Known Ice PA31 Navajo?

[DanWEC]

I've been hearing conflicting info- Are all Navajo's pre-1980 NOT certified for Known Ice?
The type certificate, which goes along with the FAA cert, states that if it's certified in the POH with the required equipment then ice protection is approved, but doesn't mention FIKI.
A/C in question is a 1977 -325.
The POH states approval in light to moderate ice condition.
If it's not certified shouldn't the A/C be placarded as such on the panel?
Not looking to fly into ice, I just don't want any surprise legal issues.

Thanks-
Dan

[Big Pistons Forever]

You will never find the words approved for "flight in known icing conditions" in any Ho POH. What you will find is approval for the icing conditions that the aircraft can fly in which will usually be light and moderate icing (never severe for obvious reasons). If the aircraft is "approved" to fly in moderate icing then by definition it is operating in
FIKI conditions.

But the POH will specify the ant/deicing systems that must be installed and servicable. I mention this because the POH requires (among other things) a heated windshield for operating in light to moderate icing. The windshield is very expensive and so many Navajo's, which are all 30 or more years old, have had the windshield fail and either replaced with a non heated panel or simply ignored. Similarly a complete deicing boot replacement will be 15 + K dollars so there are many Ho's out there with boots that are so deteriorated that they are essentially useless.

There are a lot of real Pa 31 beaters out there so if you are seriously looking for a Navajo then you want to make sure it gets a very in depth prepurchase by a AME who knows the type.

Finally at the risk of being rude are you qualified to be looking for this class of aircraft or should you get somebody with a bunch of Navajo operating experience to be sourcing an airframe for you ? Also all of this presupposes that the Navajo is in fact the "right" aircraft for your operation. Again are you the right guy to make that kind of decision ?

[oldtimer]

TC put out an information letter just on this very subject so you may want to see if it can be sourced. Basically, the first bunch of 310 'Ho's could not ever be "certified" because of a lack of pneumatic pressure. They could not run the gyros and boots at the same time. After that, airplanes could leave the factory with or without any de-ice equipment installed. Many operators went to the parts bin and selected whatever they could afford so there was a mickey mouse bunch of 'Ho's running around because all that the certification standards required was to demonstrate that the installation of the de-iceing equipment did not have a detrimental effect on the airplane. Later models appear to be certified to FAR 25, airline standards, which they are not. But WHAT I THINK IS THE CASE, the FAA adopted the FAR 25 description of icing conditions which allowed the manufacturer to design the equipment because they now had a standard to work with. That is why they are certified to FAR 25, it is just the de-icing thing. So the later model 'Ho's left the factory with the required equipment installed and tested and if you did not want all that equipment, there was either an STC or a 337 form under which the equipment was removed. (eg; a Florida based operator or a high altitude photo survey airplane.) IMHO.

[DanWEC]

Thanks for the replies.
BPF- I'm on a steep learning curve but have plenty of ongoing input and help from experienced Navajo operators. I wouldn't have made it even this far without plenty of help from generous folk. From my previous posts here I'm sure you can tell that I never have any shortage of questions, and never afraid to ask them- stupid or not.
Anyhow, given the conflicting nature of the info that I've already received personally from some experts on this topic, I just wanted to open up the floor to a larger pool by posting the question on this forum here as well as speaking with other operators and TC.

I had a feeling someone might make a mention of something along those lines, but no offense taken.

Oldtimer- I know which circular you are talking about- issued in 1997, but it's been cancelled and the material has been erased on TC's website. No way of seeing what it dictated. I do know that this C/R is certified to the standards in FAR part 23.

[human garbage]

I had a copy of that circular, but might have lost it in a hard drive crash before I started ghosting. If I can find it, I will post it.

Icing certification on the Navajo is a complicated subject. Oldtimer hits all the salient points in his post above. The -310s were never certified for FIKI due to equipment limitations for the reason he gave. In arguing this in the past with TC it all came down to the type certificate (A20S0 Rev.11 seems the most current) for the Navajo. Basically TC's standpoint was, regardless of what equipment is installed on a particular aircraft, it needed to be approved to a standard in the type certificate to be approved for a specific purpose (ie flight into known icing).

Here is an except from page 11 of A20SO (from the FAA of course):

Model PA-31 and PA-31-325 (S/N 31-8012001 through 31-8312019), and
Model PA-31-350 (S/N 31-8052001 through 31-8553002): FAR 36 as amended by
Amendments 1 through 6, effective January 24, 1977. Compliance with ice
protection requirements have been demonstrated in accordance with FAR 23.1419 as
amended by Amendment 23-14, effective December 20, 1973, when ice protection
equipment is installed in accordance with the airplane equipment list.

This to me says that no Navajos prior to the serial numbers listed were shown to comply with the requirements of FAR 23.1419 regardless of installed equipment. All the PMIs I've had in the past were of this opinion too FWIW.

If I was you, to save future hassles, consider going with a suitably equipped Navajo within that serial number range if you desire FIKI. To do otherwise would be risky from a certification point of view. That said there are probably dozens of Navajos outside that range flying daily into known icing with no practical issues... Just potential legal ones.

So your original point is correct. No C/Rs before 1980... If you were talking Chieftains, nothing before 1976 (didn't bother quoting that is it wasn't really germane).

(Please note that the above is not definitive by any means, just what I have been able to piece together. Lord knows I've been wrong before... I have no AME background. I just drive them. Good luck)

[DanWEC]

Thanks HG. I was actually just about to post that reference from the bottom of page 11 but you beat me to it. as I was reading the TC a bit closer less than an hour ago and saw the serial # spreads for the -325.

It's confusing however, I can find a few pre-1980 ho's (not 350 Cheifs) for sale that are advertised with known icing. Could be an error in the post.
For example- there is a 1979 advertised in Canada that states Known Ice. A quick call to the broker and he stated that since it's a Panther they come certified. That plane would be outside the serial number spread, unless there is an STC on the de-icing equip for the Panther that approves it for FIKI?


I'd much rather err on the side of caution. I don't want to be inviting any possiblity of violations, no matter how remote.

Cheers,
Dan

[Big Pistons Forever]

I do not see how if you have a serial number specific to your airplane POH that said, "flight in light to moderate icing approved" in the limitations section, and you choose to fly in forecast or reported "light to moderate icing"; TC could go after you. Whether on any particular day it is safe to fly in forecast icing conditions is a whole different and IMO much more important question, but from a legal view point you are operating the aircraft in accordance with its POH limitations.

[human garbage]

Dan,

I don't know about Colemill and anti-ice. I thought their STC only covered engines, props, and them zip tips. Might be worth asking them. What the broker told you sounds plausible to me. I've never flown a Panther, so I'm ill equipped to comment.

It is a confusing situation. As Big Pistons Forever correctly points out, a POH (properly serialized of course) that certifies the aircraft for flight in known icing would provide the legal protection you need IMHO. As a caveat, TC and I never seem to agree on such matters.

I think one could make a good case if the aircraft in question had anti-ice equipment installed when it was built. Remember that the FAR 23 standards for icing only came into effect in 1977 IIRC... There is no way any aircraft built before that could meet the new standards obviously. I had a POH for a 1973 Chief that was bought directly from Piper to replace a generic (ie non-serialized) POH. It did indeed say the aircraft was certified for known ice, given the proper equipment installed as per the equipment list.

I believe that prior to the FAR 23 standards for icing, Piper used to use technical drawings for the installation of optional equipment like anti-ice. I'm trying to find a reference for you, but the verbiage is something along the lines of 'approved for X when optional equipment installed as per Piper drawing 123456'. Heck it might even be in the type cert notes for all I know, as the drawings have numbers not names...

Most of my experience, outside the 1973 Chieftain, have all been models within the range of s/n on the type cert. I argued, as I said before, about the 1973 with TC but eventually gave up... Turns out the boots were in such poor shape there was no way I would conduct FIKI without a full replacement. The money wasn't there for that at the time, so it became a moot point.

I think I did indeed lose that AC on icing I said I would try and find. My apologies. I still have a couple of contacts at TC M&M. I'll see if they can find an old copy and provide some further direction on this matter. Never hurts to ask. I couldn't really do that before when it was an issue for me, as it would have been an attempt to circumvent my PMI at the time. We all know what a potential train wreck that could have been lol.

I'm really curious and would like to know how eligibility for FIKI was determined before FAR 23... I'll keep you (and the forum) posted on what I find.

[DanWEC]

Thanks again HG. There must have been a reason they didn't certify it when the FAA standards came out in 77. I emailed Piper last week about the tech drawing in the TC, but it's a moot point since my S/N doesn't apply to it anyways, but seems to be identically equipped down to every last detail, and the approval in the POH.
BTW a quick call to Colemill dispelled any known ice STC on the Panther kit. The broker was advertising it falsely and has since pulled the description from the ad.

After a conversation yesterday, I just had a pilot with a few thou Ho hours give me his rundown, and here it is paraphrased:
TC went back and forth the 70's to late 90's about KI cert on the Ho, causing a huge amount of problems for charters up north operating happily in known icing conditons. Finally the official decision was that the only legal KI certification was in the SN spread (1980 on) BUT, because of the history and number of operators using pa31's Transport has basically agreed to leave all the uncertified (but properly equipped and POH approved) Ho's alone and not violate unless you were on the wrong side of their radar for other reasons and they wanted to get you for something.
So it's officially grey area, according to one source, lol.
I would need more confirmation from Transport though.
It would be a shame (and a waste IMO) to invest so much money into a perfectly capable A/C and not be allowed to spend 30 seconds climbing though a 1k ft light icing layer to get home. On the plus side our missions are mostly daytime local business trips, so easy to analyze weather to make go/no-go decisions to prevent being stranded.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Thanks again HG. There must have been a reason they didn't certify it when the FAA standards came out in 77. I emailed Piper last week about the tech drawing in the TC, but it's a moot point since my S/N doesn't apply to it anyways, but seems to be identically equipped down to every last detail, and the approval in the POH.
BTW a quick call to Colemill dispelled any known ice STC on the Panther kit. The broker was advertising it falsely and has since pulled the description from the ad.

After a conversation yesterday, I just had a pilot with a few thou Ho hours give me his rundown, and here it is paraphrased:
TC went back and forth the 70's to late 90's about KI cert on the Ho, causing a huge amount of problems for charters up north operating happily in known icing conditons. Finally the official decision was that the only legal KI certification was in the SN spread (1980 on) BUT, because of the history and number of operators using pa31's Transport has basically agreed to leave all the uncertified (but properly equipped and POH approved) Ho's alone and not violate unless you were on the wrong side of their radar for other reasons and they wanted to get you for something.
So it's officially grey area, according to one source, lol.
I would need more confirmation from Transport though.
It would be a shame (and a waste IMO) to invest so much money into a perfectly capable A/C and not be allowed to spend 30 seconds climbing though a 1k ft light icing layer to get home. On the plus side our missions are mostly daytime local business trips, so easy to analyze weather to make go/no-go decisions to prevent being stranded.

Why does it have to be a Navajo ? Properly equiped from the factory 1975 and later Cessna 402's are FIKI and significantly less expensive than Ho's. If your passenger load is 4 or less you can get a pressurized Cessna 340 for the same money as a Ho. Smaller cabin but nicer to ride in and there is a wide variety of examples advertised. Unlike Navajo's most were privately operated since new so they tend to be low time and not beat like like most Navajo's which have seen lots of commercial hours.

[DanWEC]

Lot's of reasons for the Ho- Widely available. (many private examples as well- I won't buy a charter plane). Parts aren't as expensive and the general consensus seems to be that overall maint is less than a comparably cared-for 3/4 series Cessna.
The leftover useful load for a C340 with full tanks of 163 gal is only 472 lbs. That's pilot and one pax + bags, maybe 2 light ones. there is a VG kit that increases gross by 300 lbs though. Makes things a bit more reasonable. Also most trips would be less than 2 hours, so I could drop 40 gals and gain 240 more lbs for carrriage.
I took my partners in a test flight in a PA-34, and they decided the cabin space was far too small. They's flown in Navajo's before and prefer the size. I haven't seen the 340 cabin in person, but I am under the assumption it isn't much larger than the Seneca. I could be corrected however, it may be worth revisiting if the icing situation is the dealbreaker for this particular Ho.
The 402 seems like it would be great, but they seem extremely rare. Only a small handful advertised in the States. None in Canada. It does interest me though.
Also, not the least of issues; through personal contacts the logistics for insurance, and an approved check pilot/50 hour 2nd pilot all align for a Navajo and are already arranged.

There is a P-Navajo currently available for a good price, it would check all the boxes, but I've heard awful things about owning/maintaining them.
Duke is too expensive/too much plane. Personally, I think a Piper Malibu would be great- but the partners want a twin. We're working with a <$300k budget.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Lot's of reasons for the Ho- Widely available. (many private examples as well- I won't buy a charter plane). Parts aren't as expensive and the general consensus seems to be that overall maint is less than a comparably cared-for 3/4 series Cessna.
The leftover useful load for a C340 with full tanks of 163 gal is only 472 lbs. That's pilot and one pax + bags, maybe 2 light ones. there is a VG kit that increases gross by 300 lbs though. Makes things a bit more reasonable. Also most trips would be less than 2 hours, so I could drop 40 gals and gain 240 more lbs for carrriage.
I took my partners in a test flight in a PA-34, and they decided the cabin space was far too small. They's flown in Navajo's before and prefer the size. I haven't seen the 340 cabin in person, but I am under the assumption it isn't much larger than the Seneca. I could be corrected however, it may be worth revisiting if the icing situation is the dealbreaker for this particular Ho.
The 402 seems like it would be great, but they seem extremely rare. Only a small handful advertised in the States. None in Canada. It does interest me though.
Also, not the least of issues; through personal contacts the logistics for insurance, and an approved check pilot/50 hour 2nd pilot all align for a Navajo and are already arranged.

There is a P-Navajo currently available for a good price, it would check all the boxes, but I've heard awful things about owning/maintaining them.
Duke is too expensive/too much plane. Personally, I think a Piper Malibu would be great- but the partners want a twin. We're working with a <$300k budget.

Pretty much every 340 has the VG kit because it is such a good deal. It will easily carry 5 adults with 2 hours of fuel plus IFR reserves. The only hitch is the landing weight stays at 6000 lbs so it is only of limited help on short trips. The cabin is much bigger than a Pa34, although not as roomy as a Navajo. It has a proper airstair door and a walk through cabin. The one I sometimes fly has the sixth seat removed so there is a club seating for two on the right side, a single forward seat plus the two upfront. This works quite well with everyone having lots of leg room and making it easy to get in and out. The Pressurization is sure nice for passenger comfort as even the low teens will often get you above a lot of weather. This isn't really an option for a straight Ho as passengers do not like to suck O2.

I would stay away from a P Navajo. It is a maintenance pig with complicated systems and very problematic geared engines. If you can find one a Mojave varient of the Navajo might be worth a look. It is basically a Cheyenne 1 with Navajo 350 engines. all were built in 1984/85 so they have the latest and newest systems. A very classy ride but also useful load challenged.

[Colonel Sanders]

I personally like the Cessna 421 (11,000 feet of cabin pressurization), carries a fantastic load, known icing, but a lot of people don't like the geared engines. With an IFR GPS, I file direct everywhere at 15/16/17k feet, with cabin altitude between 4k and 6k. Very comfortable, and gets you above most of the wx. They are very popular with a certain segment of the GA world that wants to avoid CAR 604.

[nookie201]

Having owned just about every Navajo model out there P models were my favorite, I've owned 2 of them.
the P is still a Great buy in terms of value for the money and had no major issues with them.
Cost wise, no more $$ maintenance than a cheyenne I or comparable pressurized twin.

Nothing wrong with an AC that does 10K Ft cabin at Fl300, 230KTS, under $190K each, incl tax/annual out the door.

But - Often people compare it to a 310 or 350 and you simply cannot (in terms of maintenance & running costs)
P's also fall in the 3.5 Tonnes category, you'll be hit with Nav Canada charges on flights wherever there's a tower or where airspace charges apply.

I've not owned a Mojave, mainly because they are too overprized. 421's ditto.

If you have unlimited budget and looking for smaller pressurized, skip piston, go cheyenne, great fire sale just about everywhere.

-N

[straightpilot]

skip piston, go cheyenne

Being turbine powered, don't you need a CAR 604/POC and all the overhead that it entails? What's the wait time for a POC now? Six months? A year?

[C172Heavy]

skip piston, go cheyenne

Being turbine powered, don't you need a CAR 604/POC and all the overhead that it entails? What's the wait time for a POC now? Six months? A year?

April of this year saw major changes to the POC rules.. Part 604 now applies to Jet and large aircraft only. I can't remember the weight for "large aircraft" but I'm pretty sure it's 12500 or 15000 lbs or something like that. I can imagine the wait times for the POC are quite long due to TC not quite being prepared for the rules change.

My company operates a twin turbine, pressurized aircraft, under 12500 lbs. and it is private. We do want the POC eventually, for RCAP and RVSM but we are first analyzing the overall cost vs. return before moving ahead. The only requirement on top of general rules is an approved maintenance schedule, which a PRM/AME can write up an submit in short order with the correct manuals and SB's.

Happy plane shopping!