Fedex Caravan Fleet Upgrades

There are still unprotected surfaces.

I guess that true on most planes,

The FIKI Cirrus's I fly, I dont think there is anything that is unprotected that can be viewed from the cockpit. If so I havnt found it yet. Today there was different PIREPS from different aircraft at JAC with ice, but I couldnt even find an unprotected spot to tell them what kind of ice it was when the tower asked.... Unless I turn the anti ice off for a few mins.
 
I guess that true on most planes,

The FIKI Cirrus's I fly, I dont think there is anything that is unprotected that can be viewed from the cockpit. If so I havnt found it yet. Today there was different PIREPS from different aircraft at JAC with ice, but I couldnt even find an unprotected spot to tell them what kind of ice it was when the tower asked.... Unless I turn the anti ice off for a few mins.

*shrug*. It's been a while, but IMS, there was a door-jamb on the 210 that would pick up ice nicely. Can't remember what it was on the Baron, but if nothing else, it seems to me that the last few inches of wing-root weren't protected...
 
*shrug*. It's been a while, but IMS, there was a door-jamb on the 210 that would pick up ice nicely. Can't remember what it was on the Baron, but if nothing else, it seems to me that the last few inches of wing-root weren't protected...

The Commander had the OAT probe that was a nice indicator of if you were building ice. You could also look out and see the front of the cowl and the spinner. :) If it was getting bad enough, you could hear the ice hitting the airplane as it was shed off the props...
 
The Commander had the OAT probe that was a nice indicator of if you were building ice. You could also look out and see the front of the cowl and the spinner. :) If it was getting bad enough, you could hear the ice hitting the airplane as it was shed off the props...

Yeah, wow, good one. I'd forgotten but the 210 had the old Cessna "cut a hole in the windshield and stick an oven thermometer in it" OAT probe, too. Don't think the Baron did, though. Any FLX alums want to speak up on this one? Where's braunpilot...think he's still flying one of the last FLX twin bonanzas.
 
Yeah, wow, good one. I'd forgotten but the 210 had the old Cessna "cut a hole in the windshield and stick an oven thermometer in it" OAT probe, too. Don't think the Baron did, though. Any FLX alums want to speak up on this one? Where's braunpilot...think he's still flying one of the last FLX twin bonanzas.

A good indicator on the baron is the nav light fence out by the wing tip. It's about the thinnest surface on the baron, so when I see the glow from my nav lights around the edges of that fence, I start to pay attention. I've been flying the van too and it's obviously not great in icing, but not as bad as they would have you believe in training.
 
A good indicator on the baron is the nav light fence out by the wing tip. It's about the thinnest surface on the baron, so when I see the glow from my nav lights around the edges of that fence, I start to pay attention. I've been flying the van too and it's obviously not great in icing, but not as bad as they would have you believe in training.

Oh, you guys get FENCES, eh? Fancy. Actually, I may be conflating my Beechcraft Buckets of Bolts. I think the Baron had them, but the 99 did not. Made the strobes effectively unusable. Off to burn pictures and blow up models of the 99, carry on.
 
Oh, you guys get FENCES, eh? Fancy. Actually, I may be conflating my Beechcraft Buckets of Bolts. I think the Baron had them, but the 99 did not. Made the strobes effectively unusable. Off to burn pictures and blow up models of the 99, carry on.

Well while you desicrate the 99, I'll be doing the same to the chieftan....and it doesn't have fancy fences either. Stupd strobe lights trying to give me seizures.
 
Not to brag, but the BE99 I was flying the other day had 44,000 hours and 75,000 cycles. :D

That plane is a piece of crap! If it's the same plane I'm thinking of, the yoke on the right side was held together with duct tape. When you trimmed, the whole yoke would flex a little bit. And when you put the power up for takeoff? Small compressor stall, I think on the right engine.
 
Wow, I didn't realize that TKS was preferable to boots. That is one high tech freighter!

I know the boots on the 208 had some issues with them. I know that I would personally rather have heating wings, But if thats not an option I would take boots over tks anyday.
 
Dunno if it is the same one or not, this one doesn't have duct tape as far as I can remember, but to be honest the co-pilot stick isn't on my preflight checklist :D
 
Need to figure out how to upload the video of the Commander during certification for TKS. If that doesn't sell TKS over boots, I don't know what will! :)
True dat. If only it wasn't such crap 1994 quality, it would be an amazing video to demonstrate what TKS can do. I wonder if AT/JT ever encoded it...

Only thing I can think of is "boots don't run out."
You are correct. However if you ever run out of fluid, you are a much bigger problem than the ice is. If you need max flow just to keep the ice off... well... get the hell out of the ice!


So, other than running out of fluid, what's a good reason to prefer boots over TKS. I fly with hot wings now and hopefully will only ever fly with that. I'm just really curious as to why some prefer boots... what am I missing here?
(OK, refilling it on an icy ramp in -10c, with strong wind is a major PITA... but that has nothing to do with system effectiveness)
 
Neither one of these technologies are new, so if TKS is better, why have boots been the main stay for the manufactures of these twin piston or TP aircraft? Is there even a good answer to this question?
Honestly until this thread, a weeping wing seemed like a new sales gimmick to put on a Cirrus or a Mooney.
 
Neither one of these technologies are new, so if TKS is better, why have boots been the main stay for the manufactures of these twin piston or TP aircraft?
I'm guessing that boots are a lot cheaper to install and cost nothing to operate (TKS per gallon is pretty expensive). IIRC the installation cost for the Twin-Commander was around $75k.

Besides, I don't think the bean-counters at FedEx would sign off on installing TKS on 252 Caravans if it wasn't a better system.

Is there even a good answer to this question?
I don't have one...


Honestly until this thread, a weeping wing seemed like a new sales gimmick to put on a Cirrus or a Mooney.

Again, I've flown with all three- +500hrs boots(NE in winter), +1500hrs TKS, +500hrs hot wing. Based on my personal experience, I'll take TKS over boots any day. In fact I'd really rather not have to fly in ice with boots again. Compared to TKS, I think they're barely effective.

Just my $.02, YMMV etc... etc...
 
It takes to much TKS fluid when doing high speed flight. Thats why you still see boots. In fact the New Cirrus Vision jet is going to be using a boot system. Cirrus wanted it to be TKS, but realized that because of the high speed of the aircraft, they will have to pump out a LOT of fluid which means a huge TKS tank, weight penalty, cost of operation.

I do agree TKS seems to work better in my experience, however boots still has their place in the faster aircraft.
 
Back
Top