Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

FIKI certification in Europe - what does it mean?

Peter wrote:

I think we did that before.

So we did. And I posted a scan of a page from the limitations section of the TB20 deicing POH supplement which stated “Flight into known icing conditions is approved…” The page itself being marked as “Approved by the D.G.A.C.” Make of it what you will.

I can tell you that full TKS is extremely effective

I can attest to that, too, having flown a deiced TB20 in icing conditions.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

Make of it what you will.

I think it is bollocks

We did it e.g. here.

If one wants to create a criminal offence (all of aviation law is “criminal law”) then one must define the conditions which make it thus.

Looking as the confusion here, is it any wonder that somebody in the DGAC just copied across some FAA approved AFMS wording? Not really, given that this is the same DGAC which demanded the disconnection of the heading data to my WX500 stormscope, with the reason given to Socata being that if the WX500 showed the bearing on which the lightning is, the pilot might use the WX500 to avoid a storm! The same DGAC whose switchboard repeatedly slammed down the phone when they heard a caller speaking in English.

Back to the topic, you do not need ice protection to fly IFR in Europe, in the private flying context. It is “very nice to have” but in e.g. the TB20 the installation, with full fluid, is weight-wise roughly the same as an attractively proportioned woman (UK Size 8) sitting in the left back seat Life is one big tough choice, isn’t it?

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

I can tell you that full TKS is extremely effective

Fairly long exposure to operating in moderate icing conditions in the TKS DA42. The system is well designed with good redundancy, but it is an anti-ice system not a de icing system, this is the fundamental difference between TKS and pneumatic boots. What does this mean? You turn the system on in visible moisture below 5oC OAT, if you don’t the system will not work that well, and with the high aspect ratio wing there is a tendency to have accumulation on the wing tips ahead of the ailerons. Not ideal when descending through IMC in the winter, and then spending a fair amount of time in the descent and approach phase with a dwindling level of anti ice fluid. Trying to economise on fluid use, in effect negates the ability of the system to protect the airframe. TKS is an excellent system for exiting moderate icing, if you turned it on before entering icing. Am guessing the TB20 AFMS is very clear on this as well.

Only APP flaps with icing and 1.4x factor on landing distance required, plus increased approach ref speeds.

Oxford (EGTK), United Kingdom

Trying to economise on fluid use, in effect negates the ability of the system to protect the airframe. TKS is an excellent system for exiting moderate icing, if you turned it on before entering icing.

Flying in known icing does cost a lot of money renting a FIKI while and splashing 40L of TKS fluid you are near 2000£ for an out-return trip London/Paris…

Last Edited by Ibra at 13 Oct 23:10
Paris/Essex, France/UK, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

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

Have you ever had this – I mean personally and not “a nephew of the neighbor of some random guy told a great story…”? I try to avoid ice as much as I can and therefore I personally have not that much of experience – but never even got close to see this “bridging”. In addition, TKS has the much bigger issue of being completely useless when turned on too late. In combination with…
Ibra wrote:

Flying in known icing does cost a lot of money renting a FIKI while and splashing 40L of TKS fluid you are near 2000£ for an out-return trip London/Paris…

… this could become a real challenge as flying with TKS deice is not only expensive when actually encountering ice but already when there is the possibility.

Peter wrote:

If they actually used those words (FIKI) that is somebody misunderstanding the whole thing and just quoting the US term.

Just because some legal system uses a specific term in a specific definition does not mean that no other legal system on the world is allowed to use these words in this combination. USA do not have a trademark on the words “flight into known icing”. Therefore in European regulation the meaning/definition of “known icing” might be different, but by no means does that imply that using this term is wrong/senseless.

“Known Icing” in Europe has (as you rightly say) nothing to do with some products of some US weather forecaster but simply means that you know (or should have known when you did your flight planning properly) that you encounter icing. E.g. visible moisture at -5C is known icing. When you penetrate a cloud at this OAT you fly into known icing . It’s as easy as this. No US weather service involved. You will not find a judge that follows your reasoning “I know that it is physically impossible that there is no icing in a cloud at this temperature but I actually can not positively know before I have really been in that cloud…”

The reason why flight into FIKI with airplanes not authorized for it is not, that the legal definition is unclear, but rather that we have much less SEP IFR traffic in Europe in the first place and many of those who try to fly into icing w/o deice simply do not survive it.

Last Edited by Malibuflyer at 14 Oct 06:18
Germany
Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

I think it is bollocks

Really? And still you fly your deiced TB20 in icing conditions?

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

As previously described, I was referring to the use of “FIKI” as a legal concept for rendering a departure illegal (a criminal offence) if certain wx is forecast.

Ice protection is not required IFR equipment in Europe.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

@Malibuflyer summed it up nicely.

ANNEX VII (Part-NCO)

SUBPART B: OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES

NCO.OP.170 Ice and other contaminants – flight procedures
Regulation (EU) No 800/2013

(a) The pilot-in-command shall only commence a flight or intentionally fly into expected or actual icing conditions if the aircraft is certified and equipped to cope with such conditions as referred to in 2.a.5 of Annex IV to Regulation (EC) No 216/2008.

(b) If icing exceeds the intensity of icing for which the aircraft is certified or if an aircraft not certified for flight in known icing conditions encounters icing, the pilot-in-command shall exit the icing conditions without delay, by a change of level and/or route, and if necessary by declaring an emergency to ATC.

KNOWN ICING CONDITIONS

Known icing conditions are conditions where actual ice is observed visually to be on the aircraft by the pilot or identified by on-board sensors.

Essentially, the rules are identical between FAA and EASA.

always learning
LO__, Austria

Can you define what “expected icing” means? is it a forecast? a report? IMC bellow zero?

This one is pretty clear to me

KNOWN ICING CONDITIONS

Known icing conditions are conditions where actual ice is observed visually to be on the aircraft by the pilot or identified by on-board sensors

Paris/Essex, France/UK, United Kingdom
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top