Hacker News Reader

Comment by freerobby | Hacker News Reader

Does your Mooney have the TKS system, or are you saying there's a general benefit to a M20 over a 172 in terms of icing?

View on HN

Any turbocharged airplane with a hot prop will be better than a 172 in icing. Turbo gives you altitude flexibility and power to get out of the ice (rarely more than 4000’ thick vertically) and the hot prop will help you pull through it.

(I have a turbo and TKS on my A36. Almost never need the TKS.)

Thank you! (PPL student here, still lots to learn).

It’s worth noting that single engine FIKI is a little controversial.

Having TKS (or boots) is definitely a safety benefit in case you end up in inadvertent icing, but remember that the system can still get overwhelmed.

Avoiding icing conditions is still a good idea, even with TKS. :)

At a certain point you can question the suitability of the traditional twin engine piston IFR types for true commercial level FIKI. Not least because most of the examples are well into their middle age, most types are somewhat marginal on one engine, and single engine mishandling is rarely survivable.

In reality most people who can afford to run a piston twin are moving down to a Cirrus or moving up to a turbine single.

I think the move up to a turbine single is driven by maintenance dispatch reliability ("will the airplane work when I show up to fly it?") more than weather dispatch reliability ("is the airplane equipped and powerful enough for the weather challenge I'll face today?").

Turbines give you much higher power reserves at low altitude, so they are better in icing on departure and approach, but that difference doesn't come up nearly as often as generalized maintenance issues. (Owning a 1976 piston twin was an overall negative experience. I loved the airplane, but it was a maintenance hog, mostly aging systems and aging design philosophy related.)

I agree 100% that the piston twin is a dying breed, but I think it's almost never to do with FIKI (flight-into-known-icing) issues.

100% this! If I expect icing beyond trace/light, waiting or flying around it is my plan on anything with props. (I didn’t buy TKS to fly in ice; I bought TKS because it was already on the airplane that I otherwise wanted and having it was not a deal-breaker.)

Have TKS. I don't believe you can get that on a 172 (but a 182 you can).

That said I've heard anecdotally a 172/182 can carry ice better than a lot of other aircraft (I've only been iced up in a 172, never on a Mooney). That shouldn't matter anyways since you should avoid ice as much as possible.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com