lomapaseo, not sure that I can elaborate further. My post was a quote not my statement, but I totally agree with it.
From
NASA pilots guide to in-flight icing
“Wings that are thin or have sharp leading edges are more efficient ice collectors. For the reason smaller, thin aerofoils may accrete more ice faster than large thick airfoils. A large transport aircraft will accrete proportionally less ice than a smaller aircraft traversing the same environment”.
The issue “the nose radome ice accretion should be much lower than the tailplane, which does seem to go against icing test flight experience “, is probably one of proportion (as in NASA’s text ‘proportionally’) as the ice accretion depends on the ‘finess ratio’. Therefore you have to compare thick fuselages with ‘thinner’ wings and ‘thinner’ tailplanes, all with different finess ratios; I suspect that in reallity a nose radome to fuselage length has a low finess ‘thin’ ratio in comparison to a wing. Also, I suspect that there are other modifying effects i.e sweepback; the ‘thin’ wing on the Stealth Fighter apparently does not collect ice.
... and now you can tell us about engine spinners, fan baldes etc :-)