How short is yours (Oooo er?)

[Kanu]

Any idea's where the shortest runway in the UK is?

The shortest I've come across is at Leicester with one of the grass strips being 335m (Licenced). Any shorter than that?

[matspart3]

Soon to be Licensed 04/22 Grass at Gloucester measures a whopping 302m

[Monocock]

Any shorter than that?

It depends what you consider to be a "runway".

I have a friend (who is based phenominally close to your 335 metre motorway) who is perfectly happy to "put it in" on less than 50% of that as long as conditions permit.

Farmer's fields, beaches, roads and even the odd stately home's gardens are fodder for him to "alight". We're not talking about a microlight either.

It comes down to four things in my opinion.

1 - Pilot capability
2 - Aircraft stall speed
3 - Wind component
4 - Incline

The best Supercub pilot's landing/takeoff run without 3 and 4 above will be outperformed by the best Warrior pilot with favourable No. 3 and 4 above.

Ultimately, a good pilot with the right aircraft and the right conditions can put it down in an incredibly short distance. To give an example I went for a jolly today to WW and was off my strip in under 150 yds and on my return I was stopped within 80% of that. I am not saying that I am a good pilot, just that Points 2,3 and 4 above were favourable.

Now here's some strip flying where factors 1,2,3 and 4 are all there!!!

http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f71/JonoHolland/DSC_2709.jpg

[FlyingForFun]

It comes down to four things in my opinion.

1 - Pilot capability
2 - Aircraft stall speed
3 - Wind component
4 - InclineMonocock, I agree completely with your list (and I think you know a lot more about strip flying than I do, so I'm hardly likely to disagree). Can I please add the aircraft's braking capability to the list, though? This is the main reason why I wasn't happy putting my Europa down on anything really short - I could (with sufficient practice in the weeks immediately beforehand) confidently put it down at the start of a strip, at the right speed, but once it was down I couldn't stop it.

Also, remember that for the vast majority of spamcans, the take-off performance is far more limiting than the landing performance. This means than number 1) on your list is far less important in this type of aircraft, because most pilots can follow the POH instructions for the approved short-field take-off technique with only a very small amount of practice.

FFF
---------------

[Pitts2112]

FFF,

You'd have no problem putting the Europa down on Leicester's "short" runway. I can get the Pitts in there pretty easily. Approach speed 90 mph, slow it down to about 75-80 over the hedge, no problem. And that's with no wind. With any bit of wind, I don't have to slow it down that much over the hedge (my usual speed over the hedge is about 85 mph). What you have to do, though, is aim to touch down on the numbers, not 1/3 down the runway. That's the real key to a lot of strip flying. Also, you slow down in grass very quickly providing there's no slope. Give it a go, at least do a few low approaches or touch and goes to see how you get on.

Having learned strip flying from Monocock's aforementioned mate, and spent that last 8 years considering him my aviation guru, I can attest that I've seen him land ACROSS the big runway at Leicester with the right conditions, and be stopped before getting to the other side. That man truly wears the airplane and knows exactly what it's going to do. That said, he has probably over 2,000 hours in the same airframe, so I think he's starting to get the hang of it. He's an excellent pilot and a great mate!

Pitts2112

[QDMQDMQDM]

Factor number 2, the aircraft stall speed, has been mentioned so far only in passing. Weight obviously affects this and handling qualities dramatically.

A Super Cub one-up with half tanks is a completely different aircraft to one which is at gross weight. Bush pilots operating Super Cubs in and out of marginal strips will go in with minimum fuel and top up by 5 gallons at a time, as needed. On my Super Cubs Hardcore video (!) there is a grizzled Alaskan fellow who operates a 180HP Super Cub without an electrical system to achieve max power to weight ratio and minimum weight.

So important is weight that I would qualify Factor 2 to read: "Aircraft stall speed and weight."

QDM

[chevvron]

Way back in the '60's, there was a magazine called 'Flying Review'. An article by a wartime pilot in this mag told the tale of his party piece with a Harvard.
He would descend over the compass base (about 50ft in diameter roughly) almost fully stalled, and at the last moment, open the throttle. This enabled him to touch down and stop in the diameter of the compass base.
I've seen something similar in a Cessna 150 (F model). The pilot descended the aircraft in a nose up attitude with full flap and a fair bit of power, which he kept on until the wheels touched; there was no discernable flare, and he stopped in less than 100ft.
In this model 150, I was taught a short takeoff technique which doesn't work on later 150's or 152's due to a different aerofoil. It involved selecting flaps 10, then standing on the brakes and opening the throttle fully; when max rpm was achieved, let the brakes off, rotate at 45 mph and climb away at 50! it's frightening the first time you did it, but it worked. I later experienced a similar takeoff in a Loganair Islander at the old Lerwick airstrip, which had a solid stone barn at the south end. The only difference from the 150 was the use of full flap, with an extra bit of flap only allowed for takeoff and selected by tripping a special circuit breaker. This was all licenced and approved by the way! We were airborne in about 100ft.

[camaro]

Netherthorpe

18/36 (Licensed) = 309m.
06/24 (Licensed) = 370m.


Pay us a visit and brush up on your short field technique.

[FullyFlapped]

Camaro,

Interesting one, this. I've landed at Netherthorpe quite a few times, and whilst it's certainly short, I didn't think it was quite as short as you claim : so I looked it up.

AVBRIEF shows the LDA as 06=460m, 24=432m
whereas the AIP shows pretty much the figures you quote (actually 06=407m, 24=370m).

I wonder (a) which is right, (b) where the error has crept in from ? I thought it might be the displaced thresholds, but the numbers don't add up ...

FF :ok:

[Russ.w.]

this is the longest of the four short runways.
http://www.putfile.com/media.php?n=Netherthorpe-RWY-24-June-23-05&width=320

[camaro]

Fully Flapped


Those were the LDA figures (due to displaced thresholds). The TORA's are a bit longer:

18/36 = 382m
06 = 476m
24 = 490m

:)

http://www.sheffair.f9.co.uk/images/egnf.jpg