220m strip - which aircraft?

[Ojuka]

I have a field that is unobstructed at one end with some electricity wires and poles at the other. In all it is only 220m long. Having always wished to have a fun aeroplane parked on my doorstep, can any of you offer any experience of operating particular aircraft out of such a short field?

My initial thoughts were toward a Rans Coyote or Aviat Husky or similar STOL aircraft. Maybe even a three axis microlight. It is the sort of thing I would only fly on a summer evening anyway so outright speed is not an issue.

Or am I plain mad?!

[Monocock]

Bell Jetranger??

Seriously though, however STOL an a/c is, I cannot believe that consistently "safe" operation can be achieved from 220 metres.

The distance does not allow ANY scope for error whatsoever. We can all land our short field a/c in that kind of distance and get up again too but it is generally from a strip that is 400m+.

Just my opinion anyway.

A flexwing micro would be as near as I would get to that length and one with a really meaty engine.

[J.A.F.O.]

Save up for the very best STOL aircraft that you can find and then buy the field next to yours.

[BEagle]

Perhaps when HMFC sells off its Harriers.....

[loftustb]

I agree with Monocock................a helicopter (and even they don't mix well with wires and poles).

BEagle's Harrier idea is good, but it will burn big patches in the grass.

Are you winding us up?

[Pilotage]

There are a few microlights that might do the job.

- Mainair Blade 912 (flexwing) has 140m TODR, 160m LDR

- Savannah (all metal 3-axis) has 198m TODR, 140m LDR.

Both of those are in still air. Overall, I agree with Monocock, and think that a 912 engined flexwing, or (check your bank balance) a helicopter, or (check your life insurance) a gyroplane is the way ahead. I don't know the Husky, but would be very surprised if the Coyote has good-enough short field performance.

BUT, you can help yourself by persuading the PTB to shift the poles and cables, which I'd have thought would cost a fraction of the aircraft cost.

P

[TonyR]

I have flown into some very short places in the Rallye and I dont require 220M to land or take off in but I really dont think anything much less than 350M is safe. ( I have 340 M)

I did fly the Savannah and it would do, as would the CH701 which the Savannah was copied from.

A husky, on paper will do it and I hope soon to test that out.

A gyroplane will only work STOL if you have lots of wind.

As has been stated you need to have margins that will allow you to operate safely in most weather conditions.

All STOL aircrraft require STOL pilots also.

Tony

[shortstripper]

Not impossible at all!

I operate an Evans VP2 from 250m (well I did until it went in the workshop for minor work 18 months ago :( ) But I'd not recommend that particular aeroplane as it's very marginal esp as I have wires one end and a high hedge the other. However, a friend has his Zenair CH701 STOL here and he could very safely operate from about 200m. It fair leaps off the ground!!! ... the Savannah is just a clone so would be fine too. Most microlights could be operated from your strip as could quite a few PFA single seaters.

SS

[Genghis the Engineer]

On which subject, how about a Minimax? Cheap, incredibly short field, happy on grass, and needs about 70m to 50ft.

Only one seat, but that reduces the temptation to press your luck with other people on board.

John Hamer, Secretary of the Minimax club would be the man to talk to, he'll know the beast's capabilities and can probably tell you if any good ones are for sale around the bazaars. He's in the usual PFA and BMAA phone books.

G

[Ojuka]

Pilotage - good point. I will maybe price what the job would cost to bury the wires, then I could extend in to the adjoining paddock and grab another 50m or so.

Monocock- you mention you operate STOL machines - which in particular do you use at the moment? The Zenith CH701 quotes a ground roll of 42m. The new 4 seat CH801 (if and when certified) 88m. The Husky 76m. So to convert ground run to TODR I would guess add another 100m at worst to clear 50'(which is not really an issue), and the maths do seem to work. I take your point about margin for error though.

And yes, you are right about STOL pilot currency, I have around 1000hrs of light GA time and every summer use a 400m strip with a light Cherokee, and fly for a living, so would be fairly confident to try it out (so long as the sums work!!!)

Genghis - yes I know of of an elderly gentleman who operates a Minimax out of 250m where he had previously used a Goldwing microlight canard.

Shortstripper - Thanks for the VP info., and your encouragement.

All good feedback! Keep it coming!

[Genghis the Engineer]

Having owned a Goldwing at one point, anybody who is comfortable flying one out of 250m (or more to the point, landing one in 250m) on a regular basis, I may assure you, has somewhat above average flying ability.

G

[Flyin'Dutch']

We recently acquired a Maule M5 235 and that works well out of a 400m strip. The book says that the ground roll is only 600ft at MAUW, I personally would not try anything shorter than 400m at the moment.

I saw the Bob at Sherlowe do a demo in the Husky and that was very impressive, I could have one of those any day and the quoted groundroll is a fact.

Beyond that I think you are looking at the microlights.

FD

[Whirlybird]

I would check out gyroplanes. I'm not an expert, but I've done a couple of hours in them, and I think you'll find most would cope with 200m even without a wind...with wind they take-off and land in much less. And they are great fun. They do seem to have had a bad press and a lot of accidents recently...maybe check as to why.

[Zlin526]

Would a gyroplane actually reach the end of a 220m strip without having some form of accident? They have a pretty poor accident record:{

My moneys on an Aviat Husky...220m is no problem, even in still air conditions.

[TonyR]

Think of it this way.

STOL aircraft, landing at 50 mph = 80 kph = 22 M per second, if you are a bit high, say from 30 ft over your fence your decent at 300fpm will take 6 seconds or 132 M, say you float for another 2 seconds = 44 M + 132 M = 176 M into your strip

If it takes 70 M ground roll to stop you need 176 + 70 =246 M

And thats if you get the speed right in the first place.

It's what keeps a lot of engineers in work, Fixing bent aircraft.

I am sure my sums will be corrected shortly by others.

Tony

[Zlin526]

Ah yes, but if you are regularly operating into a short strip, your piloting technique needs to be spot-on. Floating into the strip is not an option; planting the aircraft exactly where you want it is the trick, and coming in with power rather than a glide approach is the preferred way. I regularly flew a J3 Cub into a 247m grass strip back in the 80s. Twas never a problem apart from when I had a lardy passenger!

[Clive J]

There is a strip at Terrington sounds just like yours, cables at one end. A flexwing a Shadow and a Rans S6 all used to operate out of it. I flew in and out in my Shadow days but as has been suggested it is less than ideal.

The thing that would swing it, and you're right to contemplate it, is the flying off the doorstep. No pratting about in the car, no hassle just wander out of the back door look left and right to check the weather and then tell the wife you'll be back in a litttle while..............priceless (as the saying goes).

A little practice and any average pilot can take any number of aircraft in and out of 220 metres. Not heavy Stol but ultralights.

I spoke with the Rans (2 seater nose wheelless) pilot, who still flies out of it, some years back and he taught himself using cones to mark out the distance on a regular grass strip.

When he got to the stage that he could land and take off in half the distance he then went over to the strip and has been there ever since.

[TonyR]

I fly the Rallye club from home 3-4 days a week, but when its gusty accross the strip it can become more risk that I care to take so I go somewhere else or take the car.

I also see various STOL aircraft comming in here, some drivers just dont get it right and use up a lot of grass before landing.

I have large motorway traffic cones set 20 m into the strip on each side, if I am not rolling past them on the ground I go around and do it again, (not very often but I have had to a few times)

I M O P, 220 M is too short, but we all have the right to do whatever we want.

Tony

[QNH 1013]

As I see it, it isn't the short length that is the problem, it is the poles and wires that reduce the option of a late go-around. It doesn't matter how current you are, there are always things that can change your touchdown point such as gusts or even small thermals as you cross the thresholds. You can get some clues from movement of crops / long grass / dust / and even windsocks, but you will always be surprised sometime.

I used to know a chap who made a strip behind his house and I believe the electricity company came and put the wires underground for him without charge. Certainly he told me he didn't pay for it to be done, and the wires are underground across the end of the strip now.

Without removing the wires, it sounds like a one-way strip, and you will always be cursing the wind. Even if you pay to have the wires moved, its got to be much cheaper than hangarage at an airfield.

Go for it.

[Whirlybird]

One thing's for certain, a helicopter could get in there easily. Why not get yourself a PPL(H) and a second hand R22 and you'll have no problems...and lots more fun. :ok:

[Flyin'Dutch']

Come on Tony,

If you fly a STOL machine in 200m you will not be a bit high and float it in!

If you can't nail the height and speed there is no place for you at the inn!

FD

PS Whirly follow the PPL(H) bit but if you wanted to propose a better option why mention the R22? ;)

Nice to see you about on here a bit more frequent again!

[TonyR]

FD,

As I said, I land in the first 20 M, at the correct speed, 99/100.

But I see a lot of experienced pilots who continue the landing long after they should have gone around. I have said before on another thread, I am not big on depending on brakes.

Take the Maule 180 (tailwheel of course), It will both land and take off, in less than 100 M with 2 up and 1/2 fuel, but I have seen pilots using 2-300 M, just by being a tad fast.

Many STOL aircraft (especially tailwheel) will not land unless they are at a speed when they don't want to fly again, this means approaching every time at the correct speed, something which is difficult in gusty conditions.

The usability of 220 M will frustrate the hell out of the owner no matter what aircraft he has.

Tony

[shortstripper]

Id dispute that last bit ... sorry Tony! Zenair STOL does it easy!!!

SS

I'll post a vid of it later

[TonyR]

shortstripper,

Ok I give in, yes it is possible to operate out of 730 feet (sounds better than 220 M), but I would get rid of the wires.

I'd have to agree that the CH701 (http://www.zenithair.com/stolch701/7-perf.html) or the Savannagh (http://www.sandtoft-ultralights.co.uk/) (I have flown both) are the only a/c I can think off than will have the X wind ability combined with exceptional STOL performance to make the strip usable most days. The downside is the low cruise speed of 75-85 mph.

John Anderson, a friend from the US who visits us on this forum from time to time (FAA Old Timer), has operated his Cub for over 40 years from a 900 ft (270M) strip with a 6 ft fence at each end, He is not a small man and flies 2 up most flights without ever having any incident. ( he has set a limit of 15 knots accross).

I know from my own strip, if it is short it should be wide this can help in X wind situations both for take off and landing.

I had a dream of having a strip at the house and it took over 20 years to become a reality. Anyway the sun is out and the wind is down the strip, so I'm out the back door and off for a flight.

Stay safe,

Tony

[Whirlybird]

Flyin'Dutch,

It's OK; I'm quite used to digs at the R22. ;) But quite seriously, I mentioned it because I think it compares quite favourably in price to some of the aircraft being mentioned. And quite honestly, if you can afford it, and don't have that much space, a helicopter is the answer. 200m is oodles of space for a helicopter, not even challenging. So if what you want is a home-based flying machine, it seems to me the most sensible suggestion.

However, don't let me spoil the fun. Feel free to use pages and pages discussing whether you can get over your wires and home safely, on a nil wind day in marginal vis on wet grass after a tiring long flight. I'll even join in if I feel like it. ;)

[shortstripper]

Whirlybird ...

Trouble is the horrendous cost of getting a PPL(H) in the first place :{

I had a go in a Westland Wasp a couple of weeks ago and I reckon I'd take ages to get the hang of it. Bl :mad: Y impressive though!

SS

Edited to include Zenair take off and fly-by video. It's a 12mb mpg file so unless you have broadband it will take a fair while to download.

www.ivannn.flyer.co.uk/zenn.mpg

The strip is exactly 250m hedge to hedge. At one end there is a 5-10' hedge and the other has 30' telephone wires about 50m further on from the 6' fence.

[Ojuka]

Whirlybird. Got a PPL (H) some years ago but just keep it current and no more. Decent R22 (though I'd prefer an Enstrom or a Hughes 269) at £70k, and I would guess £20k+ a year to run. Small aircraft such as a Rans half the price and surely only less than half that to run.

The one that seems most appealing is the Zenair CH801 4 seater kit plane 180hp but it has yet to be PFA/CAA certified in this country.

Husky again good choice but lucky to see one used in this country, and new £100k plus.

Surprised the electricity board buried the wires for no cost. A flying farmer I know said they wanted £7k many years ago to bury 70m of cable.

[Ojuka]

Shortstripper - EXCELLENT!

Downloaded the file and the music made me laugh out loud! It certainly is a slap in the face for the sceptics! Brilliant stuff!

[Kingy]

I regularly fly into a little paddock roughly 150m long in the L4, it is on a steep hill though but this means there is no go around lower than about 50ft. I would not hesitate in taking her into a 220m flat strip if light but two up I like at least 250m.
Something like a Kitfox would be a good choice.. They will get off the ground in less than 100m under most circumstances, But if you want a 'real' aeroplane how about a L4/J3 with a C85 conversion...?

Another small point, whenever I buy an aircraft I always have to junk the over-coarse cruise prop most seem to have fitted and replace it with a modern climb replacement - always works wonders and truly transformed the performance of my Cub....
My point is - many 'stol' aircraft are never 'stol-ed' and as such are often fitted with inappropriate props... something to watch out for!

Kingy

[DeepC]

I'd be very surprised if EDF were to bury wires at no cost. What wires are they? 3 wires on wooden posts?

I'd expect to not see much change out of £15k for getting wires buried especially if they are not just local supply cables.

Doing a lot of the work yourself (such as trenching and ducting with a draw string) would save you thousands over the EDF cost (cost+overhead+Morrisons cost + overhead). Then just get them to come out and reroute. Check the specifications for the ducting with EDF before you start.

DeepC

[Genghis the Engineer]

Incidentally, so far as I know, the CH801 isn't currently going through approval in the UK. I've also heard some less than favourable things about it's handling qualities, in particular pitch stability, from a British Test Pilot who did an assessment on one in Canada. (Mind you, that's not all that unusual for North American homebuilts, and Chris Heinz in particular always seems to have regarded pitch stability as a "nice to have" rather than the "essential" we tend to regard it as over here).

I have flown both the Savannah and the CH701 and would be very happy flying both out of short strips. Given a choice I'd probably go for the Savannah, not because it's a better aeroplane (to be honest, they're much the same) but because it's about 10kg and £10,000 lighter.

Re: Kingy's point on coarse .v. fine props. I agree, many STOL aeroplanes have a coarser pitch that degrades STOL performance. However, this is usually because if you pitch for best take-off and climb, you degrade the cruise. Most pilots would probably be happy with a 200 (instead of 150) metre take-off, in exchange for a 75 (instead of 65) knot cruise.

G

[Kingy]

G,

In my experience it's not as clear cut as that. Take my Sky Scooter for example, Having broke the old Lodge prop (long story... walked into it..!) I replace it with a modern GT of roughly 2" finer pitch. The difference was amazing - ground roll works out to be around 2/3 and the time to climb 1000ft has dropped from 245s to 110s, all for a penalty of perhaps 3-4 mph in the cruise at the same RPM.

I have noted the same startling differences in the Cub too, except it actually cruises faster now...

I'm saying that often the cruise is impacted only slightly if at all, and the benefits in take off performance and climb can be huge.

Best

Kingy (always trying to clear that hedge)

[QDMQDMQDM]

150HP Super Cub

Of course.

[airborne_artist]

I paid Southern Electricity £3,400 to erect a new pole, remove one pole, and bury about 75 m of three phase cable. The overhead cable was in the way of buildings we have since erected. We dug and back-filled the trench, about 1m deep as I recall.

[Ojuka]

Was that the three lines commonly seen on wooden poles?

this gives me something to go on; thanks for that.

[Teddy Robinson]

Christain Husky would do the job nicely ... at a price ! .. but whatever you choose, a bit of advice from a QFI.

Go somewhere with lots of runway, a good instructor, and practise practise practise, when and only when you really have STOL operations taped, head for your strip .. with your instructor to make up the weight .. and practise.
Do not become a statistic. :cool:

[Blind lemon]

Has any body mentioned a Storch, obviously not the original but the kit version from the land of OZ.

Good for a 30ft take off roll in a 15knot headwind....apparently

That should do the job

:ok: