17 Dec 2025, 19:09 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
| Username Protected |
Message |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: New plane- boots vs no boots Posted: 01 Dec 2025, 23:53 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 04/19/19 Posts: 875 Post Likes: +261 Location: Benton AR KSUZ
Aircraft: Baron B55 Pll
|
|
|
I have decided to sell my PII Baron and go pressurized. I am leaning towards an Aerostar 700 but all the ones I have seen do not have boots. I do not have plans to fly in ice of course but will encounter some I’m sure. Nothing more than climbing through to get above or through to get to land. Curious as why so few have them and thoughts on if they are even needed on a 700? I know Fiki is a different topic but mainly talking unforeseen ice
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New plane- boots vs no boots Posted: 02 Dec 2025, 00:56 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 07/11/11 Posts: 2429 Post Likes: +2840 Location: Woodlands TX
Aircraft: C525 D1K Waco PT17
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I have decided to sell my PII Baron and go pressurized. I am leaning towards an Aerostar 700 but all the ones I have seen do not have boots. I do not have plans to fly in ice of course but will encounter some I’m sure. Nothing more than climbing through to get above or through to get to land. Curious as why so few have them and thoughts on if they are even needed on a 700? I know Fiki is a different topic but mainly talking unforeseen ice If you plan on flying in the flight levels where a pressurized Aerostar is meant to be, and if you plan on cruising along in IMC in the clouds then it is not a matter of planning or not planning to fly in icing. Even if you are down in the tropics, the temperature will be below freezing and you WILL encounter icing when you enter the clouds (visible moisture). I have encountered moderate icing as low as 14K and all the way through FL280 and higher. And this was in summer days as far South as Tabasco, Yucatan and Guatemala - it would be scary and not very smart to attempt this without a FIKI equipped bird. The idea that you will be able to climb through to get above or through to get to land will only work until it doesn't. Bottom line - a pressurized twin with the performance to fly in the flight levels that is not FIKI is a useless airplane. It would be like buying a Ferrari to run errands inside a gated community.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New plane- boots vs no boots Posted: 02 Dec 2025, 01:43 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 04/19/19 Posts: 875 Post Likes: +261 Location: Benton AR KSUZ
Aircraft: Baron B55 Pll
|
|
|
That has been my thinking as well which is why I was surprised to find so many with no boots
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New plane- boots vs no boots Posted: 02 Dec 2025, 02:41 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 01/17/20 Posts: 283 Post Likes: +317
Aircraft: Mooney 231
|
|
|
Richard Collins, the oracle of IFR from Flying magazine, had a Cessna P210 he flew more than 9000 hours. It had all the icing options - boots, windshield heat, heated pitot tube, stall warning, and propeller. He wrote an article or two expressing his ambivalence towards that equipment. His experience was it didn’t work all that well and he always planned flights that avoided significant icing anyway. He believed light planes didn’t belong in ice. He concluded he would have flown just as much without that equipment as he would have with the equipment. Many people feel similarly and just don’t want the expense and hassle of maintaining it. I fly a turbo charged single and flight plan to avoid ice and cancel flights when it looks impossible to avoid. I don’t have deice equipment except a pitot heater and heated prop. I have only cancelled a handful of flights because of icing.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New plane- boots vs no boots Posted: 02 Dec 2025, 08:21 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 06/18/15 Posts: 1244 Post Likes: +509 Location: Alaska/Idaho
Aircraft: Helio Courier, MU2
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I have decided to sell my PII Baron and go pressurized. I am leaning towards an Aerostar 700 but all the ones I have seen do not have boots. I do not have plans to fly in ice of course but will encounter some I’m sure. Nothing more than climbing through to get above or through to get to land. Curious as why so few have them and thoughts on if they are even needed on a 700? I know Fiki is a different topic but mainly talking unforeseen ice I haven’t looked at Aerostars currently for sale but most i looked at when I purchased one in 2015 were FIKI. I only looked at 700s both Machen and Piper. I agree with the others who said it’s virtually a requirement if you are going to fly in below freezing temps
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New plane- boots vs no boots Posted: 02 Dec 2025, 09:41 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 10/18/11 Posts: 1128 Post Likes: +659
Aircraft: Seabee Aerostar 700
|
|
|
join the Aerostar owners association . they have great information on the pro's and cons. A wonderful amount of knowledgeable information about the AEST
if you plan to fly in the northern US and not cancel a lot of trips they are absolutely necessary to utilize an AEST effectively.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New plane- boots vs no boots Posted: 02 Dec 2025, 10:41 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 03/04/14 Posts: 2034 Post Likes: +940 Location: FREDERICKSBURG TX
Aircraft: MOONEY M20TN
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Richard Collins, the oracle of IFR from Flying magazine, had a Cessna P210 he flew more than 9000 hours. It had all the icing options - boots, windshield heat, heated pitot tube, stall warning, and propeller. He wrote an article or two expressing his ambivalence towards that equipment. His experience was it didn’t work all that well and he always planned flights that avoided significant icing anyway. He believed light planes didn’t belong in ice. He concluded he would have flown just as much without that equipment as he would have with the equipment. Many people feel similarly and just don’t want the expense and hassle of maintaining it. I fly a turbo charged single and flight plan to avoid ice and cancel flights when it looks impossible to avoid. I don’t have deice equipment except a pitot heater and heated prop. I have only cancelled a handful of flights because of icing. Things aren't always as forecast, especially depending on where you fly. Although Richard Collins didn't plan flights into significant ice, he still had what was on the airplane in case he encountered in the air something that wasn't as forecast. I would rather have something and not need it than to have nothing, especially on a pressurized airplane which is meant for the FLs.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New plane- boots vs no boots Posted: 02 Dec 2025, 10:53 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 09/08/21 Posts: 61 Post Likes: +12
Aircraft: bonanza A36
|
|
|
I would definitely not own a pressurized airplane without boots.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New plane- boots vs no boots Posted: 02 Dec 2025, 13:55 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 02/28/18 Posts: 93 Post Likes: +43
Aircraft: NA
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I have decided to sell my PII Baron and go pressurized. I am leaning towards an Aerostar 700 but all the ones I have seen do not have boots. I can't imagine flying on an IFR flight plan without anti/deicing equipment. ATC procedures for IFR aircraft are not really resigned to avoid icing -- esp in mountainous terrain where minimum vectoring altitudes are high -- and icing can be unpredictable.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New plane- boots vs no boots Posted: 02 Dec 2025, 14:03 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/30/15 Posts: 797 Post Likes: +841 Location: NH; KLEB
Aircraft: M2, erstwhile G58
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I have decided to sell my PII Baron and go pressurized. I am leaning towards an Aerostar 700 but all the ones I have seen do not have boots. I do not have plans to fly in ice of course but will encounter some I’m sure. Nothing more than climbing through to get above or through to get to land. Curious as why so few have them and thoughts on if they are even needed on a 700? I know Fiki is a different topic but mainly talking unforeseen ice Boots... as others have said, Wx not always as forecast. And even if it is forecast, sometimes it gets "worser, faster" than forecast. IF icing gets moderate to heavy, even with boots, the ice will pile up. But better to have the boots when needed, if for no other reason than to get out of the icing safely. But for IFR and late fall, winter & early spring opns.... really like some way to deal with the ice.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New plane- boots vs no boots Posted: 02 Dec 2025, 14:12 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 01/17/20 Posts: 283 Post Likes: +317
Aircraft: Mooney 231
|
|
|
My best anti-ice/deice equipment are the turbo-charger and O2. They give me a vast envelope of airspace to choose from to avoid ice.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New plane- boots vs no boots Posted: 02 Dec 2025, 14:15 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 11/22/08 Posts: 3117 Post Likes: +1071 Company: USAF Propulsion Laboratory Location: Dayton, OH
Aircraft: PA24, AEST 680, 421
|
|
|
I'm surprised you have found a large number of 700's without boots. You definitely want them. That said, most piston twins, Aerostar included isn't really a plane to continue flying in ice with. I rarely use the boots in anger on mine. But there are a lot of trips I would have cancelled because of forecast or likely icing conditions. Mine is not FIKI as it doesn't have the inboard boots. Coming from a Comanche 250, the beauty of the pressurized Aerostar is the ability to climb or descend out of icing layers.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New plane- boots vs no boots Posted: 02 Dec 2025, 14:17 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 08/13/10 Posts: 1308 Post Likes: +891
Aircraft: Piper Cherokee 180
|
|
|
I'd go for boots. Once, I was coming back from Lynchburg, VA in my Cherokee 180, on the way to Wilmington, NC. Multiple lines of weather. I made it past the northernly one. Felt pretty good. The next line was further south, and it was warmer, so I thought no big deal. In seconds, I was in freezing rain. The windshield looked like frosted shower glass. I could see the wings loading up. I diverted to a nearby airport. Full throttle and the stall warning going off. I tried to stay high but I had no climb left. I was lucky to make it to this little airport. Flew straight in at full throttle. Only way to see the airport was through the little window on the pilots side. I had to slip for a peek out the window which was scary. Touched down with full throttle and no flaps. I pulled the power, and it thudded on the runway. I was able to get off the runway and just sat on the taxiway until my legs stopped shaking. The temperature was so much warmer on the ground that the ice started falling off, guess it was the thump on landing. I hope I never do that again. Get the FIKI, Ralph PS The only deice I had was a heated pitot tube.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025
|
|
|
|