If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
ET wrote:
"Colin Kingsbury" wrote in news:XW4Ab.542 : Of course, there's a lot of flights that will get scrubbed in an SR-22 because of icing, so this isn't a good plane for you. My father owns SR-22, it has an anti-icing system (sprays solution out from micro holes in the wings/prop/etc)... I am not yet a pilot, so I'm certain I don't understand all the complexities of this, but would an SR-22 with this system still be as limited as your statement suggests?? Yes. Even an anti-icing equipped light airplane is still a light airplane and has neither the power nor the altitude capability to withstand the ice that exists in much of the northern latitudes during the winter. Matt |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"ET" wrote in message
... My father owns SR-22, it has an anti-icing system (sprays solution out from micro holes in the wings/prop/etc)... I am not yet a pilot, so I'm certain I don't understand all the complexities of this, but would an SR-22 with this system still be as limited as your statement suggests?? Even when certified for flight into known icing, light planes are simply no match for real icing conditions. Anti-ice or de-ice equipment is useful for buying yourself more time in which to leave the icing conditions (climb, descend, turn around) but they don't come close to matching the all-weather capabilities of airliners. Heck, even the smaller airliners (turboprops) can easily get out of their depth. The installation on your father's SR-22 is simply an escape route. It doesn't provide him with anything near all-weather capabilities with respect to icing. Pete |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
The nice thing about a Cirrus is also you could always (i.e., once) pop the
chute if the TKS couldn't keep up. I would think this would be comforting when choosing to fly through a what was believed to be little known ice that the TKS system should be able to easily handle, just in case you found it is was more ice than anyone would have expected and you ran out of other options. I think the TKS/chute combo would allow a lot of flights that would keep me on the ground otherwise. "Peter Duniho" wrote in message ... "ET" wrote in message ... My father owns SR-22, it has an anti-icing system (sprays solution out from micro holes in the wings/prop/etc)... I am not yet a pilot, so I'm certain I don't understand all the complexities of this, but would an SR-22 with this system still be as limited as your statement suggests?? Even when certified for flight into known icing, light planes are simply no match for real icing conditions. Anti-ice or de-ice equipment is useful for buying yourself more time in which to leave the icing conditions (climb, descend, turn around) but they don't come close to matching the all-weather capabilities of airliners. Heck, even the smaller airliners (turboprops) can easily get out of their depth. The installation on your father's SR-22 is simply an escape route. It doesn't provide him with anything near all-weather capabilities with respect to icing. Pete |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
The NTSB considers pilot reports to be "anectdotal" and relies solely on
government sources. The case law on this comes from a guy in upstate NY who relied on pilot reports of no icing, took off into what they consider known icing conditions, and....after a decent period...crashed. Bob Gardner "Paul Tomblin" wrote in message ... In a previous article, ET said: "Colin Kingsbury" wrote in news:XW4Ab.542 : Of course, there's a lot of flights that will get scrubbed in an SR-22 because of icing, so this isn't a good plane for you. My father owns SR-22, it has an anti-icing system (sprays solution out from micro holes in the wings/prop/etc)... I am not yet a pilot, so I'm certain I don't understand all the complexities of this, but would an SR-22 with this system still be as limited as your statement suggests?? The TKS system is to escape inadvertent ice, not to fly into known icing conditions. So yes, it would be limited as Colin suggested. Especially since the FAA is now regarding "known icing conditions" to mean any time when there is a mention of icing in the forecast, even if you have pireps of no icing. -- Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/ "I didn't know it was impossible when I did it." |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Once(!) is right.
Will your insurance company buy you a replacement SR-22 after you pop = that chute? Especially if you had to use it because of ice? ---JRC--- "Dan Thompson" wrote in message = gy.com... The nice thing about a Cirrus is also you could always (i.e., once) = pop the chute if the TKS couldn't keep up. I would think this would be = comforting when choosing to fly through a what was believed to be little known = ice that the TKS system should be able to easily handle, just in case you found = it is was more ice than anyone would have expected and you ran out of other options. I think the TKS/chute combo would allow a lot of flights = that would keep me on the ground otherwise. =20 "Peter Duniho" wrote in message ... "ET" wrote in message ... My father owns SR-22, it has an anti-icing system (sprays solution = out from micro holes in the wings/prop/etc)... I am not yet a pilot, so I'm certain I don't understand all the complexities of this, but would an = SR-22 with this system still be as limited as your statement suggests?? Even when certified for flight into known icing, light planes are = simply no match for real icing conditions. Anti-ice or de-ice equipment is = useful for buying yourself more time in which to leave the icing conditions = (climb, descend, turn around) but they don't come close to matching the all-weather capabilities of airliners. Heck, even the smaller airliners (turboprops) can easily get out of = their depth. The installation on your father's SR-22 is simply an escape route. = It doesn't provide him with anything near all-weather capabilities with respect to icing. Pete =20 |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Yes, in that they would pay the agreed value for the plane if it were, as I
assume it would be, totalled. But I wouldn't expect to be covered by them or anyone else in a replacement. "John R. Copeland" wrote in message ... Once(!) is right. Will your insurance company buy you a replacement SR-22 after you pop that chute? Especially if you had to use it because of ice? ---JRC--- "Dan Thompson" wrote in message gy.com... The nice thing about a Cirrus is also you could always (i.e., once) pop the chute if the TKS couldn't keep up. I would think this would be comforting when choosing to fly through a what was believed to be little known ice that the TKS system should be able to easily handle, just in case you found it is was more ice than anyone would have expected and you ran out of other options. I think the TKS/chute combo would allow a lot of flights that would keep me on the ground otherwise. "Peter Duniho" wrote in message ... "ET" wrote in message ... My father owns SR-22, it has an anti-icing system (sprays solution out from micro holes in the wings/prop/etc)... I am not yet a pilot, so I'm certain I don't understand all the complexities of this, but would an SR-22 with this system still be as limited as your statement suggests?? Even when certified for flight into known icing, light planes are simply no match for real icing conditions. Anti-ice or de-ice equipment is useful for buying yourself more time in which to leave the icing conditions (climb, descend, turn around) but they don't come close to matching the all-weather capabilities of airliners. Heck, even the smaller airliners (turboprops) can easily get out of their depth. The installation on your father's SR-22 is simply an escape route. It doesn't provide him with anything near all-weather capabilities with respect to icing. Pete |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Roy Smith wrote:
(Paul Tomblin) wrote: Especially since the FAA is now regarding "known icing conditions" to mean any time when there is a mention of icing in the forecast, even if you have pireps of no icing. You say that like it's a bad thing. I don't think it is. We just don't know enough about icing to be sure when or where it's going to occur. If our best prediction methods say "there's likely to be ice in clouds between 5000 and 12000", just because you fly into a cloud at 8000 and don't pick up any ice doesn't mean the predicion is any less valid. I think it is a bad thing. We don't know enough to know where it is likely to occur as you say. This means that forecasting it is virtually impossible, but the FAA will play it very conservative and forecast anywhere that there is the slightest possibility of icing. This greatly reduces the operational flexibility of many types of aircraft during many parts of the country for a good portion of the year. I think it is much better to let the pilot take a look and retreat if necessary. Matt |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Dan Thompson wrote:
The nice thing about a Cirrus is also you could always (i.e., once) pop the chute if the TKS couldn't keep up. I would think this would be comforting when choosing to fly through a what was believed to be little known ice that the TKS system should be able to easily handle, just in case you found it is was more ice than anyone would have expected and you ran out of other options. I think the TKS/chute combo would allow a lot of flights that would keep me on the ground otherwise. Not me. I really doubt that the BRS chute has been tested in icing conditions. I don't want to be the test pilot for it. I suspect a parachute could pick up a LOT of ice in a hurry given its surface area. You might come down a lot faster than you think. Matt |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
What would be the effect of a thin layer of ice on a parachute canopy?
There are no aerodynamics other than pure drag. This does not even consider that the trip down is going to be pretty quick anyway. Also the constant flexing of the canopy is going to shed any layers that amounted to anything, just like deicing boots. I'll wave to you on my way down! "Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message ... Dan Thompson wrote: The nice thing about a Cirrus is also you could always (i.e., once) pop the chute if the TKS couldn't keep up. I would think this would be comforting when choosing to fly through a what was believed to be little known ice that the TKS system should be able to easily handle, just in case you found it is was more ice than anyone would have expected and you ran out of other options. I think the TKS/chute combo would allow a lot of flights that would keep me on the ground otherwise. Not me. I really doubt that the BRS chute has been tested in icing conditions. I don't want to be the test pilot for it. I suspect a parachute could pick up a LOT of ice in a hurry given its surface area. You might come down a lot faster than you think. Matt |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|