On Dec 4, 7:35 am, Dylan Smith wrote:
On 2007-12-02, wrote:

On Dec 2, 2:30 pm, "Blueskies" wrote:

The airplane is NOT approved for flight into *known* icing conditions. So when a pilot finds himself in those conditions
in one of these planes, Cessna is to blame if he/she screws up and crashes...

So, why do so many of them have boots and hot props and all
the rest? It would seem to add a lot of expensive weight if flight
through known ice is forbidden.

It's there to give you more time to escape icing conditions, not so you
can simply fly in known icing conditions.

So then: Why does the FAA or Transport Canada call it
certification for flight into known ice? An aircraft is either
certified for flight into know ice (like all modern airliners and many
smaller airplanes and some helicopters) or it's not. There's no
certification basis for flight into "possible ice." On this continent,
ice is present much of the year in a wide range of altitudes and there
is simply no escape from it other than staying on the ground. An
aircraft that is not certified for flight into known ice is, in Canada
at least, prohibited from filing IFR if ice is "forecast or reported."

Dan

Dan