Russian carrier taking off with snow on wings
04-13-2012, 02:10 PM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2008
Posts: 879
A slotted slat wing takes a ridiculous amount of ice to stall. Any roughness past about 30% chord makes very little difference to the stall characteristics of the wing, so I find it very irritating to waste time deicing when all we have is frost patches on the spoilers.
Last edited by FAULTPUSH; 04-13-2012 at 02:20 PM.
04-13-2012, 06:31 PM
#24
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2011
Position: CRJ-700/900 Right Seat
Posts: 52
Ive seen ridiculous things done here, like deicing with rain and temps +4. Or when atis calls for precip and there is absolutely none and people still de-ice for some reason. There is a fine line between being safe and paranoid.
04-14-2012, 03:53 AM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 767 Captain
Posts: 3,989
If the forecast is calling for precip that might require anti-ice and I'm looking at a conga line at a big airport, I'd rather anti-ice and be prepared when I'm number one than have to taxi back because I didn't believe the wx report.
04-14-2012, 09:26 AM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2008
Posts: 879
I'm assuming you're referring to the post immediately previous to your question. My answer would be "for the same reason we take other chances which are much more risky" (e.g. reduced thrust takeoffs, reserve fuel of an hour vs. two hours, using the MEL vs. fixing everything, flying at optimum altitude instead of one with more margin). It's all a risk-benefit equation, and frost that's only on the spoilers makes somewhere between virtually and absolutely no difference. Deicing fluid on the wing (or rain, for that matter) have a far bigger impact on the airflow. When we deice just because there's frost on the spoilers, we're paying hundreds of dollars to decrease the wing's aerodynamics.
04-15-2012, 06:27 PM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2010
Posts: 165
Monday morning quarterbacking here, but that was a pretty ridiculous stunt IMHO. I don't know how long the plane was on the ground but unless you can guarantee that there wasn't an inch of clear ice below that snow that's Russian roulette right there.
Even after liftoff there was trace snow still stuck on that wing. The air passing over the top of the wing should be around 170kts!
Even after liftoff there was trace snow still stuck on that wing. The air passing over the top of the wing should be around 170kts!
04-15-2012, 07:47 PM
#30
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Posts: 72
'Sup cowboy!
I'm assuming you're referring to the post immediately previous to your question. My answer would be "for the same reason we take other chances which are much more risky" (e.g. reduced thrust takeoffs, reserve fuel of an hour vs. two hours, using the MEL vs. fixing everything, flying at optimum altitude instead of one with more margin). It's all a risk-benefit equation, and frost that's only on the spoilers makes somewhere between virtually and absolutely no difference. Deicing fluid on the wing (or rain, for that matter) have a far bigger impact on the airflow. When we deice just because there's frost on the spoilers, we're paying hundreds of dollars to decrease the wing's aerodynamics.
So now you are comparing flex thrust t/o's to taking off with ice on the wing.
I'm very glad to report that the rest of the world doesn't agree with you. Please post what outfit you are with so we can all avidly avoid it.
Also, deicing is free, as far as I'm concerned. When is the last time YOU whipped out the credit card to pay for it? It is a cost of doing business, and any air transport company/aircraft owner is aware of those expenses.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
