At AMS last Saturday, where we we had to sit on the ground for three hours in a snowstorm, that was exactly the procedure once de-icing started. I even have a picture but don't know how to post it....

Ex Cargo and Albert, You need to call the FAA tomorrow; and the guys who are wasting $$$$$ on this hare-brained scheme. :hmm:

Sunday, December 12, 2010

Radiant Aviation

Radiant Aviation Services, Inc. has developed, patented and sells the world’s only infrared alternative to traditional glycol-based aircraft deicing. Radiant deicing systems are fully approved for use in the United States by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

Radiant’s patented technology was developed in cooperation with the FAA in the mid-1990’s. Radiant facilities are currently installed and operating at New York’s JFK airport, one of the busiest international gateway’s in the world and at Wisconsin’s Rhinelander airport, serving the general aviation and regional airline community.

Home | IR Deicing | Radiant Energy Corporation

Confirmation
 

Thank you Mr PiG for those pictures.

This confirms my thought on the incident.

Standing at that platform I recall it being really difficult, with all the bright beams out to facilitate the de-icing crew in their job of getting the ice/snow off, to distinguish the taxiway lay-out in front of the cockpit with the sea of green and blue lights/refelctors.

You actually have to taxi quite a distance straight ahead before you're even close to any taxi way, however an airport perimeter road you have to cross to get there actually looks like a taxiway as well. And, believe me or not, to make a turn into that perimeter road you have to turn as you're leaving the platform. Hitting everything with your tail.

Now, I don't think the crew left for the airport to go around injuring ground crew that day. And most probably it was the crews first actual de-icing is a decade or so. And that West platform is also of quite recent origin so they've probably never been there in the first place.

No complacency but Murphy. Could've happened to anyone.

I do accept the fact it's rather interesting to see another dent in KLM's sometimes a bit arrogant attitude of their reputation. It's keeping them sharp. H*ll, it's keeping everybody sharp.

I hope for a speedy recovery of that poor chap.
Smooth landings,
NK

Ok reasons it is not a great idea.

The various Glycol solutions are designed to "stick" to the aircraft after de-icing, hence why you have a holdover time, if you just remove the ice then you are asking it to be re-iced, with no protection.

Would you really want to take an aircraft for a 15 minute taxi which is perfectly clean of ice but has no ice protection in conditions along the lines of M01/M00 +SN or M06/M06 FZDZ

I also would like to know the effect this will have on fuel, electronics etc, chemical de-icing is fluid adiabatic process. Heating the aircraft on the other hand will increase pressure, according to Charles's Law. I'm not sure I would fancy that on an aircraft with full fuel tanks....

It's de-icing on the cheap, that's all it is.

Ex Cargo, What is a great idea is to read stuff before you launch into criticising that same stuff.

In addition to the fact that infra red deicing (of whatever form) has zero anti-icing properties, it's not even 100% effective for de-icing. Our advice for our types using it is:

Its certainly no solution for the problems of having de-icing trucks near aircraft.

I'm really struggling to understand the point of it then, so it de-ices the aircraft and then you have to apply glycol to keep it anti-iced when that would have done just as good a job to do de-ice it :confused:

I don't buy the environmental angle either, glycol is easily either decomposed or recycled, all's you are doing with this vast IR array is creating a load of CO2 and depleting fossil fuels.

ex cargo clown
 

One of us must be a clown here, and if we know "Charles's Law", then we don't know much about the airplanes...not even about a full car-fuel tanks...

ECC

What it saves is the bulk of the de-icing application if using a two step technique.

Using fluids alone, you'd use hot type I or hot water to remove the contaminant, then Type II III or IV for anti-icing protection.

With infra-red, you can remove most of the contaminant without using Type I - our recommendation is for just a light spray of Type I after the IR has done its thing. You'd still need Type II III or IV for anti-icing.

The biggest advantage is when you're dealing with overnight frost, and the conditions are otherwise good. Then you just need the IR and can skip the second step. No fluid used.

Incidentally, anti-icing fluids aren't as good for de-icing (much more expensive, too) and in one-step operations you don't get the full benefit of the properties of the anti-icing fluids.

Don't worry, I know about both, and I understand with increased pressure you have the tank venting it, I wasn't suggesting you would have a complete catastrophe or anything of the sort.

In essence the idea is akin to a giant toaster, It just seems that it is using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut. If overnight conditions are conducive to frost, but >0 temperatures are expected by departure and frost is expected, then just throw a thin insulating sheet over the wings the night before, that is teathered down. Then anti-ice it properly the next day.

On B747's and the like? You must be kidding!

Maybe, maybe not.....but I think my original idea of the gantry (or the hangar as in the infra red idea) is a winner, irrespective of whatever's used inside it :)

New Kid

It's not in the category of mistakes such as taking of from a taxiway or taxiing into a new passenger terminal or taxiing into a grass mower which KLM has done in the past. In this case the crew was not in a good position to avoid this incident. Just very interesting to find out where the communication process things were assumed which should have been checked. As said, the crew is in a difficult position unless they decide to check for themselves, but most of us aren't that paranoid.

Anyway, I just hope the crew had the decency to visit the poor chap in hospital.

A chappette actually, who was helping the company out during the deicing season. Apparently she has two smashed vertebrae and is recovering. I understand that she was in the KLM holding pool and was soon to join as pilot. I hope that this will still happen for the poor girl. And I'm sure that the crew will visit her, if they haven't already done so. These guys are human after all.

PM

No the girl was actually the supervisor of the spot that day (not a aspirant pilot), the guy in the safearo (closed basket 1man oprating vehicle) was pulled over by the horizontal stabilizer. The KLM crew of that day is not to blame, they had no way of knowing it was not clear, other then phisically checking from the cabin. The captain visited the operator in the hospital a few days later and the whole KLM crew signed a card and send him flowers. He is actually home and recovering pretty good.
It was a really busy that day and workload was high. It was a combination of factors which caused this accident, as always. It remains work by humans, mistakes are made, just like the taxiway incident of KLM. It's sooo bizar thinking that someone could ever make such a big mistake like that, that you just dont calculate on it happening.

About the IR deicing. It could work when there is no precipitation. Normally a 1step method is used in such conditions. This means A lot of HOT water (80C/176F) and a little bit of type 1 fluid (normally about 30%, depending on OAT) just to make sure that the water used for deicing wont freeze up again.
Type1 has no deicing function (in this way) it is only the hot water and the force with which it is applied, which clean the wing of any conatminations.

Then there is any form of precipitatio, freezing fog or cold soaked wings, a 2 step method is used. Which means first cleaning the wing with Hot water and a bit of type 1 (as discribed above) and then the second step, which is 100% Cold type 2. This is a much thicker fluid (like a blanked) and is designed to protect the wing against contamination (time depending on OAT and type of precipitation), this fluid will fall of during raotation of the aircraft, or at least it is designed to.

Glycol is not very harmful to the environment, the only thing is, it subtracts oxygen out of water, so all life in the water will die.

I belive the United Crayfish & Burrowers Union will beg to differ...

Just a comment on infra-red deicing.
There is an installation at OSL airport. A B737 sized hangar with no doors. It was abandoned after a short trial period. The infrared worked well, but left water on the wings so a truck was required to spray deicing fluid afterwards. So the aircraft had to taxi into the hangar, then taxy to the deice pad for spraying. It just took too long and wasn't practical.

Final report
 

The final report was published two weeks ago.
Dutch version:

English version is not available yet.

Improved Google translation of the conclusions:

And then yet more ground handling jobs down the tubes.

Edit: Tried to quote and made a hash of it, reply in refrence to suggestion of automated traffic light deicing sytem