KSCessnaDriver
Well-Known Member
TKS is useless on a Cirrus, or useless on anything? If I recall, there is an STC out for known ice protection on Commander 690's, that uses nothing but TKS fluid.
Buying an older Cirrus
- Thread starter meritflyer
- Start date
TKS is useless on a Cirrus, or useless on anything? If I recall, there is an STC out for known ice protection on Commander 690's, that uses nothing but TKS fluid.
I think it's usless on anything, because it's a temporary solution. Put boots, or heated leading edges on it. I think about it like this. Drive through thick mud for 30 mins, and tell me if you can still see out of your windshield after you run out of washer fluid. Only problem is, last time I checked, Ice cubes don't fly to well. To prove my point, go to your fridge, grab an ice cube, walk outside and throw it to see how far it will fly. Don't get me wrong, it'll work in a pinch, but what happens if you forgot to fill it, or the rate at which it's building the system can't keep up, or it can, but only for a few minutes, because you run out of fluid.
I guess the point I am trying to make, is you can run out of fluid. I want it to always bee there when I need it (like bleed air, or boots, or heated L/E's). Sure that stuff can break, but it'll never run out of fluid.
ackeight
Well-Known Member
hmmm, you went and took the measuring stick out huh?....and pay more for insurance on the GD parachute, with less payload, less space, and ADs that have yet to be worked out.......
Let me know when you are in the area, I will be passing you off your right side
trafficinsight
Well-Known Member
I too think that you have no business in ice in the first place... but I don't understand the mentality that no protection is better than some protection?
jrh
Well-Known Member
That makes about as much sense as demanding nuclear powered aircraft, because conventional fuels run out, and you don't want to have to worry about fuel management.
Understand the limitations of whatever you're flying, stay within those limitations, and you'll be fine.
Also, for what it's worth, the FIKI certified Cirrus can run the TKS system on "normal" for 150 minutes, "high" for 75 minutes, and "max" for 37.5 minutes.
bdhill1979
Gone West
It was like converting the kings feet to metric
I too think that you have no business in ice in the first place... but I don't understand the mentality that no protection is better than some protection?
I completely understand the limitations of the system, and thats why I disagree with it, because it is so limited. Yes, some protection is better than none. But all I see is some rich Cirri driver, who has a newly minted inst. rating either pulling the chute, or wadding up his plane because he didn't understand the limitations of his airplane and turned it into a popsicle. Lets face it (not to sound self-righteous) but the majority of us here on these forums are what I'd call professional pilots, who have a very healthy respect for what an airplane is capable of. You average Joe-pilot (evidenced by the many flight reviews I have done) is horrible, with little to no respect of aviation. They get the flight review done, and go right back to their old habits. Being reckless, and skimming by with no one noticing their horrible careless nature.
FWIW, you can completely understand the limitations of this system, and still run out of fluid. Like I said, it's a band-aid, not a solution.
"Just stay out of ice" is a good plan and I endorse it 100%.
Reality is that sometimes things don't go according to plan and TKS may buy you enough time to get out of a bad situation you ideally shouldn't have gotten into in the first place.
Some pilots (myself included) recognize that stuff happens and given a choice prefer to have more options than fewer and would see lack of TKS a deal-breaker, which is why it's on my original list.
Some don't see the value and I'm cool with that. Still others use the TKS system inappropriately and I choose not to fly with them.
trafficinsight
Well-Known Member
But you can't blame all that on the airplane Joe Pilot flies. And if you understand the limitations of the system then you should be able to use it as it was intended, a tool to help you get out of icing conditions... not shoot multiple approaches in ice, right? It is, as you say, a band-aid.
KSCessnaDriver
Well-Known Member
I think that the FIKI Cirrus is a great idea. Would I cruise in ice, absolutely not. But would I pop through a layer of ice, to get up to cruise, absolutely. Would I use a non-FIKI TKS to get through ice, absolutely not. So, I agree that the TKS equipped, non-FIKI SR-22's are dumb. Just cuts down on your useful load.
ackeight
Well-Known Member
Here is something to think about guys. Why did cessna take the Van and change it from boots to TKS?????? Because slow(I emphasize slow!) flying aircraft with the properly equipped with FIKI TKS systems do better in icing. Unfortunatly not everyone has good sense/skills in icing, but if you do then you could get away with flying either equipped airplane in 99% of the icing out there. However, that's just my 2 cents:insane:
Because slow(I emphasize slow!) flying aircraft with the properly equipped with FIKI TKS systems do better in icing. Unfortunatly not everyone has good sense/skills in icing, but if you do then you could get away with flying either equipped airplane in 99% of the icing out there. However, that's just my 2 cents:insane:
TFaudree_ERAU
Mashin' dem buttons
Hawker-Siddeley put it on the HS125 in 1962. It hasn't changed since.
The system provides 85 minutes of protection, which is MORE than enough time for any competent airman to get out of icing conditions.
Matter of fact, I feel that having a limited capacity system has a positive impact on safety of flight. Anti/de-icing systems aren't meant to allow you to continue to fly in icing conditions. It is designed to get you OUT of icing conditions. You'll be more proactive in doing so when you know you have a limited amount of fluid. If you've got bleed air or boots, I guarantee you'll find crew members that would make no effort to get out of icing conditions when encountered.
TFaudree_ERAU
Mashin' dem buttons
So, most professional pilots flying FIKI aircraft with TKS systems are not competent?
Of course. If they were, they'd have boots (and have to let ice accumulate on the aircraft before activating the boots...bad) or heated surfaces (which suck the climb performance right out of me and limit my ability to climb and get above the ice).
Personally, I'd rather have TKS than boots.
-mini
Are we gonna play this circle dance again? Go back re-read ALL of my posts, then come and have an informed discussion on what I am getting at.
Specificly post #27. Do you condiser yourself the average Joe-pilot? I would hope not.
TFaudree_ERAU
Mashin' dem buttons
Enough to know it's good if you know how to use it, horrible if you get complacent. For a quick climb through the ICE, it's great, and a quick descent through it, it's great. But if you do a quick climb through it, and forget to turn it off (like the typical week-end warior Cirri owner), it's not a good system. Thats all I am saying. The few Cirri owners I have done FR's for don't understand the limitations of the system (none are the FIKI), and one of them even admitted to me that he has left it on inadvertantly. This is why I am leary of seeing it used by the average Joe-pilot.
BTW, this isn't a contest of who's pencil is bigger, or who's log book is thicker.:whatever: Park the lynching wagon dude.
TFaudree_ERAU
Mashin' dem buttons
No lynching wagon in my driveway.
You keep discussing Cirrus drivers, but I took some of your comments as broad generalizations that TKS is not suited for ANY airplane. Like you said, its the pilot, not the airplane.
Even Hawker pilots get caught with their pants down if they don't prime the system and get a good coat on the wings before entering icing conditions. A lot of people ignore the airspeed envelope also.