What's the point of non-FIKI TKS?

[201er]

FIKI TKS makes sense as an added capability. But what's the point of spending 50 grand on an inadvertent system? You're still not allowed to fly if there is any report of known icing. The chances of truly inadvertently getting into icing (and even more so not having any out but TKS) is slim. Is non-FIKI TKS just an invitation to break the rules?

[John Pleisse]

Yes and the system falls short of it's certified brother. There is only one pump and a smaller reservoir. What drives the notion is price. The FIKI upgrade cost almost double, so some people get sucked into the non certified system by lower price. 201's aren't certifiable.

[N33GG]

If you fly enough, there may come a day when you get into ice, in spite of your best efforts to avoid it. There was one flight I remember that I would have paid anything for de-ice capability of any kind.

[gjkirsch]

I have had both non FIKI and FIKI.  There are a lot of variations in the non FIKI installations to make comparisons next to impossible.  The non FIKI system I had in my last Bravo had exactly the same fluid capacity as the FIKI system I now have.  It had the prop slinger and ice light.  The main things it did not have were the back up pump and a heated stall vane.  I have seen other variations without the prop slinger, light, and in non Mooney planes lower fluid capacity. 

 

The only issue I had with either system in nearly 10 years of flying both planes was the loss of a stall strip.  Never had a leak or a pump failure.  I fly year round at altitudes where you can encounter ice at any time.  I could not tell a difference in the performance of either system and have experienced a lot of ice flying around the great lakes. 

[aviatoreb]

I think the no Fiki in a mooney (vs other planes the story is different) you get same flow rate, same panel coverage, same tank capacity, I have the same lights prop slinger and window spritzer.

I do not have heated stall vane - but I do have a heated aoa. Also no second alternator but I do have two 35mamp batteries... And the weakest link is one pump.

Is it an invitation to fly illegally into ice? Depends on the pilot - not the airplane. I avoid ice just like I would w a Fiki. I am very much comforted having it living around these parts. It's a backup plan just in case. In a high flyer like I have ice is a possibility year round.

To your question I ask - are seatbelts an invitation to crash? If you don't intend to crash then why wear seatbelts?

[Piloto]

On the FIKI system you have to know where ice is. On non FIKI system you do not need to know. That's how simple it is. On non FIKI you are legal if you didn't know.

 

José 

[201er]

To your question I ask - are seatbelts an invitation to crash? If you don't intend to crash then why wear seatbelts?

Not until flight into known turbulence becomes illegal

[PAMooney]

I have TKS on my 201 and the system is most valuable when flying into unpredictable cloud layers. More than a few time I've flown into Albany and Buffalo when the forecast was scattered and I get there and it is broken or overcast This is not fun in a clean wing Mooney like my old C.

[jlunseth]

To answer the question, the primary reasons you see non-FIKI systems on Mooneys are two.  First, there are a number of older airframes that cannot be certified as FIKI.  In the case of the 231, it is because redundant alternators are required for the certified system, and there is no ability to add a second alternator to the aircraft.  In the case of the Rocket/Missile, Rocket Engineering, which holds the STC, did not obtain an STC for FIKI.  So people want de-icing but can't get a full, certified system, they accept what they can get. The second reason is that some aircraft, some Bravos and I think some Ovations, had TKS added before it was certified for FIKI, so there was no FIKI available at the time.  I agree that if you are going to get TKS, and FIKI is available for your aircraft, it does not make much sense to just go part of the way.  Among other things, I talked to CAV (the TKS company) and they advised that it costs more to convert a non-FIKI TKS to a FIKI TKS, than to install FIKI TKS on an airframe that has no TKS.  About 10 grand more as I recall.  So if your aircraft is qualified for FIKI TKS and you install non-FIKI, future buyers wanting FIKI are less likely to pick your aircraft than a completely non-FIKI aircraft. 

[MB65E]

Had a filter clog up once but that's it! Non fiki and a little smarts is an extremely capable set up.

-matt

[M016576]

To answer the question, the primary reasons you see non-FIKI systems on Mooneys are two. First, there are a number of older airframes that cannot be certified as FIKI. In the case of the 231, it is because redundant alternators are required for the certified system, and there is no ability to add a second alternator to the aircraft. In the case of the Rocket/Missile, Rocket Engineering, which holds the STC, did not obtain an STC for FIKI. So people want de-icing but can't get a full, certified system, they accept what they can get. The second reason is that some aircraft, some Bravos and I think some Ovations, had TKS added before it was certified for FIKI, so there was no FIKI available at the time. I agree that if you are going to get TKS, and FIKI is available for your aircraft, it does not make much sense to just go part of the way. Among other things, I talked to CAV (the TKS company) and they advised that it costs more to convert a non-FIKI TKS to a FIKI TKS, than to install FIKI TKS on an airframe that has no TKS. About 10 grand more as I recall. So if your aircraft is qualified for FIKI TKS and you install non-FIKI, future buyers wanting FIKI are less likely to pick your aircraft than a completely non-FIKI aircraft.

Wow- CAV must really not want to re-work non-FIKI systems... Or just smell blood in the water. If the panels, slinger, windshield portion are all the same, and the difference is indeed just an extra pump and bigger tank, and they charge 10k more than a brand new install to make that FIKI... That's just crazy...,

Or is it 10k on top of the difference (so ~25k total) to upgrade to FIKI from non-FIKI? That makes more sense, but still highway robbery for what's being added... But the market sets the price.... I guess that's to discourage guys from buying non-FIKI, then saying "I'll upgrade later if I need to."

Still, if you buy a cheap enough aircraft with a non-FIKI install, could be cheaper to get it upgraded to FIKI than to buy a no TKS bird and install a new system. 55k... That's a huge investment- over 25% of the hull in a 200k bird.

[jlunseth]

Easy to say, but installing a FIKI means installing an entire system with different capability.  The old system (nonFIKI) needs to be removed and the new system installed, and that's the extra cost - removing the old system.  No, its not $10,000, it is a total cost of about 10 more than just installing FIKI from scratch.