What criteria for FIKI?

Screw it, ditch the props all together! Just modify the nacelles to mount turbojets. Then to keep FIKI certification you don't need hot props...
 
scottd said:
Well, I'll take the Cirrus with a certified IPS any day, especially when you are dealing with clear ice scenarios including SLD. Boots won't help you with runback whereas TKS does a great job keeping the entire wing's surface protected.
Click to expand...

Right up to the point where your tiny TKS tank goes dry. Then your in a real pickle.
 
n20junkie said:
Right up to the point where your tiny TKS tank goes dry. Then your in a real pickle.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that those systems require constant tweaking to keep functioning. I've not heard many people that weren't marketing for Cirrus say they were reliable and effective enough to be relied upon.
 
They are plenty relyable.

Even the non KI TKS is quite rugged and it's only got one pump.
 
I know the TKS on the bosses columbia was good at first, but its having issues now after 2 years. Its an ok system. But its not boots or bleed heat thats for sure.
 
Keep in mind TKS is a lot more than Cirrus. For example the Hawker 800 is certified with TKS.
 
Lance F said:
Keep in mind TKS is a lot more than Cirrus. For example the Hawker 800 is certified with TKS.
Click to expand...

I think I'd be less concerned about it on an aircraft that was able to quickly be out of icing conditions, however with something like a Cirrus, which is more likely to be in continuous icing conditions, I'd be more concerned about the fluid systems.

Regardless, that's good to know. I wasn't aware that larger aircraft were certified with TKS systems.
 
The theory is great. On a big airframe that can haul 30 gallons its awesome. 3 gallons gets you 1 hour on normal and 20 minutes on max.

Thats not a whole lot of time depending where you are. I believe the FIKI birds hold 6 or so, but with windshield sprayers and tail panels, it uses it a whole lot faster.

And the alcohol is an issue. Even the TKS tank cap is heavily corodded.
 
Adodero said:
I think I'd be less concerned about it on an aircraft that was able to quickly be out of icing conditions, however with something like a Cirrus, which is more likely to be in continuous icing conditions, I'd be more concerned about the fluid systems.

Regardless, that's good to know. I wasn't aware that larger aircraft were certified with TKS systems.
Click to expand...
The approach of some Cirri operators (and heck, some FIKI Mooney operators) scares the beejesus out of me. Some do "cruise" in icing conditions.

See "Flying 2.0" on the Cirrus Website. "Your Personal Airliner".
 
Adodero said:
My understanding is that those systems require constant tweaking to keep functioning. I've not heard many people that weren't marketing for Cirrus say they were reliable and effective enough to be relied upon.
Click to expand...
I know of at least 3 airplanes with TKS and the owners unanimously love the system. Two are Bonanzas and one is a Cirrus. IMO the chief downsides of FIKI TKS are the need to prime before using and the mess they make on the hangar floor.
 
bbchien said:
The approach of some Cirri operators (and heck, some FIKI Mooney operators) scares the beejesus out of me. Some do "cruise" in icing conditions.
Click to expand...

+1...
 
At least in the FIKI Baron I fly there is essentially no maintenance required for the TKS system other than running it periodically. It works great. Unlike boots, hot pops, or hot plates, there is no maintenance. They don't need a heavy duty vacuum pump with the associated weaknesses. You also don't need to be fixing pinhole leaks or replace boots. It is a great system, and I would never go back to boots.
 
I've never flown a Cirrus-sized airplane with TKS but I flew a Hawker 800 and it was my least favorite system on the airplane. Seems like they never could get it working quite right. We followed all the instructions such as priming it every day and turning it on way in advance but the results were never very satisfying. Give me bleed air any day.
 
bbchien said:
The approach of some Cirri operators (and heck, some FIKI Mooney operators) scares the beejesus out of me. Some do "cruise" in icing conditions.

See "Flying 2.0" on the Cirrus Website. "Your Personal Airliner".
Click to expand...

I think that's what scares me the most.

There was some Cirrus ad I saw a few months ago that sounded like a NTSB report waiting to happen. The guy was going on about how he was shooting an approach into Jackson Hole, was running low on fuel, had one chance, picking up ice, turned on TKS, VOILA all taken care of, magical airplane, etc.

I don't think it's the system in itself that I have such a hesitation about, but the way they are used.
 
AcroBoy said:
At least in the FIKI Baron I fly there is essentially no maintenance required for the TKS system other than running it periodically. It works great. Unlike boots, hot pops, or hot plates, there is no maintenance. They don't need a heavy duty vacuum pump with the associated weaknesses. You also don't need to be fixing pinhole leaks or replace boots. It is a great system, and I would never go back to boots.
Click to expand...

Hmm. In my 1000+ hours of operating boot systems, the only maintenance I've had to do is replace a couple of worn boots (happens on 40+ year old planes) and put the treatment on them that helps the ice come off easier. I've had two vacuum pumps go out. One was a wet vacuum pump (we didn't find any record of it being replaced in the plane's 40+ years on this earth), and the other was a dry pump that had over 500 hours on it.

I have no experience with TKS, but I have not found boots to be finicky.

Skylane81E said:
As quick as our old TKs mooney iced the un protected surfaces punching down through a layer of ice you don't want to hang out there.
Click to expand...

This is my issue with taking something like a Mooney or a Cirrus into ice. You're not keeping all the surfaces clean, you'll build drag quickly (on a slick airframe), and you don't have the power to try to overcome it.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Hmm. In my 1000+ hours of operating boot systems, the only maintenance I've had to do is replace a couple of worn boots (happens on 40+ year old planes) and put the treatment on them that helps the ice come off easier. I've had two vacuum pumps go out. One was a wet vacuum pump (we didn't find any record of it being replaced in the plane's 40+ years on this earth), and the other was a dry pump that had over 500 hours on it.

I have no experience with TKS, but I have not found boots to be finicky.



This is my issue with taking something like a Mooney or a Cirrus into ice. You're not keeping all the surfaces clean, you'll build drag quickly (on a slick airframe), and you don't have the power to try to overcome it.
Click to expand...

Well let's be 100% fair, the only places with ice were the landing lights (wing LE) and the spinner. Same things would have iced on any plane. Even the cowl inlets were clear. Seen Navajos come back with lots of ice on the cowls and even the ac compressor can have a nice thick coat.
 
Skylane81E said:
Well let's be 100% fair, the only places with ice were the landing lights (wing LE) and the spinner. Same things would have iced on any plane. Even the cowl inlets were clear. Seen Navajos come back with lots of ice on the cowls and even the ac compressor can have a nice thick coat.
Click to expand...

Sure, but I bet the Navajo handles that a lot better than the Mooney.
 
Neither noticed according to my boss. The great thing about that mooney is it held a lot of fluid, and on some flights they had more TKS time than legal fuel when loading multiple passengers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top