What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Rv10 expulsive deice

Rallylancer122

Well Known Member
I've heard rumors of an expulsive deice system for the RV10, but google can't seem to find any information. Does anyone have any details on this?
 
Therm-X De-Icing has it.
"Therm-X consists of a graphite foil laminate applied to the leading edge of the wing and horizontal stabilizer. Electronic heating elements embedded within the laminate are powered by a 70 volt/100 amp alternator."


It is reported to be $15K
Note it is a thermal solution and my concern would be ice forming behind the thermal strips.

But.......
The small protrusions, canopy, prop, and tail will ice up first. A tail plane stall due to ice will most likely not be recoverable.

I suggest, know what weather conditions ice will form and don't fly near them.
 
I've heard rumors of an expulsive deice system for the RV10, but google can't seem to find any information. Does anyone have any details on this?

There is a guy on here who installed the Therm-X system in his RV-14 and has said it was not without issues. He installed an expulsion de-ice system using actuators in his RV-10. He just started flying in the last year i believe. Last i spoke to him the system in the rv-10 was not perfect and he’s adding something like ice sheild to the leading edge to try and help the actuators expel the ice. He has some install information in his builders log, and the modifications look extensive.
http://www.mykitlog.com/users/category.php?user=NorrisAir&project=2673&category=12847
 
Last edited:
Therm-X De-Icing has it.
"Therm-X consists of a graphite foil laminate applied to the leading edge of the wing and horizontal stabilizer. Electronic heating elements embedded within the laminate are powered by a 70 volt/100 amp alternator."


It is reported to be $15K
Note it is a thermal solution and my concern would be ice forming behind the thermal strips.

But.......
The small protrusions, canopy, prop, and tail will ice up first. A tail plane stall due to ice will most likely not be recoverable.

I suggest, know what weather conditions ice will form and don't fly near them.

Agree with Mike D - get your IFR and learn Wx. You’ll be a safer pilot.
 
Actually the regulations clearly state that flight into known or forecast icing is prohibited unless the aircraft is certified for FIKI FAR 91.527

This system does not satisfy certification requirements so I don’t see it being a worthwhile investment.
 
Best icing procedure, avoid it. There is extensive testing done to certify a aircraft for FIKI, it's not something to be undertaken by a amateur, it'll give you a false sense of security.
So the wing is supposedly protected, what about the prop and the vertical and horizontal surfaces?
 
Last edited:
In the latest issue of Sport Aviation there is an RV10 in completions that had expulsive deice on it, I don't have the issue anymore so I'm not sure what they guys name is.
 
Best icing procedure, avoid it. There is extensive testing done to certify a aircraft for FIKI, it's not something to be undertaken by a amateur, it'll give you a false sense of security.
So the wing is supposedly protected, what about the prop and the vertical and horizontal surfaces?

^^ This.

And a few more words to meet the minimum. :)
 
been here a couple of years now, but still surprised by the tone and arrogance some people get asking a simple technical question.

The OP is only asking if there is an expulsive deice system for the RV10, period.
Maybe he is IFR rated, maybe he is highly experienced, and maybe he well knows that flying in real IMC (yes, in clouds) for long enough might lead to ice formation one day.
"Knowing the weather" or using the best data and forecast is for sure no guarantee of what might happen weather wise. Experienced ATPL talking.
 
Really

"Knowing the weather" or using the best data and forecast is for sure no guarantee of what might happen weather wise. Experienced ATPL talking.”

True, it is no guarantee…however…knowing the weather allows you to minimize the risk of encountering ice in an aircraft never designed to fly in it…

…from one “experienced ATP” to another…
 
Rumors, Experimental and ice may sound intriguing, but as a low time RV 10 builder/flying, anything with ice and flying, I would tend to steer clear of using all available resources. And, agreed there are no guarantees. IMHO
 
There is a guy on here who installed the Therm-X system in his RV-14 and has said it was not without issues. He installed an expulsion de-ice system using actuators in his RV-10. He just started flying in the last year i believe. Last i spoke to him the system in the rv-10 was not perfect and he’s adding something like ice sheild to the leading edge to try and help the actuators expel the ice. He has some install information in his builders log, and the modifications look extensive.
http://www.mykitlog.com/users/category.php?user=NorrisAir&project=2673&category=12847

My experience with ice boots is that the RV10 isn’t fast enough to have them work properly. The Caravan had them, and if the IAS was down to 140 knots, the ice would crack upon inflation but not get carried away. We would ask for a block altitude, then dive for 175 KIAS, then pop the boots, ice would shed well then.
Other options are TKS fluid, but that makes such a mess, and if you don’t use it, the “sponges” dry out and it doesn’t apply evenly. Not sure how that system would be adapted to the RV wing due to the fuel tank design, as it’s typically imbedded into the surface. That leaves that thermal design. The Piaggio has electric thermal mats on the forward wing.. worked well with no run back issues..
 
This is for known icing conditions?

To me the regs are a bit unclear. It is clear that a pilot can use data other than the forecast itslef to exempt the restriction of flight into "Forecasted Icing." The regs state that flight into known or foretasted icing conditions (at least mild or moderate) requires functional deice equipment (with a detailed list of that equip). It THEN states that the deice equipment meet the requirements of section 34 of part 23. However, part 23 expressly excludes EAB aircraft, so somewhat unclear if that applies to EAB aircraft in this case. Even if it is the case that it applies, no certification is required; Only that the deice equipment meets the specifications called out in section 34. Except for transport category aircraft, there is no mention of a requirement for an aircraft to be "certified for FIKI" when flying in icing conditions.

Everybody keeps saying that a plane must be certified for FIKI, yet there is nothing in the regs that states that, with the exception of transport category aircraft. Cetainly an aircraft that is certified for FIKI has met section 34, but that does not mean it is the only way to be legal under the regs.

§ 91.527 Operating in icing conditions.
(a) No pilot may take off an airplane that has frost, ice, or snow adhering to any propeller, windshield, stabilizing or control surface; to a powerplant installation; or to an airspeed, altimeter, rate of climb, or flight attitude instrument system or wing, except that takeoffs may be made with frost under the wing in the area of the fuel tanks if authorized by the FAA.

(b) No pilot may fly under IFR into known or forecast light or moderate icing conditions, or under VFR into known light or moderate icing conditions, unless -

(1) The aircraft has functioning deicing or anti-icing equipment protecting each rotor blade, propeller, windshield, wing, stabilizing or control surface, and each airspeed, altimeter, rate of climb, or flight attitude instrument system;

(2) The airplane has ice protection provisions that meet section 34 of Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 23; or

(3) The airplane meets transport category airplane type certification provisions, including the requirements for certification for flight in icing conditions.

(c) Except for an airplane that has ice protection provisions that meet the requirements in section 34 of Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 23, or those for transport category airplane type certification, no pilot may fly an airplane into known or forecast severe icing conditions.

(d) If current weather reports and briefing information relied upon by the pilot in command indicate that the forecast icing conditions that would otherwise prohibit the flight will not be encountered during the flight because of changed weather conditions since the forecast, the restrictions in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section based on forecast conditions do not apply.
 
Last edited:
To me the regs are a bit unclear. It is clear that a pilot can use data other than the forecast itslef to exempt the restriction of flight into "Forecasted Icing." The regs state that flight into known or foretasted icing conditions (at least mild or moderate) requires functional deice equipment (with a detailed list of that equip). It THEN states that the deice equipment meet the requirements of section 34 of part 23. However, part 23 expressly excludes EAB aircraft, so somewhat unclear if that applies to EAB aircraft in this case. Even if it is the case that it applies, no certification is required; Only that the deice equipment meets the specifications called out in section 34. Except for transport category aircraft, there is no mention of a requirement for an aircraft to be "certified for FIKI" when flying in icing conditions.

Everybody keeps saying that a plane must be certified for FIKI, yet there is nothing in the regs that states that, with the exception of transport category aircraft. Cetainly an aircraft that is certified for FIKI has met section 34, but that does not mean it is the only way to be legal under the regs.


According to the regs, you may be right…but do you want to be dead right?

I fly a FIKI aircraft for work and have seen ice buildup faster than you can imagine. Wing anti ice is not going to be of much use if the tail plane accumulates ice first…

The only winning move is not to play. Avoid icing and if encountered, get out…
 
I have shark gill vents on the lower sides of my cowling at oil cooler level. They came with my A/C kit. I like them for extra cooling in AZ, and have never had significant cooling issues of oil or cylinders.

I don't go looking for IFR and/or icing. Got enough of that flying Metroliners in the Rockies. But I do use my airplane year round.

However, one strange thing I have found is that one time when I did encounter icing in my -10, the wings had pretty significant layer at the outer half of the wing but zero on the inner half. I was so intrigued that I continued for a while to watch. I could even see precipitation collecting outboard but melting off inboard. I have a picture somewhere in my collection.

THIS IS NOT A RECOMMENDATION.

The only answer that I can come up with is that I have an unplanned benefit that my inner leading edge is warmed by air exiting the shark gills. Cray cray isn't it?
 
Last edited:
You need horsepower

I have spent my career in icing and can tell you that any device/anti ice system is there to get you out of ice, not allow you to stay in it. The first thing one needs in an icing encounter is a LOT of excess performance. It is almost always the worst right at the top of cumuliform clouds so first thing to do is climb. If it continues to accumulate , you WILL descend. While my -10 is a stellar performer, I avoid ice at all costs. No we don’t have enough reserve performance.
 
However, one strange thing I have found is that one time when I did encounter icing in my -10, the wings had pretty significant layer at the outer half of the wing but zero on the inner half. I was so intrigued that I continued for a while to watch. I could even see precipitation collecting outboard but melting off inboard. I have a picture somewhere in my collection.

THIS IS NOT A RECOMMENDATION.

The only answer that I can come up with is that I have an unplanned benefit that my inner leading edge is warmed by air exiting the shark gills. Cray cray isn't it?

What you observed was most likely a ‘heat reservoir’ effect. If you took off and climbed into icing conditions all that warm gas in contact with the inboard leading edge kept ice from forming there. I recall DC9’s (iirc) had the opposite problem: They could descend from the flight levels (cold fuel) and land at San Jose (warm), and promptly have frost over all the wing tank areas.
 
Yep, at AA they had one Super 80 with a one black wing, didn't help a bit. Those airplanes would have ice on them on a 80 degree day.
 
What you observed was most likely a ‘heat reservoir’ effect. If you took off and climbed into icing conditions all that warm gas in contact with the inboard leading edge kept ice from forming there. I recall DC9’s (iirc) had the opposite problem: They could descend from the flight levels (cold fuel) and land at San Jose (warm), and promptly have frost over all the wing tank areas.

I know what you're thinking there and I have questioned it myself, but the previous fuel had been purchased in SLC on a cold winter day and we had been airborne almost two hours when it occurred so I don't think warm fuel is the answer.
I would never count on it for ice protection but the fact remains that with side vents on the cowl, hot air is added to the airstream at each side.

Many years ago I took a 737 into OAK and had a bird strike on a short final. We had a big dent in the leading edge of the horizontal stab. Maint bright out a belt loader for a close inspection and invited me to take a look so up I went. By now we had been on the ground for 20mins or but what was amazing to me was how warm the leading edge was. When I remarked about it, the mech said turn around and there were the aft ends of the engines. He said. “These don't need anti-ice because it's always on”
 
Let’s note the OP is from the frozen north and icing could be an issue.

From the NTSB reports I have read, you have seconds to recognize icing and make positive movements to get out of it.

That being said, there are aircraft like the SR22 that are retrofitted FIKI and have been retrofitted with weeping leading edges. This is not cheap and maintenance is somewhat of a challenge from what I’ve heard. But it has been done.

If he wants to experiment, and knows the mountain he will climb, then he should be able to do it.

But my recommendation remains the same to avoid the ice.

I would have the same advice for someone wanting to turbo normalize their RV. It shouldn’t be done because of the high risk with VNE, but if you know the risk and want to do it still, you should be allowed.

Vans RV-1 was a pure experiment in this same track. So was the rocket, Super 6, EVO, radial -8, retractable -4, and many others. Just know what your getting into.
 
.....The result is 8,000 watts of digitally controlled energy coursing through the heaters...

With typical alternator efficiency, that's around 15 HP. Buenos says it's up to the installer to figure out mounting that huge alternator plus the minimum 1" wide multi-rib belt to transmit that much power.
 
From the NTSB reports I have read, you have seconds to recognize icing and make positive movements to get out of it.

Well, maybe in heavy freezing rain. But usually it builds slower. Which is part of the problem. Pilots just continue on, doing nothing, until it’s too late.
 
According to the regs, you may be right…but do you want to be dead right?

I fly a FIKI aircraft for work and have seen ice buildup faster than you can imagine. Wing anti ice is not going to be of much use if the tail plane accumulates ice first…

The only winning move is not to play. Avoid icing and if encountered, get out…

absolutely NO argument here. I just wanted to correct the statements about certification and legality. I have 0 interest in flying an untested set up into icing conditions.
 
To me the regs are a bit unclear. It is clear that a pilot can use data other than the forecast itslef to exempt the restriction of flight into "Forecasted Icing." The regs state that flight into known or foretasted icing conditions (at least mild or moderate) requires functional deice equipment (with a detailed list of that equip). It THEN states that the deice equipment meet the requirements of section 34 of part 23. However, part 23 expressly excludes EAB aircraft, so somewhat unclear if that applies to EAB aircraft in this case. Even if it is the case that it applies, no certification is required; Only that the deice equipment meets the specifications called out in section 34. Except for transport category aircraft, there is no mention of a requirement for an aircraft to be "certified for FIKI" when flying in icing conditions.

Everybody keeps saying that a plane must be certified for FIKI, yet there is nothing in the regs that states that, with the exception of transport category aircraft. Cetainly an aircraft that is certified for FIKI has met section 34, but that does not mean it is the only way to be legal under the regs.

Technically since § 91.527(b) uses the disjunctive "or", only one of the three clauses is required to be true to be compliant with this subsection. So having "functioning deicing or anti-icing equipment" protecting the indicated places is sufficient and you don't have to worry about Section 34 or transport category certification provisions for purposes of this subsection. Not sure if there are any other provisions about FIKI, but this section lets you off the hook with the right equipment. Having said that, I agree that FIKI is a bad idea for EAB.

Though it could be nice to have deicing equipment for inadvertent flight into icing conditions.
 
Technically since § 91.527(b) uses the disjunctive "or", only one of the three clauses is required to be true to be compliant with this subsection. So having "functioning deicing or anti-icing equipment" protecting the indicated places is sufficient and you don't have to worry about Section 34 or transport category certification provisions for purposes of this subsection. Not sure if there are any other provisions about FIKI, but this section lets you off the hook with the right equipment. Having said that, I agree that FIKI is a bad idea for EAB.

Though it could be nice to have deicing equipment for inadvertent flight into icing conditions.

“Inadvertent”… most of these occurrences are “preventable”.
 
…and

Agreed, but it may be the nonpreventable one that kills you...

…and how many of those with “some” ice protection will continue further into those conditions because of the perception that they have “some” ice protection?

In the aircraft that we fly, RVs in this case, it is almost always possible to avoid icing…and most of my GA time has been spent in WI, IL, IA, IN, MN, and MI so the threat is real.
 
“Inadvertent”… most of these occurrences are “preventable”.

Yep, most occurrences are "preventable", just stay on the ground and play the armchair pilot, or fly so little, in perfect no wind no clouds conditions, staying around your well known patch.
Or go places and use your RV as means of transportation, and not only as a toy.

I almost reached 500hrs in 2022, including a westward then eastward crossing of the NA, and a little round tour of Canada, Alaska, and the US. A few of these hours had to be flown in clouds, and guess what, ice was encountered a few times as well.
As you must know, forecasts are what they are, and if you start picking up ice despite none shown on the weather charts... you then apply the techniques taught and surely known by yourself and all IFR rated pilots, e.g. quantify the rate of ice build-up and then decide to, turnaround, continue and climb or descend if possible at all, and of course, get out of the conditions.
Luckily the airfoil as used on RVs can take some ice, I'm sure others will attest to this.

Anti- and de-ice systems have been developed for good reasons, so why not talk about them for our RVs?
 
Anti- and de-ice systems have been developed for good reasons, so why not talk about them for our RVs?

I think the issue here is in the certified world there is significant testing on these systems even when FIKI isn’t the goal. With E-ABs, even RVs, there’s enough variation within like models to raise doubt that a given system will perform exactly as the aircraft used in development. For example without testing how do you know for sure that your system melts ice but doesn’t allow water to flow back and refreeze beyond the systems coverage? If I’m flying a Cirrus SR-22 with FIKI certification I have no doubts. But an RV-10 with a builder installed system— not so sure. Of course everyone has to gauge their own level of risk acceptance, but as an instrument pilot, single pilot IFR adds enough risk without purposefully adding icing to the equation. Have I picked up ice before—yes. But I’ve been more successful in using the tools out there to avoid it in the first place. That’s where I put my energy. YMMV….
 
Last edited:
Yep, most occurrences are "preventable", just stay on the ground and play the armchair pilot, or fly so little, in perfect no wind no clouds conditions, staying around your well known patch.
Or go places and use your RV as means of transportation, and not only as a toy.

I almost reached 500hrs in 2022, including a westward then eastward crossing of the NA, and a little round tour of Canada, Alaska, and the US. A few of these hours had to be flown in clouds, and guess what, ice was encountered a few times as well.
As you must know, forecasts are what they are, and if you start picking up ice despite none shown on the weather charts... you then apply the techniques taught and surely known by yourself and all IFR rated pilots, e.g. quantify the rate of ice build-up and then decide to, turnaround, continue and climb or descend if possible at all, and of course, get out of the conditions.
Luckily the airfoil as used on RVs can take some ice, I'm sure others will attest to this.

Anti- and de-ice systems have been developed for good reasons, so why not talk about them for our RVs?


You are missing the point; having wing anti ice on an RV is likely to give a false sense of security and encourage flying further into icing conditions. What about the tail plane? The prop? The windshield?

The good news is also posted above…each of us can make our own decisions about risk. If you do get caught in icing conditions, you do what you have to to exit it. Thinking you can continue because one surface may or may not be protected by an untested system, well, you get the idea…
 
All RVs are fair weather airplanes once the temperatures dip below freezing. To pretend otherwise is playing with fire. Might get away with it 1000 times, but eventually luck runs out.

Lots of certified FIKI Cessna Caravans have crashed. I know one dead Caravan pilot because of airborne icing.

Can a system be designed to safely operate an RV10 in icing conditions? Probably. However, it would be cheaper to buy a Cirrus.
 
I have owned FIKI airplanes and planes with no de-ice. My FIKI P210 (boots) lost 40 knots of indicated airspeed even with prop heat, windshield de-ice, and blowing the boots every minute. The ice was so bad that I was losing 100 FPM at full throttle. My Cirrus SR22 with TKS was almost as bad. My Baron with TKS could fly through freezing rain without a problem. In bad ice I maybe lose 5-10 knots indicated airspeed. I trusted that system in any weather. My Glasair III did not like ice at all and the tail was really critical. Out about 1/2" of ice on it one day climbing through the clouds. Cost me 30 knots of indicated airspeed.

The RV wing is about as good as you will get when it comes to carrying ice. I'm not advocating flying in ice, but I can't think of a better experimental wing if I get stuck in ice.

While I agree with those that say "just avoid it", you would park your plane the majority of the winter here in NE Indiana if you totally avoided ice. Having some form of de-ice (if even only the prop) is a tool you can use to get you out of the ice. Ice layers are usually only 3k thick or so. The key is to know where the warm air is and the tops of the clouds. Most of the time you are only in the ice maybe 3-5 minutes which should be no problem.

I have agreed to buy the RV-14 that was mentioned here. It has Therm-x which is not supported anymore, but if it works it is a tool. If nothing else, the hot prop ensures that I can at least make full power. Hopefully, someone comes up with a good de-ice system that is reliable. I will fly over the mountains at night IMC in a single engine plane and not even think about it twice, but if there is forecast ice I will avoid that area as I have witnessed in the P210 how quickly things can get ugly.
 
Ice

I have owned FIKI airplanes and planes with no de-ice. My FIKI P210 (boots) lost 40 knots of indicated airspeed even with prop heat, windshield de-ice, and blowing the boots every minute. The ice was so bad that I was losing 100 FPM at full throttle. My Cirrus SR22 with TKS was almost as bad. My Baron with TKS could fly through freezing rain without a problem. In bad ice I maybe lose 5-10 knots indicated airspeed. I trusted that system in any weather. My Glasair III did not like ice at all and the tail was really critical. Out about 1/2" of ice on it one day climbing through the clouds. Cost me 30 knots of indicated airspeed.

The RV wing is about as good as you will get when it comes to carrying ice. I'm not advocating flying in ice, but I can't think of a better experimental wing if I get stuck in ice.

While I agree with those that say "just avoid it", you would park your plane the majority of the winter here in NE Indiana if you totally avoided ice. Having some form of de-ice (if even only the prop) is a tool you can use to get you out of the ice. Ice layers are usually only 3k thick or so. The key is to know where the warm air is and the tops of the clouds. Most of the time you are only in the ice maybe 3-5 minutes which should be no problem.

I have agreed to buy the RV-14 that was mentioned here. It has Therm-x which is not supported anymore, but if it works it is a tool. If nothing else, the hot prop ensures that I can at least make full power. Hopefully, someone comes up with a good de-ice system that is reliable. I will fly over the mountains at night IMC in a single engine plane and not even think about it twice, but if there is forecast ice I will avoid that area as I have witnessed in the P210 how quickly things can get ugly.


Avoiding icing doesn’t necessarily mean parking your aircraft.

You keep speaking about airspeed loss; the greater threat is the aerodynamic effects on the shape of the wing and the excess weight. You may see the airspeed loss and think you are ok but in reality, the wing may be on the edge of a stall.

Flying these airplanes in know icing is an unnecessary risk, imo.
 
Performance

I have owned FIKI airplanes and planes with no de-ice. My FIKI P210 (boots) lost 40 knots of indicated airspeed even with prop heat, windshield de-ice, and blowing the boots every minute. The ice was so bad that I was losing 100 FPM at full throttle. My Cirrus SR22 with TKS was almost as bad. My Baron with TKS could fly through freezing rain without a problem. In bad ice I maybe lose 5-10 knots indicated airspeed. I trusted that system in any weather. My Glasair III did not like ice at all and the tail was really critical. Out about 1/2" of ice on it one day climbing through the clouds. Cost me 30 knots of indicated airspeed.

The RV wing is about as good as you will get when it comes to carrying ice. I'm not advocating flying in ice, but I can't think of a better experimental wing if I get stuck in ice.

While I agree with those that say "just avoid it", you would park your plane the majority of the winter here in NE Indiana if you totally avoided ice. Having some form of de-ice (if even only the prop) is a tool you can use to get you out of the ice. Ice layers are usually only 3k thick or so. The key is to know where the warm air is and the tops of the clouds. Most of the time you are only in the ice maybe 3-5 minutes which should be no problem.

I have agreed to buy the RV-14 that was mentioned here. It has Therm-x which is not supported anymore, but if it works it is a tool. If nothing else, the hot prop ensures that I can at least make full power. Hopefully, someone comes up with a good de-ice system that is reliable. I will fly over the mountains at night IMC in a single engine plane and not even think about it twice, but if there is forecast ice I will avoid that area as I have witnessed in the P210 how quickly things can get ugly.

It will be interesting to see actual performance with these mods. When I was building mine another builder looked into this mod and decided between the weight, drag and reduced performance airfoils it was a non starter for him. Data would be beneficial.
 
The airspeed loss data was given to show the severity of ice buildup. 40 knot loss is not good. 10 knots in a Baron is nothing. 40 knots on a P210 is critical.

And, yes, stay out of ice is the best policy, but after 35 years and 4k hours of flying you will find ice if you use an airplane for something other than flying around locally. I wouldn’t own a plane if I had to stay home every time there was a chance for ice.

As for performance, most people I have talked to that installed TKS report a 5 knot decrease in cruise and slight climb degradation. I have no reports on the 14A with therm-x
 
Flying these airplanes in know icing is an unnecessary risk, imo.

Bob, why don’t you try to respect the OPs original question? In clear text, it ain’t about your take about flying in icing conditions or not, but rather what can, or could help if icing conditions are encountered, easy no?

The RV wing is about as good as you will get when it comes to carrying ice. I'm not advocating flying in ice, but I can't think of a better experimental wing if I get stuck in ice.

My, and others, experience… several ice encounters, one severe with engine coughing, others more benign, had no immediate effects on the cruise performance. As stated above, the key is getting out of icing ASAP, and flying higher or lower, restore vis, and then adjust inputs and speed (AOA really) for the approach phase, should ice in any form still be present on the LE, or elsewhere.
 
Agreed. You need an exit for ice. If ice is forecast and the tops are more than 12k or so it is best to stay home. If you know it is clear skies above 10k then ice really isn’t an issue. I won’t scud run to stay out of ice. I go IFR just about everywhere regardless of the weather. ATC help is just another tool in the shed just like deice, radar, GPS, etc.
 
Performance

Would be good to hear how the airframe performs with the added systems in place.
 
Last edited:
All of this airframe anti-ice deicing is very interesting. Plan on adding some kind of system to get your windshield deiced because you're coming down and you want to see the runway environment.
 
"The first thing one needs in an icing encounter is a LOT of excess performance. It is almost always the worst right at the top of cumuliform clouds".
Years ago a new tightly cowled twin jet was on it's initial flight test out of Wichita Kansas. The test crew entered the low overcast and shortly both engine fire lights illuminated. The co- pilot ready with the emergency checklist asked the captain if they should fire the engine fire extinguishers.
Pilot: No we're going to need all the heat we can get to get rid of all this ice we're picking up.
Post flight inspection revealed that the moisture had shorted out the new fire indicating system.
 
Ice

“…Bob, why don’t you try to respect the OPs original question? In clear text, it ain’t about your take about flying in icing conditions or not, but rather what can, or could help if icing conditions are encountered, easy no?…”

Actually, my comment was in reference to toddsanderson post 37, not the OP. Thought you might want some clarification, considering the apparent tone of your post.
 
Flying these airplanes in know icing is an unnecessary risk, imo.

Yep. A couple of years we departed San Jose, climbing through 6,000' - 8,000' we were suddenly covered in ice and the windshield heat was overwhelmed. I'm remember saying out loud, "WTH just happened ..."

Popped the boots and prop deice on. In that airplane it was a annoyance, in a GA airplane not so much.

On the ground it was 65F, high overcast layer, zero precipitation, and certainly no ice in the forecast.
 
It seems to me that the best deice system would be a water cooled engine with the “radiator” being the leading edges of the wing and tail. You could close up the cowl almost completely eliminating all cooling drag. No TKS fluid, hi power alternators, and always on. I just wonder if there would be too little or too much heat rejection using the leading edge.
 
It seems to me that the best deice system would be a water cooled engine with the “radiator” being the leading edges of the wing and tail. You could close up the cowl almost completely eliminating all cooling drag. No TKS fluid, hi power alternators, and always on. I just wonder if there would be too little or too much heat rejection using the leading edge.

Not nearly enough heat rejection and it adds too much weight. It's been discussed here in the past, and actually tried with aircraft a couple times, to no real success.
 
Back
Top