Known Icing Enforcement?

jtrain609 said:
Conditions are there for icing, but that's not known icing. It's a prediction that ice *might* be there, and depending on your aiframe, speed, altitude, blah blah blah, you have the possibility of having ice stick to your airframe. But until it does, it's not known that there is ice in there.

Again, I'm not saying it's not stupid, I'm just saying you're not making a delineation between forcasted and actual.
Click to expand...
It's a delineation that's been tried by pilots looking for an out, but I think you need to look at some of the NTSB cases dealing with known icing to see the results. Like the ones that say stuff like:

==============================
The Board has long viewed the phrase "known icing conditions" to include predicted weather: "We do not construe the adjective 'known' to mean that there must be a near-certainty that icing will occur, such as might be established by pilot reports....Rather, we take the entire phrase to mean that icing conditions are being reported or forecast in reports which are known to a pilot or of which he should be reasonably aware."
-- Admin v. Boger (http://www.ntsb.gov/alj/alj/O_n_O/docs/aviation/4525.PDF)
==============================

or this one where, although there was also some evidence of actual icing, the NTSB made it a point to say:

==============================
Pilots are required to obtain all information pertinent to their flight – that is, be well prepared – and make reasoned decisions based on that information. Here, respondent knew that he would be flying into clouds that contained moisture, knew that the temperature on the ground at his destination was close to freezing, and knew that in the cloudy skies on the way to and above Payne Field the temperature would be colder. The risk of icing was clear.
--Admin v. Curtis (http://www.ntsb.gov/alj/alj/O_n_O/docs/aviation/5154.PDF)
==============================

On the more positive side, though, I have heard that for various reasons, the FAA does not go after pilots unless there ends up being actual ice that causes an event.
 
meyers9163 said:
But again why would one fly into an area where conditions are right? You are saying that in your post conditions are right for icing. Therefore if you fly into it you had knowledge about this condition. Therefore you flew into an area that was known to be right for icing?

Either way you are correct flying into an area where there is an Airmet for icing in a GA is very VERY stupid and ignorant, no wait not even ignorant just plain stupidity!
Click to expand...

Well, an awful lot of guys who make their livings in single engine airplanes with no icing protection would sure have to take more days off. Forecast icing, not a big deal if you have outs. Especially given how hit and miss icing forecasts are.
 
flyover said:
Well, an awful lot of guys who make their livings in single engine airplanes with no icing protection would sure have to take more days off. Forecast icing, not a big deal if you have outs. Especially given how hit and miss icing forecasts are.
Click to expand...

Holy crap we finally agree on something!
 
When I first saw this, I thought that maybe the FAA was starting a "Known Icing Enforcement Team" - you know, another incompetent law enforcement agency that walks around the airport busting people for inoperative pitot heat, and launching into questionable temperatures.:laff:
 
mtsu_av8er said:
When I first saw this, I thought that maybe the FAA was starting a "Known Icing Enforcement Team" - you know, another incompetent law enforcement agency that walks around the airport busting people for inoperative pitot head, and launching into questionable temperatures.:laff:
Click to expand...
So many ways I could go with this but I'll just say typo.
 
some new info from the ole FAA

Whether a pilot has operated into known icing conditions contrary
to any limitation will depend upon the information available to the
pilot, and his or her proper analysis of that information in connection
with the particular operation (e.g., route of flight, altitude, time of
flight, airspeed, and aircraft performance characteristics), in
evaluating the risk of encountering known icing conditions. The FAA,
your own association, and other aviation- or weather-oriented
organizations offer considerable information on the phenomenon of
aircraft icing. Pilots are encouraged to use this information for a
greater appreciation of the risks that flying in potential icing
conditions can present. Likewise, a variety of sources

[[Page 15932]]

provide meteorological information that relates to forecast and actual
conditions that are conducive to in-flight icing. Pilots should
carefully evaluate all of the available meteorological information
relevant to the proposed flight, including applicable surface
observations, temperatures aloft, terminal and area forecasts, AIRMETs,
SIGMETs, and pilot reports. As new technology becomes available, pilots
should incorporate use of that technology into their decision-making
process.
The ultimate decision whether, when, and where to make the flight
rests with the pilot. A pilot also must continue to reevaluate changing
weather conditions. If the composite information indicates to a
reasonable and prudent pilot that he or she will encounter visible
moisture at freezing or near freezing temperatures and that ice will
adhere to the aircraft along the proposed route and altitude of flight,
then known icing conditions likely exist. If the AFM prohibits flight
in known icing conditions and the pilot operates in such conditions,
the FAA could take enforcement action.\2\
 
Texasspilot said:
some new info from the ole FAA
Click to expand...
Yep. There was a SNAFU this past year when someone asked the FAA Regional Counsel for an opinion and got more than he bargained for - an interpretation that a lot of people read as saying that if you flew in high humidity in below freezing temperatures, you were in known icing conditions.

It was the rage in forum discussions for a while.

What you copied and pasted is a notice the FAA published asking for public comments on a proposed replacement for the unfortunate regional opinion.
 
jtrain609 said:
So if a thunderstorm is forecast, but never shows up, is it known?
Click to expand...

If I recall, guys doing military training can't fly inside a thunderstorm watch box so they don't use the NWS's boxes because they are just big rectangles of areas where thunderstorms MAY be. Instead, they have their own meto guys draw up squiggly line boxes of where storms probably are so they can still go out and do their training.


jtrain609 said:
EDIT: Also guys you've gotta realize the equipment type giving the report. CRJ's don't turn their anti ice equipment on until they get below 230 knots because their wings won't accumulate ice until that point. Now a Caravan? Those things are like ice magnets!
Click to expand...

Actually, cowl anti ice is on any time we are in icing conditions which is < 10TAT and > -40SAT with "visible moisture" meaning viability of less then 1 mile. Wing only comes on if we are doing less then 230 or ice is detected by the probes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top