Severe clear ice. Thank you Kansas city

If I know this is absolutely no way for me to exit the ice which is usually rare then you are right and I would not go. In my experience there is usually a way around it either by staying low or staying low and flying to an area where the ice is thought or reported to be less severe and then climbing through it.

As far as I know there is no rule saying that a 208 can not be dispatched into know moderate ice. I haven't heard of an airplane certified to continuously maintain flight in moderate or greater ice. With that said no plane should be dispatched into known moderate or greater ice but the majority of the time it can be avoided or escaped one way or the other and get the job done.

I guess it just comes down to your comfort level and experience dealing with it.
 
"(1) For Cessna Model 208 airplanes and Model 208B airplanes, all serial numbers, equipped with airframe deicing pneumatic boots, that are not currently prohibited from flight in known or forecast icing: You are prohibited from continued flight after encountering moderate or greater icing conditions. The airplane can dispatch into forecast areas of icing but must exit moderate or greater icing conditions if encountered."

That verbiage for example is not in a be20 manual. But if you have known moderate conditions, why launch or fly in them. If, when you check in to approach, and they tell you that the last three aircraft in the last 15 minutes have all called moderate ice, are you good to go?
When you check in to flight following for a trip, and you heard that in the atis, are you going to say you are good to go?
The answer is, you probably can go. But if you bend the airplane, you are a sitting duck.
Because of this, most operators will probably accept your decision to not go based on the ice reports.
 
If the moderate reported conditions are reported to be 1000ft thick I really don't see a problem launching but if they are calling it to be several thousand feet thick then it would be a different story.

As far as starting the approach it really all depends on the approach, wx, what type of ac made the reports and if there is already a lot of ice on the plane.
 
I disagree, Our 135 operation once hired a new pilot with like 2000 hours in the traffic pattern who would not fly if there was an airmet for moderate icing even though he had a plane perfectly capable with boots, windshield etc. When I did a flight he canceled, I didnt pick up more then a trace. After a couple canceled flights from him because of icing airmets, he was let go.



If you are talking about me you are completely inaccurate. Or maybe you just listened to someone who was not informed and believed their ignorance.

First of all, you didn't cover any flying for me while I was there. If you did, you did it without a 135 check and that would be admiting on the internet that you flew in violation of the regs.

Your opinion is accurate about pilots not flying because of an Airmet Z. The flight you are referring too had a lot more to do with it being 300/1 in class E than it did ice. Thats below TO mins at that A/P, it was below landing mins at the destination as well. (You got in in the WAAS SR22, the 310 is /A) I'll add that the flight in question was a non revenue, non time critical repositioning flight. In an Aircraft that was squawked and MELed all over.

Just to add a little flavor to the circumstances, it was also the day after your incompetent, dishonest boss left me stranded in Powell. (I mean What would we have done if I had passengers on board?) The only thing your boss is worse at than piloting is running a company. He makes decisions to fly routes for BK companies and wonders why you cant get paid

I never refused a revenue flight and if someone told you otherwise send them to my house so I can ask them what they mean. You know where I live.

And BTW there is a huge difference between me telling him to pound sand for ordering me to fly overweight, over duty, in an unairworthy airplane into conditions that the airplane is not certified for, than getting fired.

You need to look around man. Who else flys a NA, Non FIKI, 310 in the Rocky Mt region under IFR. If you did find a company that did that they darn sure don't try to dispatch into Freezing Rain. (Yes that happened.)

...But you know all that because you are the new meat that replaced me. You are the guy that lets the bosses push you into flying the exact same way they wanted me to fly. Give me one good reason to think you guys saw the light and changed your ways? You guys make Key Lime look like SWA.

It's sad when you undercut fellow pilots for a bottom feeder operation. Myself, and JC both put our foot down and tried to change the way they operate. They told us to take a hike, fly our way, so we quit. Then you swoop in and turn into a "yes Sir, anything you want sir" kind of guy and hurt everything in the process. (And you do it for less money too!) They couldn't find anyone to stay except you, man! What's that tell you?

My new company (135) doesn't have any problem with my flying and neither did the company that I ACPed before that... or the one before that. What's that mean? Just some food for thought.

If you want to make allegations, at least be accurate.
 
1386.jpg
 
I'm a pilot at the same company and I can confirm everything in his story. He is fortunate to be alive, and should not have to justify his actions to anyone.

BTW your statements about icing may be accurate in the north, but down here it can be different. What he likely encountered was freezing rain on a airframe that was already below freezing, which can put a LOT of ice on in minutes. None of this was forecast by anyone, nor had any other airplane in the area reported anything.


This is simply another example that despite taking every precaution and doing everything correctly, this is still a dangerous business.

Exactly... Ive seen over an inch of ice appear in mere seconds, (30-45 seconds), it happens
 
Back
Top