Don’t worry CAA & UK MET office do not have money to issue an “icing forcast” for UK and again forcasting icing is the least of their problems…
I don’t ever recall they ever send a leaflet about it? so probably airframe icing is not not what keeps UK regulator awake at night (carb/engine icing is another matter)
Airborne_Again wrote:
That I didn’t know. Do you have a reference?
Just an email from the NAA ;)
When obtaining a specific approval (e.g. RVSM), the NAA required a MEL.
NCO.GEN.155 (b) says the NAA gets to see it (notification). The NAA does not approve it though.
@Peter I get my forecasts from Sigmets, either the France Sigmet or Euroc usually through Aeroweb. They’ve always been pretty accurate in helping me forecast possible icing conditions.
There are also Pireps when in the air.
Under FAA, you in your N reg when flying in Europe must adhere to FAA regulations regarding known icing because they would appear stricter than EASA regs.
Although you have deicing equipment I don’t think your TKS system ( although probably.excellent and perfect for the job) qualifies as certified for flight into known icing.
One could argue that known icing is not the same as forecast icing and you may have a point. But what would the FAA or your insurance company say if.you.had an accident due to icing had been forecast. If ATC had passed on a Pirep and you still flew.into those conditions you wouldn’t IMO have a leg to stand on. Even without accident you will have committed an infraction and the FAA could take action. Whether they would or not is open to speculation.
The point is that, rule wise, ( and I’m only talking regulations here not what the sensible pilot does) if you were flying that same plane, your TB20 and it was EASA registered it wouldn’t matter that your aircraft was not certified for FIKI. Even if it was forecast or there was a Pirep, you will not have committed an infraction if you find you are picking up ice.
How your insurance company would react again would be speculation.
“FIKI” relates to specific wx services which cover US territory only.
In US airspace, a TB20 with full TKS is not “FIKI” but the same TB20 outside the US is allowed to fly in icing conditions of a specified severity.
Is that what FAA regs say? I did not know that. I was going by an article written about Cirrus and what it had to do to be FIKI certified.
gallois wrote:
Although you have deicing equipment I don’t think your TKS system ( although probably.excellent and perfect for the job) qualifies as certified for flight into known icing.
TB20s with factory-installed TKS system are approved for flight into known icing conditions by the DGAC.
I don’t know about Peter’s retrofitted TKS, but AFAIU it is precisely the same as the factory-installed system.
Peter wrote:
getting busted for crashing due to ice (virtually impossible in Europe, IMHO)
Which part is virtually impossible, getting busted or crashing due to ice? Being from FAA-land I had the fear of God put in me over icing, so I’m curious what’s different in Europe.
Being from FAA-land I had the fear of God put in me over icing, so I’m curious what’s different in Europe.
@dutch_flyer a good philosophy. I have only had slight stabilator buffet when applying approach flaps at the final fix in FIKI twins, in garden variety moderate icing, removing flaps usually reduces/eliminates the risk. A colleague has experienced the full stabilator stall, again in quite modest, moderate conditions, always exciting to see an un-commanded pitch down of thirty degrees on the approach. These incidents in well equipped, FIKI piston twins. Removing the increased downwash from the flaps should remove the stalled condition of the tailplane.
Modern AFM on some types will say no or limited flaps with visible contamination.
I regard piston FIKI as a marketing and payload reducing device, which hopefully gives you some precious minutes to escape the icing conditions.
Is that what FAA regs say? I did not know that.
Yes; the FAA needs a second alternator, a backup TKS pump, a heated stall warner, etc, for “FIKI”.
I was going by an article written about Cirrus and what it had to do to be FIKI certified.
Yes, for US FIKI.
TB20s with factory-installed TKS system are approved for flight into known icing conditions by the DGAC.
I think we did that before. If they actually used those words (FIKI) that is somebody misunderstanding the whole thing and just quoting the US term. France doesn’t have the relevant wx services either. The DGAC has done all kinds of weird stuff over the years.
I don’t know about Peter’s retrofitted TKS, but AFAIU it is precisely the same as the factory-installed system.
It is. There is only one STC for the TB20/21.
Which part is virtually impossible, getting busted or crashing due to ice?
The former, of course 
so I’m curious what’s different in Europe.
The lack of wx services which could be used to form a prosecution case, to bust a pilot who departed into specified wx.
I regard piston FIKI as a marketing and payload reducing device, which hopefully gives you some precious minutes to escape the icing conditions.
I can tell you that full TKS is extremely effective – until the fluid runs out You get about an hour. On the SR22, max flow, you get a lot less but I don’t recall the time (30 mins?).
It is probably much better than rubber boots (until the fluid runs out, obviously). Boots have issues e.g. bridging and ice build-up past the boots. We have various past threads on that one. I think the main difference is perception, because rubber boots are found on “serious planes” (e.g. a 421C, TBM) whereas TKS is found on “toy planes” (e.g. TB20, SR22)
RobertL18C wrote:
I regard piston FIKI as a marketing and payload reducing device, which hopefully gives you some precious minutes to escape the icing conditions.
Amen! Fully agree
