed in icing conditions unless you are climbing to exit. So if you have de-ice on and you get slow the light tells you that you are.
Click to expand...


So it is similar to the blue line for a twin but annunciates. I had never heard of that. Is it standard an FIKI aircraft?
 
tmyers said:
So it is similar to the blue line for a twin but annunciates. I had never heard of that. Is it standard an FIKI aircraft?
Click to expand...
No, because you will be talking about Vyse which is best rate single engine. That is a twin concept. If I interpolate you ment to compare it to VMC? If that is the case its still no, because that has to do with single engine ops in a twin. This minumum icing speed is a speed somone has come up with after some accident (I think it was Winnepeg) to say that under this speed, we cannot guarentee control in icing, so if you can't maintain it, you have to leave.

No its not standard. It is a caravan issue.
 
Technically you don't 'know' you have ice, until you have ice. . . .but thats not how the FAA interprets it.

If you end up with no drama other than an altitude change or landing, then its no harm no foul.

I would not rely on an inadvertent icing encounter system for anything.
 
Sounds like a good feature since you tend to get busy in an icing situation. The added indicator could help, but then all ice is different. Fortunately you shouldn't encounter too much ice dropping meat bombs.
 
Matt is right, minimum icing speed is not standard. But I think some King Airs have it as well, and general procedure for dealing with ice includes going faster, at least to the extent practical.
 
comanchepilot said:
I would not rely on an inadvertent icing encounter system for anything.
Click to expand...

I'm curious as to your reasons. A number of inadvertent systems have effectively the same equipment as the certified systems, which is why I look at the components. Is this just a line you set for yourself or do you have technical considerations?
 
tmyers said:
you guys are going to get me into trouble!!

What is this Min Icing Speed light and how does that work?
Click to expand...

If you are accreting ice and try to maintain altitude by increasing angle of attack, sooner or later ice will begin to form beneath the leading edge, on the bottom surface of the wing. This can lead to some really weird ice forms, a far cry from those you see in texts on the subject. No boots down there, of course. So some models (KingAirs come to mind) have a minimum speed...IOW, "get the nose down, stupid!." The light is a reminder.

Bob Gardner
 
Jim, you can look at inadvertent icing as an invitation to the death dance. Or you can look at is as potentially saving your a_se when you make a bad decision.

It depends on the mindset of the pilot.

That's like the discussion about autopilots. I use mine for cruise above the deck, so that when I re-renter IMC and do the approach, I am briefed and rested. Others use their Autopilots (VFR only pilots) to cruise in the clag on days they should not be out. It's about mindset.
 
From a legal standpoint, in terms of intentional flight into known icing conditions, either the system is certified for flight into known icing conditions or it isn't. The fact that you have some de-icing equipment will not help you before the mast if the FAA catches you intentionally flying into known icing conditions, even if the manufacturer advertises it as intended to help in the event of an "inadvertent" icing encounter. And if you want to know how the FAA defines "known icing conditions", see the Bell letter.
 
In a nutshell, it was known icing if they decide you should have known better. Does that sound about right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top