TKS Upgrade

[kortopates]

46 minutes ago, M016576 said:

I think the answer was stated above- fewer overall panels for the same coverage- which reduces install time, and probably makes install easier... since the total number of panels changed between their “earlier” non-fiki design and the fiki certified design- there is probably no way to legally certify the “old” panel setup- despite identical coverage, flow rates and ice capability.

thats my hunch anyway....

one easy way to know the flow rates are the same- the advertised capacity for the tank is the same. The advertised run time in the de-Ice and anti-ice is the same.  And the pump is the same.  

Goes to reason that if you run out of fluid at the same time, using the same pump, at the same settings... then the flow rates would be the same (since the coverage is the same).

I understand, but I am wondering if flow rates and wing coverage wasn't enough to meet certification requirements with the original panels. Why else would they re-design them. Reducing install time couldn't have been a requirement but a side benefit. My guess is the new design improved the effectiveness of the weeping fluid in some way that improved the icing protection - why else would they spent all that money and time if the initial panels did the job just as well?

[M016576]

37 minutes ago, kortopates said:

I understand, but I am wondering if flow rates and wing coverage wasn't enough to meet certification requirements with the original panels. Why else would they re-design them. Reducing install time couldn't have been a requirement but a side benefit. My guess is the new design improved the effectiveness of the weeping fluid in some way that improved the icing protection - why else would they spent all that money and time if the initial panels did the job just as well?

Hard to say, really- could be that the thicker titanium was required on other installs (Cessna, beech)... or that the panel length was changed to conform to other installs... basically standardizing across the line, thus reducing overall costs.  I doubt though, that if CAV states the flow rates are the same, and the coverage is the same, that they are lying to us about it.  And the fluid is not different between the systems.  

My guess, and it’s just that, a guess, is that the “new panels” were made to increase the company’s efficiency in some way or another (install, standardization, etc)... and it happened to coincide with the faa certification.  Since they only installed the newer panels (fewer panels overall required, but same coverage) on their fiki demo rig, it would go to reason that they couldn’t use the older panels on a fiki install, despite the same performance (which the company states is true- same performance between the two).

its also worth noting that CAV no longer makes the “non-fiki” install... so I’m guessing the older style panels became obsolescent/orphaned for whatever reason, hence no more non-fiki installs (or could just be due to lack of demand).

Edited March 9, 2019 by M016576

[larryb]

The used aircraft market does not value the TKS system. It is basically free. When I bought my Encore FIKI was a requirement. I was looking at Bravos and Ovations but found the Encore. There were 3 Encores in the market that month. All the same basic price but only 1 FIKI. I got the FIKI one.

[Rick Junkin]

1 hour ago, kortopates said:

I understand, but I am wondering if flow rates and wing coverage wasn't enough to meet certification requirements with the original panels. Why else would they re-design them. Reducing install time couldn't have been a requirement but a side benefit. My guess is the new design improved the effectiveness of the weeping fluid in some way that improved the icing protection - why else would they spent all that money and time if the initial panels did the job just as well?

Here's another perspective Paul - fewer panels and reduced install time produces more profit, because the price certainly won't be reduced. I'm inclined to believe it was a business decision before they went for certification. My non-FIKI system does an awesome job of spreading TKS fluid everywhere I want it on my TLS. 

Anyone care to follow me out of the box on this topic? Acknowledging the legalities involved, what if we looked at this purely from a technical/practical perspective and determined what is required to make the non-FIKI equivalent to the the FIKI? CAV won't do it, it isn't in their best interest. But I myself might, given the new climate in the FAA certification environment. Just a thought. Probably can't be done without great expense. Legally.

I'll probably get a spanking for even suggesting this...

Cheers,
Rick

[M016576]

1 hour ago, larryb said:

The used aircraft market does not value the TKS system. It is basically free. When I bought my Encore FIKI was a requirement. I was looking at Bravos and Ovations but found the Encore. There were 3 Encores in the market that month. All the same basic price but only 1 FIKI. I got the FIKI one.

I’m not sure that’s the case any longer- it looks like Bravos w/ TKS sell for about 30K more than a similarly equipped non-TKS  version.  And I got an email from Jimmy about a sweet 252 coming available with TKS that’s about 30K above a non-tks like type airplane.  I think de-icing  equipment is making a resurgence.... or maybe I’m just paying more attention to it now.

but the market for these aircraft are VERY thin... and “feast or famine”...

Edited March 9, 2019 by M016576

[M016576]

2 minutes ago, Junkman said:

Here's another perspective Paul - fewer panels and reduced install time produces more profit, because the price certainly won't be reduced. I'm inclined to believe it was a business decision before they went for certification. My non-FIKI system does an awesome job of spreading TKS fluid everywhere I want it on my TLS. 

Anyone care to follow me out of the box on this topic? Acknowledging the legalities involved, what if we looked at this purely from a technical/practical perspective and determined what is required to make the non-FIKI equivalent to the the FIKI? CAV won't do it, it isn't in their best interest. But I myself might, given the new climate in the FAA certification environment. Just a thought. Probably can't be done without great expense. Legally.

I'll probably get a spanking for even suggesting this...

Cheers,
Rick

Yes- this exactly was what I was dancing around, I believe.

[Yooper Rocketman]

36 minutes ago, larryb said:

The used aircraft market does not value the TKS system. It is basically free. When I bought my Encore FIKI was a requirement. I was looking at Bravos and Ovations but found the Encore. There were 3 Encores in the market that month. All the same basic price but only 1 FIKI. I got the FIKI one.

I respectfully disagree.  Although SOME models may NOT reflect value, I closed on a sale if my Rocket at the very end of 2018 and clearly got $10k to $15k more for my TKS equipped Mooney.  I think it has more to do with specific models on the market rather than “no value” for TKS Mooney’s.  

On another perspective, I’ve bought and had 4 TKS Systems installed on Mooney’s,  Bonanzas and my Lancair turbo-prop.    Three inadvertent systems and one certified “known icing”.  Of the four, only ONE left me stranded with a failed system in icing.......two times.  Not what you are likely wanting to hear...... but both failures were on the FIKI Bonanza plane!   Not anything to do with FIKI, but it proves there’s little advantage, other than “legal”, to FIKI over “inadvertent”.   If “FIKI” is important to you, go for it.   If a safe outcome to your flight is the “real goal”, apply some common sense to your flight planning rather than relying on “being legal”.

And a last note, my Lancair “non-certified” TKS will out perform the “FIKI” Bonanza by 200%,.  And I have 2.5 thousand hours flying in icing conditions in the Great Lakes region over the last 18 years with 4 different airplanes equipped with TKS.  

Tom

[exM20K]

59 minutes ago, larryb said:

The used aircraft market does not value the TKS system. It is basically free. When I bought my Encore FIKI was a requirement. I was looking at Bravos and Ovations but found the Encore. There were 3 Encores in the market that month. All the same basic price but only 1 FIKI. I got the FIKI one.

congratulations. that is IMHO the best plane Mooney produced. ever.

-de

[M016576]

23 minutes ago, Yooper Rocketman said:

I respectfully disagree.  Although SOME models may NOT reflect value, I closed on a sale if my Rocket at the very end of 2018 and clearly got $10k to $15k more for my TKS equipped Mooney.  I think it has more to do with specific models on the market rather than “no value” for TKS Mooney’s.  

On another perspective, I’ve bought and had 4 TKS Systems installed on Mooney’s,  Bonanzas and my Lancair turbo-prop.    Three inadvertent systems and one certified “known icing”.  Of the four, only ONE left me stranded with a failed system in icing.......two times.  Not what you are likely wanting to hear...... but both failures were on the FIKI Bonanza plane!   Not anything to do with FIKI, but it proves there’s little advantage, other than “legal”, to FIKI over “inadvertent”.   If “FIKI” is important to you, go for it.   If a safe outcome to your flight is the “real goal”, apply some common sense to your flight planning rather than relying on “being legal”.

And a last note, my Lancair “non-certified” TKS will out perform the “FIKI” Bonanza by 200%,.  And I have 2.5 thousand hours flying in icing conditions in the Great Lakes region over the last 18 years with 4 different airplanes equipped with TKS.  

Tom

This is some of the best advice I’ve heard on this board.....heck... some of the best advice I’ve heard in my 20+ year career as a professional pilot.

>>>>> If a safe outcome to your flight is the “real goal”, apply some common sense to your flight planning rather than relying on “being legal”.<<<<

Edited March 9, 2019 by M016576

[Ragsf15e]

13 hours ago, Junkman said:

Here's another perspective Paul - fewer panels and reduced install time produces more profit, because the price certainly won't be reduced. I'm inclined to believe it was a business decision before they went for certification. My non-FIKI system does an awesome job of spreading TKS fluid everywhere I want it on my TLS. 

Anyone care to follow me out of the box on this topic? Acknowledging the legalities involved, what if we looked at this purely from a technical/practical perspective and determined what is required to make the non-FIKI equivalent to the the FIKI? CAV won't do it, it isn't in their best interest. But I myself might, given the new climate in the FAA certification environment. Just a thought. Probably can't be done without great expense. Legally.

I'll probably get a spanking for even suggesting this...

Cheers,
Rick

Does the vertical stab have tks panels on both the fiki and non fiki version?  Some of the older Cirrus inadvertent systems didn’t have panels on the vert stab, but fiki version does.

[M016576]

41 minutes ago, Ragsf15e said:

Does the vertical stab have tks panels on both the fiki and non fiki version?  Some of the older Cirrus inadvertent systems didn’t have panels on the vert stab, but fiki version does.

Yes. The entire tail is covered in both versions.  Both fiki and non-fiki have identical coverage.

[peevee]

I can't speak to other airframes but the Cirrus basic and fiki are completely different systems, different panels, coverage, just totally different.

The fiki is great, the basic sucks. The fiki if you need fluid right now will run both pumps and flood the airframe, the basic might wet out if you're lucky.

[M016576]

6 hours ago, peevee said:

I can't speak to other airframes but the Cirrus basic and fiki are completely different systems, different panels, coverage, just totally different.

The fiki is great, the basic sucks. The fiki if you need fluid right now will run both pumps and flood the airframe, the basic might wet out if you're lucky.

The mooney fiki system does not run both pumps simultaneously- just one at a time.

the mooney non-fiki and Fiki system are different in a few ways-

1) the fiki system has heated stall warning, and fuel vents

2) the fiki system has a second main pump (backup pump).

3) the fiki systems uses fewer panels to cover the same area as the non-fiki.  The panels also use a thicker grade of titanium.

things that are the same between the fiki and non-fiki mooney installs, according to CAV (the factory):  

-the fluid reservoir (6.6 gallons)

-the pumps themselves (although the fiki has 2)

-the flow rate in both de-ice (high) and anti-ice (low) (both have the same “endurance” as well).

-the coverage.  Both systems cover the entire airplane, as well as a spray bar and a prop slinger.

From an engineering perspective- the two systems are nearly identical, with the exception of redundancy in the fiki system (2 main pumps instead of one).

[exM20K]

Pedantic comment...sorry.  The fuel vents are not heated on FIKI installations.  The NACA ducts in which they sit is, itself, anti icing.  

 

Also... the 14V system in 201 and 231 aircraft is, itself, a disqualifier. They couldn’t get enough pressure in the system on the lower voltage systems.  My 231 was kind of marginal WRT pushing electrons around.  Pitot heat, prop Heat, some lights, and the gear would about max it out.

i would imagine that modern LED lights and modern radios would help

Edited March 10, 2019 by exM20K

[peevee]

1 hour ago, M016576 said:

The mooney fiki system does not run both pumps simultaneously- just one at a time.

the mooney non-fiki and Fiki system are different in a few ways-

1) the fiki system has heated stall warning, and fuel vents

2) the fiki system has a second main pump (backup pump).

3) the fiki systems uses fewer panels to cover the same area as the non-fiki.  The panels also use a thicker grade of titanium.

things that are the same between the fiki and non-fiki mooney installs, according to CAV (the factory):  

-the fluid reservoir (6.6 gallons)

-the pumps themselves (although the fiki has 2)

-the flow rate in both de-ice (high) and anti-ice (low) (both have the same “endurance” as well).

-the coverage.  Both systems cover the entire airplane, as well as a spray bar and a prop slinger.

From an engineering perspective- the two systems are nearly identical, with the exception of redundancy in the fiki system (2 main pumps instead of one).

Again of no use here but the fiki Cirrus has a different pitot mast and provides angle of attack info to the g1000

 

The basic has one tank, the fiki has two with automatic switching for 3.5 vs 7 gallons.

 

The fiki has an automatic prime function iirc. And windshield spray bars. The basic relies on the prop slingers to cover the windscreen. I'm guessing hot props don't work well on composite blades.

Edited March 10, 2019 by peevee

[M016576]

14 hours ago, exM20K said:

Pedantic comment...sorry.  The fuel vents are not heated on FIKI installations.  The NACA ducts in which they sit is, itself, anti icing.  

 

Also... the 14V system in 201 and 231 aircraft is, itself, a disqualifier. They couldn’t get enough pressure in the system on the lower voltage systems.  My 231 was kind of marginal WRT pushing electrons around.  Pitot heat, prop Heat, some lights, and the gear would about max it out.

i would imagine that modern LED lights and modern radios would help

They have the non-fiki system on the 14V mooney’s.  The pump is rated for operation on both.. not sure what the actual voltage operating range is though

Edited March 10, 2019 by M016576

[Austintatious]

interesting thread.... I have a couple pennies to toss in. 

If I were in OP's position I would likely be OK with having the inadvertent Icing TKS.  For starters and most importantly, going into known icing in a SE aircraft  is not something I would want to do, TKS or No.

  Secondly, known icing is not (to my understanding), possible icing conditions.  In other words, nothing says you cant go into freezing temps with visible moisture.  These conditions do not always produce ice and actually frequently do not.  according to the aim, known icing is "atmospheric conditions which the formation of ice is observed or detected in flight".... SO if you start getting ice, turn on your TKS and then get out of it!   Also, if you know there are possible icing conditions ahead, ask the controller if there are any PIREPS for icing on your route.  If there is, avoid it.

So to me anyhow, the difference in how I would operate 2 aircraft, 1 with FIKI and one without is zero.

Edited March 11, 2019 by Austintatious

[LANCECASPER]

28 minutes ago, Austintatious said:

interesting thread.... I have a couple pennies to toss in. 

If I were in OP's position I would likely be OK with having the inadvertent Icing TKS.  For starters and most importantly, going into known icing in a SE aircraft with no protection on the tail is not something I would want to do, TKS or No on the wing.

  Secondly, known icing is not (to my understanding), possible icing conditions.  In other words, nothing says you cant go into freezing temps with visible moisture.  These conditions do not always produce ice and actually frequently do not.  according to the aim, known icing is "atmospheric conditions which the formation of ice is observed or detected in flight".... SO if you start getting ice, turn on your TKS and then get out of it!   Also, if you know there are possible icing conditions ahead, ask the controller if there are any PIREPS for icing on your route.  If there is, avoid it.

So to me anyhow, the difference in how I would operate 2 aircraft, 1 with FIKI and one without is zero.

No protection on the tail? Any TKS installation on a Mooney, FIKI or non-FIKI has protection on the tail.

[Austintatious]

55 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

No protection on the tail? Any TKS installation on a Mooney, FIKI or non-FIKI has protection on the tail.

ohh, my apologies, I didn't realize that.  I will remove it from the post.

This however doesn't change my .02 on the matter.  If I am in ice in anything that doesn't have heated edges, I am not happy.  I have experienced icing that has completely overwhelmed anti icing and deicing equipment and in a fraction of a second put 1-2 inches of ice on the aircraft and got multiple hits.    One of the few times I have been truly scared in an aircraft.

 

That is just my opinion, nothing more.

[Yooper Rocketman]

4 hours ago, Austintatious said:

  SO if you start getting ice, turn on your TKS and then get out of it!  

Just a humble observation.  Your opinions REALLY have more to do with “icing” than the TKS System, maybe even “icing in a GA plane”.   I respect that, but probably a discussion under a different topic.   It’s pretty clear you have no experience with TKS on a Mooney.  ALL TKS systems have tail deice.  Knowledge of the system would be nice when commenting.

Secondly, you’re 10 minutes late if you’re turning on a TKS system AFTER encountering icing conditions.   The system works 10 times better wetted out BEFORE icing conditions are encountered than trying to deice after building ice.  

As far as effectiveness, our Mercy Flight organization has numerous active AND retired airline pilots.  Without exception, every one of them feels our SE Bonanza is SAFER in icing than our “boots equipped” twin.  Absence “real world” experience with TKS, maybe a little more discretion and system knowledge  would be appropriate before knocking it’s capabilities.  

And lastly, if you’ve built 1” to 2” of ice on an airplane, seems you pushed your equipment well beyond its abilities, which falls back to my earlier post: maybe a little better flight planning or decision making would have avoided that situation.  In 2.5k hours flying with TKS protection, I’ve never built ANY ice on protected surfaces unless “I screwed up” and, even then, never seen ice at anywhere near that level (probably because of my flight planning).  Affording a “heated deice system” is not an option for Mooney pilots or we would be flying in those planes. 

Tom

[Rick Junkin]

4 hours ago, Austintatious said:

if you start getting ice, turn on your TKS and then get out of it!

Thanks for sharing your experiences.

I turn on my non-FIKI TKS almost every time I turn on my pitot heat. And I lead that an estimated 5-10 minutes prior to entering an area of concern (almost always occurs on descent with worse than forecast weather/cloud deck). While there is a "de-ice" switch position, I find it most useful for wetting out the panels more quickly during preflight. I don't count on it being able to overcome accumulated ice.

Cheers,
Rick

 

[ilovecornfields]

Agree with @Yooper Rocketman about being “10 minutes late.” TKS is pretty effective, but it does take time to get the wings and tail wet.

[peevee]

11 minutes ago, ilovecornfields said:

Agree with @Yooper Rocketman about being “10 minutes late.” TKS is pretty effective, but it does take time to get the wings and tail wet.

X2

It is vital to wet the wings before ice has accumulated. If I think I need it I prime it on the taxi out

[Austintatious]

That is of course smart.  To be ahead of the situation!

as to what I said..I am not certain about moonies specifically.  TKS is considered anti ice AND de-ice... which is pretty cool.  what does the mooney manual say about when to activate the system??

Here is some general info on tks

https://www.caviceprotection.com/content/about-tks-ice-protection-systems

Edited March 12, 2019 by Austintatious