Issues around de-ice on a 182

Andrew Gideon wrote:

One of the members of my club has proposed that we add TKS de-ice to our two
182s. Apparently, such a system is to become available later this year.

My reaction at first was negative. After all, in our near-NYC location, the
utility of such a tool is limited to a few months a year. Surely we could
spend money better (ie. on upgades that would be useful year round).

His reply to this reasoning is that our aircraft utilization is much lower
in the cold months than in the summer. If we can increase winter use, then
we get better value from our investment.

It's a good point. Of course, when I mentioned this to my wife, she asked
how much of the lower use was due to the threat of ice, and how much was
due to our lack of love for preflighting in subzero weather.

Another good point grin.

But it does have me wondering. The system would not be "known icing"
compliant. So...what difference in utilization would it make? I'm curious
what others - esp. that fly with de-ice - would reply.

Without "known icing" certification, I don't think it buys you much at
all from utilization perspective. It is insurance if you get caught in
ice, but that is it. And if if DOES increase utilization it means that
you have pilots flying in conditions they likely shouldn't be in anyway.

And, I know from a hairy personal experience, a Skylane will carry a lot
of ice and still fly pretty well. I'd invest the money and weight into
something more useful.


Matt

I'll second the "fly pretty well" with a load of ice. I should not have
been there years ago.....but.......
Another second...My two cents...I don't believe a 182 should have the
TKS...might go when you shouldn't...

John N3DR


"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Andrew Gideon wrote:

One of the members of my club has proposed that we add TKS de-ice to our
two
182s. Apparently, such a system is to become available later this year.

My reaction at first was negative. After all, in our near-NYC location,
the
utility of such a tool is limited to a few months a year. Surely we
could
spend money better (ie. on upgades that would be useful year round).

His reply to this reasoning is that our aircraft utilization is much
lower
in the cold months than in the summer. If we can increase winter use,
then
we get better value from our investment.

It's a good point. Of course, when I mentioned this to my wife, she
asked
how much of the lower use was due to the threat of ice, and how much was
due to our lack of love for preflighting in subzero weather.

Another good point grin.

But it does have me wondering. The system would not be "known icing"
compliant. So...what difference in utilization would it make? I'm
curious
what others - esp. that fly with de-ice - would reply.

Without "known icing" certification, I don't think it buys you much at
all from utilization perspective. It is insurance if you get caught in
ice, but that is it. And if if DOES increase utilization it means that
you have pilots flying in conditions they likely shouldn't be in anyway.

And, I know from a hairy personal experience, a Skylane will carry a lot
of ice and still fly pretty well. I'd invest the money and weight into
something more useful.


Matt