I'm late to the party....TKS?

[rturbett]

How does TKS really work in flight planning?

I see it as a great safety factor. Does it really help you when it comes to flight planning? Its placarded that flying into known icing conditions is prohibited. So if icing is reported, your still grounded, correct?

One of the planes I'm looking at has it installed, trying to weigh it in on my decision making process.

Thanks,

Rob

[Hank]

Be aware that there are two TKS installation types:  FIKI (Flight In Known Icing) and non-FIKI. I have neither, but the difference seems more related to the aircraft systems than to installation differences (two alternators, two pumps, etc.)

Best find out which one you are looking at.

[Fly Boomer]

41 minutes ago, rturbett said:

How does TKS really work in flight planning?

I see it as a great safety factor. Does it really help you when it comes to flight planning? Its placarded that flying into known icing conditions is prohibited. So if icing is reported, your still grounded, correct?

One of the planes I'm looking at has it installed, trying to weigh it in on my decision making process.

Thanks,

Rob

I have inadvertent (so-called no hazard) TKS, but even if I had FIKI TKS, I wouldn't plan to fly into icing conditions.  I see it as a tool to buy me some time to go up, go down, or turn around.  Mostly ice doesn't accumulate super fast, but if you encounter SLD ice, you will be happy for any protection you have.  If you never fly in air where the dewpoint is close to the OAT, no worries.  Also, because the titanium leading edges disrupt the airflow somewhat, TKS reduces your speed a few knots.  Finally, if you need to eke out every last ounce of useful load and fly right on the edge of the W&B envelope, know that the TKS system weighs a few pounds, and the fluid (6 gallons in mine) is pretty heavy.

[larryb]

6 years ago I traded a non-TKS J model for an Encore with FIKI. With the J I was tired of cancelling flights if I could not guarantee that I would not touch a cloud in below-freezing conditions. I don't use it much but it absolutely allows me to consider flights that I would not have without. 

A few weeks ago, yes, in the summer time, I was flying from Medford Oregon to San Jose, CA. I was in clear air above an overcast at 15K. I could hear another Mooney, an Ovation, picking up ice below me. He was constantly asking for lower but ATC could not give it to him as he was over the mountains. I could hear the stress in his voice. I tried to help over the radio, but just could not seem to get my message through to the controller or the Ovation that conditions were much better a bit West of their position, where he could descend lower over the central valley. I was comfortable knowing that I had TKS for when it was my turn to descend through the layer. 

[Fritz1]

I have owned a FIKI Bravo for 6 years and like the added safety, the system is very reliable and allows climbs and descents through icing layers, the system is heavy, 110lbs full, scrubbs off 3-5 KT, planning flights and using the system is a learning process, to me the system only makes sense in combination with a turbocharger and vice versa, like many other good things, once you are used to them you feel naked without them

[GeeBee]

To answer your question directly, yes unless your airplane is FIKI you cannot fly into known icing conditions. It is kind of a strange rule because you won't get charged with a violation, unless you stub your toe, i.e. declare an emergency or crash due to icing and not have a FIKI airplane. However you can get into equal trouble (if you survive) if you take a FIKI airplane into forecast SLD icing as it would be "careless and reckless" to take the airplane into conditions beyond which it is certified and a FIKI Mooney (and most airplanes) are not certified for SLD icing. 

That said, I have dispatched into known icing with my FIKI Mooney. The most important thing is to have an "out" if the system fails, or is more severe than forecast. An example of my last dispatch was forecast icing at my preferred altitude. It worked good for a while as I was on top with no visible moisture. As I entered precipitation, I was still good but after crossing the front, I began picking up ice. I had plenty of time to coordinate lower altitudes, which initially was not available due to conflicting traffic. It was reassuring that I had time and means. Eventually I got down to 7000 and all was good. TKS is not "live forever in icing" as like fuel you have a limited time. Your icing range planning is important.  

[wombat]

Known Icing Conditions are very very poorly defined. 

Known Ice is well defined but it's defined in such a way that you can't possibly fly into it, it's something that you can only know as you experience it.  The definition is: "Known ice" involves the situation where ice formation is actually detected or observed.

It is clear that visible moisture below freezing is not enough to be considered 'known ice'.   Nor is an airmet or sigmet.  Similarly, neither is a pilot report from an aircraft that flew through that position previously.

The reason the definition is important is because 14 CFR § 91.9(a) states that "no person may operate a civil aircraft without complying with the operating limitations specified in the approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual .... '' These manuals may state that a particular aircraft type is not approved for flight in known icing conditions.

While "known icing conditions" are not defined by regulation, the term has been used in legal proceedings involving violations of FAA safety regulations that relate to inflight icing. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has held on a number of occasions that known icing conditions exist when a pilot knows or reasonably should know about weather reports in which icing conditions are repo"rted or forecast. In those cases the pilots chose to continue their flights without implementing an icing exit strategy or an alternative course of action and the aircraft experienced heavy ice formation that validated the forecasted danger to the aircraft.

Read more about it here: https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/practice_areas/regulations/interpretations/Data/interps/2009/Bell-AOPA_2009_Legal_Interpretation.pdf

 

[GeeBee]

If you are in an airliner and you have a bad anti-ice valve the MEL requires a "no-ice" dispatch. Guess how the dispatcher routes you?

 

[wombat]

5 minutes ago, GeeBee said:

If you are in an airliner and you have a bad anti-ice valve the MEL requires a "no-ice" dispatch. Guess how the dispatcher routes you?

 

 "just like normal"?

[M20F]

Where you live and where you fly has a high impact on your dispatch rate due to icing.  I have a very short window in the South East where icing might be a problem.  I had a slightly longer window when I lived in the Midwest. 
 
I will say over the years very few days when I couldn’t make it work. 

[GeeBee]

2 hours ago, wombat said:

 "just like normal"?

Afraid not. 

[rturbett]

This is great information, and helps with my decision process.

Thank you to all

Rob

[wombat]

1 hour ago, GeeBee said:

Afraid not. 

Well, don't keep us in the dark here... What do they do?

 

[wombat]

Many people have strong opinions on what is too dangerous to do regarding possible ice formation.

 

Some will say that without FIKI they will never enter visible moisture below 0C.    It's not my personal minimum and it's not what the FAA requires either.   But if you want to do that, go right ahead.   I will always support pilots' personal minimums as long as they don't violate regulations or try to force me to use their personal minimums.

I know multiple people that have flown over the North Cascades regularly all winter (and summer) for decades with no anti-ice at all.    Through a combination of altitude selection, route selection, and a willingness to shift the flight in time by a day or so, they've stayed safe.  I'm not quite that brave at this point in my life but it does show that it's not an immediate killer.

[GeeBee]

Operation into "known" " or...."forecast" icing is prohibited.  So your route may be changed, or flight cancelled.

From the MMEL preamble set for all aircraft.

Definition: Icing Conditions 

An atmospheric environment that may cause ice to form on the aircraft (structural) or in the engine(s) (induction). Icing conditions may be known or forecast, and may be defined in the AFM, RFM, or POH.

[Mufflerbearing]

@wombat is correct on his pointing out the definition of "known icing conditions".  Having FIKI on my plane, I use it quite often.  I also fly over the Cascades year around multiple times a month and when there is forecast possible icing on Fore Flight, more times than not, I find no icing conditions at all.  Known is when you personally see icing.  The system works well and has helped me in situations.  For my wife, she felt having FIKI on the plane was way more important than a parachute.

[dzeleski]

A TKS Mooney will be the only reason I end up selling my J one day. Probably a K of some kind is the sweet spot. The issue that a few have mentioned though is weight. I pretty regularly use nearly all my UL. I didnt have my IR when I bought my J so I didnt really know any better. If I did I think I probably would've gotten into a TKS plane from day one but canceling a flight due to IMC in the winter isnt the end of the world for me right now.

I've been in trace ice with my J and my instructor, its not a comforting situation in the NE. Thankfully in that case we just dropped a few thousand feet and it started to fall off. The NE is largely nice that way with lower MEAs but in peak winter you wont be able to get low enough either.

[wombat]

I don't know what the actual dispatch rate difference would be between FIKI and non-FIKI TKS.....   There is never a 'known-ice' forecast where it's legal for one but not the other.

 

When would I go fly if I had FIKI but not non-FIKI TKS?    Hmm....  I don't know.

[Ibra]

In practice,

Flying into “actual icing” is prohibited without FIKI (TKS is not enough unless you are going left/right or up/down) 

Flying into “forecasted icing” is prohibited without an exit strategy

Flying into “reported icing” is prohibited without re-planing or cancelling 

Edited October 3, 2023 by Ibra

[GeeBee]

If the composite information indicates to a reasonable and prudent pilot that he or she will be operating the aircraft under conditions that will cause ice to adhere to the aircraft along the proposed route and altitude of flight, then known icing conditions likely exist. If the pilot operates the aircraft in known icing conditions contrary to the requirements of 91.9(a), the FAA may take enforcement action.

Translation,,,,,, if nothing happens, you're golden, if something happens you are golden toast. Choose wisely.

(Note, it is not enough to have an exit strategy. It says, "proposed route and altitude" so what you file, locks you in legally to FIKI) Your exit strategy only keeps you from getting noticed, not immune.
 

1

 

[Ibra]

10 hours ago, GeeBee said:

Your exit strategy only keeps you from getting noticed, not immune.

Indeed, on the legalities you need FIKI to file your level on some forecast, however, if you have TKS and solid exit no one will enforce it, one can deals with it: like they deal with icing like they deal with convective weather, crosswinds… 

In practice, the exit strategy depends on terrain and airspace, for departure in low frozen weather in busy terminal airspace with hardcore terrain, one can easily see the difference in legalities between FIKI vs TKS and why such distinction exist (*), however, in empty airspace over flat lands, there is likely no practical difference: no one bothers, notices or even care (you can file 14kft and ask 4kft)

(*) They both fly in same airspace and ATC/FAA want to have that FIKI vs non-FIKI distinction as it prevents those not equipped getting in way of those who are not in busy environments, just like: IFR, LVO, PBN, WX radar, RVSM, Approche Ban…either you have the label or you don’t? 

Edited October 4, 2023 by Ibra

[GeeBee]

5 minutes ago, Ibra said:

Indeed, on the legalities you need FIKI to file your level on some forecast, however, if you have TKS and solid exit no one will enforce it, one can deals with it: like they deal with icing like they deal with convective weather, crosswinds… 

In practice, the exit strategy depends on terrain and airspace, for departure in low frozen weather in busy terminal airspace with hardcore terrain, one can easily see the difference in legalities between FIKI vs TKS and why such distinction exist (*), however, in empty airspace over flat lands, there is likely no practical difference: no one bothers, notices or even care (you can file 14kft and ask 4kft)

(*) They both fly in same airspace and ATC/FAA want to have that FIKI vs non-FIKI distinction as it prevents those not equipped getting in way of those who are not in busy environments, just like: IFR, LVO, PBN, WX radar, RVSM, Approche Ban…either you have the label or you don’t? 

I agree. If you foul the airspace in busy terminal area, for icing which was forecast and you're not FIKI, trouble brewing. Less likely but not moot in lesser areas. However, if you suddenly declare an emergency because of icing which a "reasonable pilot" could foresee and claim it was not forecast you may have a 91.183(b) problem unless you immediately report icing. IOW you can't have it both ways.

[wombat]

13 hours ago, GeeBee said:

If the composite information indicates to a reasonable and prudent pilot that he or she will be operating the aircraft under conditions that will cause ice to adhere to the aircraft along the proposed route and altitude of flight, then known icing conditions likely exist. If the pilot operates the aircraft in known icing conditions contrary to the requirements of 91.9(a), the FAA may take enforcement action.

Translation,,,,,, if nothing happens, you're golden, if something happens you are golden toast. Choose wisely.

(Note, it is not enough to have an exit strategy. It says, "proposed route and altitude" so what you file, locks you in legally to FIKI) Your exit strategy only keeps you from getting noticed, not immune.
 

1

 

This gives the wrong impression for most of it, and is purely wrong for part of it.

No part of a forecast or set of pireps "locks you in legally to FIKI".     

 

If anything, I'd say that a decision to remain in known icing conditions (which can only be known if you are in them) without FIKI is potentially a violation, but you can't know that until you are already in it.

 

There is no performance difference between the FIKI and non-FIKI systems. There are only redundancy differences. The only time a FIKI system would be more effective is if there was a hardware failure.

Edited October 4, 2023 by wombat

[Ibra]

4 hours ago, wombat said:

There is no performance difference between the FIKI and non-FIKI systems

On most TKS retrofit, no practical difference while flying, the differences are legal ones during dispatch…in Mooneys, at best it’s 14V vs 28V 

I don’t think there is any point comparing performance, I have flown turbo C182 (clean wing) and DA42 (FIKI) in similar winter forecasts, I was surprised that I had to turn and land back on FIKI wing while the other time a naked wing made it (maybe by luck)

Just to put the lid on practical performance, in FAR25 (FAA) or CS25 (EASA), “maximum continuous icing for FIKI certification purposes is 17.4nm in a stratus cloud and maximum intermittent ice corresponds to a 2.6nm in a cumulus cloud”. In other words, flying FIKI in ice more than 5min-10min in stratus or 2min in convective icing is not necessarily tested and it would not be legal according to certification limits, yet anyone flying FIKI has probably spent more than that (even before noticing or warming up their system), the heavy part of FIKI certification cost is not about flying performance, it’s rather about system redundancy, detection, annunciations…the main benefit is legalities of dispatch and planning !

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2014/11/04/2014-25789/airplane-and-engine-certification-requirements-in-supercooled-large-drop-mixed-phase-and-ice-crystal

https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/document-library/easy-access-rules/online-publications/easy-access-rules-large-aeroplanes-cs-25?page=5

 

Edited October 4, 2023 by Ibra

[wombat]

By performance I meant the ability of the system to remove or reject ice based on the TKS panel locations/sizes, hole patterns, flow rates, and so on.

For the CAV Ice systems from what I understand those factors are all the same between the FIKI and non-FIKI versions.

Unless there is an equipment malfunction, the way I understand it, two Mooneys that are in identical situations but one is FIKI and one non-FIKI TKS would have exactly the same outcomes.