Originally Posted by
LarryJ
I don't agree. I think that more icing accidents have come from takeoff attempts with inproperly deiced airplanes. The past decade has seen significant improvement in deicing technology (Type IV fluid), procedures and awareness so that should be improving. Most inflight icing accidents are on smaller airplanes, not airliners (jet or turboprop). There have been some exceptions, particularly the ATR, but that was blamed on inadequate design and training which has now been corrected.
Once in the air, transport category aircraft can take care of themselves in all but the most severe icing.
Aircraft in general are more likely to encounter icing incidents in flight for many reasons, the most obvious being that up is where the clouds are and that if the weather is bad you don't ever have to leave the ground in the first place. However, I will concede that in the air transport category, the majority of fatal incidents do seem to happen at takeoff.
But this part of the thread is discussing the relative safety of RJ vs. turboprops in adverse weather conditions, in particular in cold and/or icing conditions. There is no doubt that a turboprop is more likely to encounter an icing upset in flight than a jet. Not only because it flies slower and lower, but also because a propeller, not a ducted fan, is supplying the thrust. This
recent article from Aviation Week discusses some of these issues in the context of jet vs. turboprop.
This is not to say that turboprops are unsafe or are falling out of the sky right and left. I certainly would not avoid flying on a commercial turboprop. In fact, in good weather, I might prefer them over a small jet just for the adventure factor. But when the weather is bad, be it ice or T-storms, I'd rather take the jet any day.