Croydon "why grass"
WHBM asks why so many of our pre war civil airfields were only grass.
Yes, the aircraft then operating would have needed to take off into wind,and as many of them were without nav aids or gyro instuments winter flying was limited,so the expense of tarmac was not deemed worthwhile.
Fast forward to WW2 and you have a requirement for heavy aircraft to operate at any time,and therefore cost is secondary.
Gatwick blossomed later as a charter "inclusive flights" field and had to expand after the war as Londons "second airport" but only had a runway from 1958.
I never quite understood why it was not developed more during the war, but it was one of the few to escape the multiple runway additions of its regional partners,although it had the steel and wire tracking laid to reinforce the grass surface.
Croydon had nowhere to expand and therefore was closed as Gatwick rose from its waterlogged past.
The problem from operating off soft ground is the lack of performance information that gives you the exact distance you may need to get off with a safety margin,couple this with most grass airfields having to reduce the TORA at times and it becomes a commercial no no.
Of course Croydons demise was Biggin Hills gain,so at least the huge expansion of private flying in the 60's had somewhere to operate from.