IFR

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, I WAS Birddog

Post Reply
User avatar
PT6-114A
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 371
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 8:06 am
Location: I love the south

IFR

Post by PT6-114A »

I went IFR today in a caravan I did not tell my passengers but it was only 037BKN. But guess what the plane flew just fine :butthead:
---------- ADS -----------
 
Turkey
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 9:07 am

Post by Turkey »

Congratulations.

I flew my Navajo IFR today too. And while doing so, I knew beyond the shadow of a doubt, that if I got into icing conditions, I would be able to get out. Because in my airplane, "certified" for flight in known icing actually means something. More than the paper it's written on.

Oh, wait a minute, I see your point was about Single Engine IFR. Pardon me. Still, even if the Caravan had six 100 HP engines, if it handled ice as badly as it currently does, it would still be a dangerous IFR machine.

PS Don't take me too seriously. I actually think quite highly of the Caravan. I just have a problem with it's icing characteristics. For an airplane that's "certified," I have a hard time understanding how it can suck so bad...
---------- ADS -----------
 
goldeneagle
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1345
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 3:28 pm

Post by goldeneagle »

Turkey wrote:PS Don't take me too seriously. I actually think quite highly of the Caravan. I just have a problem with it's icing characteristics. For an airplane that's "certified," I have a hard time understanding how it can suck so bad...
There is a lot of confusion in the pilot community about just what 'certified' for flight into known ice actually means. So many inexpereinced pilots seem to think it means 'this airplane is impervious to ice', when in reality it means 'it has been demonstrated that this aircraft can be safely operated in icing conditions, with proper training'. For MANY airframes, proper training means, knowing when to do something about getting OUT of icing conditions, it doesn't mean 'charge along strait and level praying the airplane can shed/carry more ice than it accumulates'. Every aircraft has limits. The Van gets an especially bad rap because most van drivers it's thier first 'certified' for ice ride, and they dont understand, certified does NOT mean impervious.


Over the years, I've seen numerous airplanes 'fall down' due to ice, a few times I've managed to watch the show from the front left seat. Thankfully, every time it's happened, the freezing level was high enough that I was able to de-ice the airplane naturally before contacting terrain. Some would call this luck, but, in all honestly, luck had NOTHING to do with it. I can say with certainty, it'll happen to a caravan, and it'll happen to a navajo, seen it from the inside on both of them. I can also say with certainty, there was no luck, guessing, or by golly involved in surviving the situation, it was all to do with planning. Departure paths that allowed one to 'take a look' but leave plenty of options to get out of the ice before it became deadly.

When push really gets to shove, the concept of 'certifying' an airplane for known ice is flawed. In reality, pilots should be certified for it, it should be a rating on the license. Safe operation in ice is helped a lot by the equipment on the wings and props, but, it's gotta start in the front left seat.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Dust Devil
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4027
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 10:55 am
Location: Riderville

Post by Dust Devil »

Here we go!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
---------- ADS -----------
 
//=S=//


A parent's only as good as their dumbest kid. If one wins a Nobel Prize but the other gets robbed by a hooker, you failed
Over the Horn
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 380
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 5:28 pm
Contact:

Post by Over the Horn »

I went IFR today in a caravan I did not tell my passengers but it was only 037BKN. But guess what the plane flew just fine
Your crazy man!! :lol: you mean to say you didn't fall out of the the sky I thought all Caravans were suposed to do that IFR :roll: and you actually had enouf sense and judgement as a pilot to avoid heavy icing and not push the limits whats this world coming to!! :lol:

PS 32c and Sunny 8)
---------- ADS -----------
 
ScudRunner
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3239
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:58 am

Post by ScudRunner »

and you actually had enouf sense and judgement as a pilot to avoid heavy icing and not push the limits whats this world coming to!!
What are you talking about man I Paid my 10K to Flight safety and it clearly states that I can fly better than you and that the girls skirts automatically drop after two beers. You must be getting to much sun down their. :lol:
---------- ADS -----------
 
Turkey
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 9:07 am

Post by Turkey »

goldeneagle wrote:The Van gets an especially bad rap because most van drivers it's thier first 'certified' for ice ride, and they dont understand
No, the Van gets a bad rep because it handles ice worse than any other "certified" plane out there. And by worse, I mean WAY worse.

Bull Shoot, "most Van drivers are in their first 'certified' for ice ride." Well, maybe they are, but so are most Twin Cessna drivers and most Navajo drivers. Yet, they don't seem to be falling out of the sky (or even coming seriously close to it.)

I've seen a 402 a Chieftan and a Caravan all fly the same route, at the same altitude, at the same time, one behind the other. (with minumum IFR radar separation between them) The 402 didn't pick up enough ice to blow the boots. Neither did the Chieftan. However, the Caravan, in the middle, driven by a VERY experienced driver, picked up so much ice that it diverted to a nearby airport for an emergency landing due to "severe icing." Again, the 402 and the Chieftan didn't even blow their boots.

The Caravan picks up ice conciderably faster in the exact same conditions than other 'certified' aircraft. The Caravan is not as capable as other aircraft.

Yes, all pilots are expected to immediately exit icing conditions which exceed the deicing capabilities of their aircraft. The difference is, most Navajo and 402 pilots won't ever see those conditions. Caravan drivers see them on a regular basis.

On another day (the same winter, if I recall), again a 402 and a Caravan both landed after having flown the exact same route. They had both been using their boots. The 402 had about 1/2 an ince of ice on the unprotected surfaces, the Caravan had over 4 inches.

Both certified airplanes. One less capable than the other.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
PT6-114A
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 371
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 8:06 am
Location: I love the south

Post by PT6-114A »

I've seen a 402 a Chieftan and a Caravan all fly the same route, at the same altitude, at the same time, one behind the other. (with minumum IFR radar separation between them) The 402 didn't pick up enough ice to blow the boots. Neither did the Chieftan. However, the Caravan, in the middle, driven by a VERY experienced driver, picked up so much ice that it diverted to a nearby airport for an emergency landing due to "severe icing." Again, the 402 and the Chieftan didn't even blow their boots.

I CALL BULL SHIT!!
---------- ADS -----------
 
eep...2 Green
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2004 12:49 am

Post by eep...2 Green »

PT6-114A wrote:
I've seen a 402 a Chieftan and a Caravan all fly the same route, at the same altitude, at the same time, one behind the other. (with minumum IFR radar separation between them) The 402 didn't pick up enough ice to blow the boots. Neither did the Chieftan. However, the Caravan, in the middle, driven by a VERY experienced driver, picked up so much ice that it diverted to a nearby airport for an emergency landing due to "severe icing." Again, the 402 and the Chieftan didn't even blow their boots.

I CALL BULL SHIT!!
Whatever dude...Caravans suck... :P
---------- ADS -----------
 
FamilyGuy
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 548
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 10:54 am

Post by FamilyGuy »

I call bullshit too. I've seen 31's and 402's land with 2-3 inches on the unprotected areas as well.

I find it EXTREMELY hard to beleive that by some freak fate of design, somehow, the 208 accumulates ice at such a prodigious rate higher than other FASTER aircraft on the same route???

By far the worst airplane EVER certified for flight into known icing was the CF104. At those speeds, mere seconds could make the difference.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Hedley
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 10430
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 6:40 am
Location: CYSH
Contact:

Post by Hedley »

By far the worst airplane EVER certified for flight into known icing was the CF104
I wasn't aware the Lockheed F-104 or Canadair CF-104 had ever received certification by any civilian aviation department of any government. Do you have a link to a civilian type certificate?
At those speeds, mere seconds could make the difference.
ummmm ... if you keep the speed up over 300 knots, icing really isn't much of a problem because of the temp rise. Most people didn't exactly like to fly the -104 slowly, though in fact it would do a very nice hammerhead.

And it's not like the -104 had the fuel to hold at low altitude, either. If some ATC idiot ever issued a holding clearance to a -104, the pilot would likely laugh and ask where ATC wanted him to eject.
---------- ADS -----------
 
ahramin
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 6324
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:21 pm
Location: Vancouver

Post by ahramin »

You said it Hedley. I guess some people just don't care about credibility.
Turkey wrote:And while doing so, I knew beyond the shadow of a doubt, that if I got into icing conditions, I would be able to get out. Because in my airplane, "certified" for flight in known icing actually means something.
It doesn't mean you are safe from ice. Every year there are several times where the icing conditions are such that if my King Air got into them, i might not be able to get out. I find it hard to believe that your navajo is so impervious to ice that you don't need to worry about it until you are in it.
---------- ADS -----------
 
FamilyGuy
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 548
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 10:54 am

Post by FamilyGuy »

Geez sorry there Hedley. How many hours you got on a 104?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”