On Feb 16, 8:01*am, "Robert11" wrote:
Hello,

Not a Physicist, so please bear with me.

The posts here seem to imply that wing icing occurs (mainly), if not
exclusively, on the leading edges, and not on the upper or lower wing
surfaces.

Why ?

If it does occur on the upper surfaces in modern jet commercial aircraft, is
there also
hot bleed air available for this large surface, as there is for the leading
edges ?

If it does occur on modern turboprops, on the upper surface, there is
nothing they can do to remove it.
Right ?

Why did they say that a 180 degree turn "may" help break off ice ?

Thanks,
Bob
---------------------------------

"VOR-DME" wrote in message

...



In article
,
says...

On Feb 15, 5:41 pm, Tman wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote:
There's a very good chance the Boston crash might have been tailplane
icing.

Did you mean BUF or did I miss something in Boston?
T

Yes. I've been dealing with a Boston issue most of the day and my
senior moment quota kicked in. It was Buffalo.
DH

Oh thanks! Spent two hours on the NTSB database trying to figure what
Boston crash we were talking about! :-)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Think for a moment about the airflow around thle wing. At one point
the air flows up and over, and a little lower on the leading edge if
flows down and under. There is a line then, the point where the flow
seperates, where there is little airflow at all. It's called the
stagnation point. If ice is going to form it will form where there's
not a lot of wind blowing the water away, that's why it forms on the
leading edges. You'll see, in icing conditions, ugly ice sticking out
from the leading edges first.

The magic of a 180 degree turn is, back where you came from there was
not ice forming -- go back there!