Short/Rough Field techniques.
Why do it if it's not fun?
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,782
Likes: 12
From: Bournemouth
I think it's near the top-left of the picture.... from the village, follow the road up and to the left, and there's a green/brown field to the right of the road. Looks like there's a runway in the field, with a definite dog-leg in it.
So, do we get to find out???
FFF
---------------
[Edit - Genghis said the strip has "high obstructions". Can't see too many of them on the area I've identified, so I think I'm wrong. Now I'm really curious!]
So, do we get to find out???
FFF
---------------
[Edit - Genghis said the strip has "high obstructions". Can't see too many of them on the area I've identified, so I think I'm wrong. Now I'm really curious!]
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
From: Home
A favourite spot to compare with Chuck's. It's a little spot called La Croix Rozier in the Beaujolais region of France. It's about 250m long, with an initial slope of 26 degrees, then a slightly more level section, then a steep slope again before the top platform.
Here are some photos.
You aim at the trees, and start the round out you're about 50ft agl. If you get it right, the ground comes up to meet the wheels just as you reach Vs!
On take off, the trees at the end look very close sometimes....
Ideally you'd want a 10kt tailwind for landing - the slope will stop you even if you land long, and the wind will help you take off.
Sorry about the quality - it was a murky day, and I think I had the camera set to low resolution....
(Edited due to technical incompetence at posting links....)
Here are some photos.
You aim at the trees, and start the round out you're about 50ft agl. If you get it right, the ground comes up to meet the wheels just as you reach Vs!
On take off, the trees at the end look very close sometimes....
Ideally you'd want a 10kt tailwind for landing - the slope will stop you even if you land long, and the wind will help you take off.
Sorry about the quality - it was a murky day, and I think I had the camera set to low resolution....
(Edited due to technical incompetence at posting links....)
Last edited by Aerobatic Flyer; 10th October 2002 at 16:50.
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
From: on your left, a little low.....
SA bush strips...
Sennadog,
most of the bush strips I have seen in SA look similar to the piccy of Mt Bosavi that Chimbu posted.
One thing to bear in mind is that a fair number of them are cut out of the middle of timber plantions and the challenge for lowtime pilots is mainly to fly the approach... short fields are not too common because space is not a problem and the terrain is often very accomodating. The challenge is a field that is surrounded by 50-60 foot gum tree plantations, even in light winds...
Most of the fields I have used in the UK are shorter than most that I have used in SA.
Density Altitude and location have been more of a challenge.
Sky
P.S. got space in your case...
most of the bush strips I have seen in SA look similar to the piccy of Mt Bosavi that Chimbu posted.
One thing to bear in mind is that a fair number of them are cut out of the middle of timber plantions and the challenge for lowtime pilots is mainly to fly the approach... short fields are not too common because space is not a problem and the terrain is often very accomodating. The challenge is a field that is surrounded by 50-60 foot gum tree plantations, even in light winds...
Most of the fields I have used in the UK are shorter than most that I have used in SA.
Density Altitude and location have been more of a challenge.
Sky
P.S. got space in your case...
QDMQDMQDM...
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
From: www.tiovicente.com
Some really solid adivce here - cheers peeps.
A bit of background first....
Firstly, what I meant as "Rough strips" is that they look rough to me in the pictures that I've seen compared to the normal grass ones that I land on.
Secondly, as I obviously haven't repeated myself enough times, I am Captain Cautious and as an example, if I have the choice between a Bush strip that is 700m and one 30 miles away that is 1000m then I'm going for the longer strip. This holiday is about improving my flying, getting experience and seeing what looks to be a fantastic country. In other words, my b*lls are fine - I'm not out to prove that they are made of steel!
Chimbu chuckles - I wouldn't even think about trying to land at one of those strips, let alone even attempt it at this stage although I hope that one day I'll be good enough to have a stab with a local onboard.
The chap I'm renting from insists that you take a two hour course/check ride and I'm insisting on 4 hours minimum so I hope this puts it into perspective what I'm all about. As I do when sailing, I normally collar the nearest salty old sea dog, buy him a beer and get the inside gen and I'll do the same over there.
As I've been told, most flights in this area are of about 2 hours duration as the most I've done so far is 1 hour I need to get more air time (I sound like a mobile phone salesman here
) amongst other things.
Anyway, minor rant over.
There is some good stuff on here. Stoke looks worth a look as it's not too far from here and is the kind of thing I'm after. As I said before it's easy to do a short(ish) field landing when you've got 700m to play with but the real thing has got to be better.
Cheers All.
A bit of background first....
Firstly, what I meant as "Rough strips" is that they look rough to me in the pictures that I've seen compared to the normal grass ones that I land on.
Secondly, as I obviously haven't repeated myself enough times, I am Captain Cautious and as an example, if I have the choice between a Bush strip that is 700m and one 30 miles away that is 1000m then I'm going for the longer strip. This holiday is about improving my flying, getting experience and seeing what looks to be a fantastic country. In other words, my b*lls are fine - I'm not out to prove that they are made of steel!
Chimbu chuckles - I wouldn't even think about trying to land at one of those strips, let alone even attempt it at this stage although I hope that one day I'll be good enough to have a stab with a local onboard.
The chap I'm renting from insists that you take a two hour course/check ride and I'm insisting on 4 hours minimum so I hope this puts it into perspective what I'm all about. As I do when sailing, I normally collar the nearest salty old sea dog, buy him a beer and get the inside gen and I'll do the same over there.
As I've been told, most flights in this area are of about 2 hours duration as the most I've done so far is 1 hour I need to get more air time (I sound like a mobile phone salesman here
) amongst other things.Anyway, minor rant over.
There is some good stuff on here. Stoke looks worth a look as it's not too far from here and is the kind of thing I'm after. As I said before it's easy to do a short(ish) field landing when you've got 700m to play with but the real thing has got to be better.
Cheers All.
Carbonfibre-based lifeform
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
From: London
Stoke - the answer
The runway at Stoke is highlighted this time.
The curved feature across the centre of the picture is a railway. What you can't see in this view are the high-voltage power lines and pylons which run next to the railway and right along the edge of the strip, just to keep things interesting!
The runway at Stoke is highlighted this time.
The curved feature across the centre of the picture is a railway. What you can't see in this view are the high-voltage power lines and pylons which run next to the railway and right along the edge of the strip, just to keep things interesting!
Grandpa Aerotart
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 3
From: SWP
Sennadog,
Good lad...I wasn't trying to lecture you however many pilots do try really dumb things and I was a little worried you might head off into the veld and attempt something too far beyond your experience...stretching yourself is a good thing, provided it's incremental
Steep strips are not hard of themselves Senna, 10 or so 'circuits' at Kamalai and you would, probably, have it (reasonably) down pat. The slope gives you a fair bit of leeway for little 'imperfections' in technique as long as you don't end up low...that can be a killer....windsheer can make them a little more sporting but on a calm morning they are just good fun. Kanobea is flat but the terrain(and strong winds at certain times of the year) was the killer...from memory there were 4 wrecks at Kanobea one of which was a Tubine Porter.
Can't work out why spotting Stoke was so hard...look in the middle of most peeps piccies and you see the subject
.
Aerobatic Flyer,
That little spot looks like a hoot.
The rule of thumb we used for steep strips in PNG was, < 5% Vref, 5 to 10% Vref + 5kts, > 10% Vref + 10kts...power stayed on till you were in the landing attitude, came off a bit for touchdown then straight back on again to get you to the top.
17% average is as steep as I've ever experienced but the steeper the better as far as I'm concerned. At 25% 250m is probably the equivalent of 750m+ flat...except you couldn't stop from more than about 15kts on takeoff on that slope
Final approach was always flown exactly as you would to any flat runway, ie 3%, except you obviously must 'look' very high going into a steep runway. We had a bunch in PNG where the first 60 or 90 meters was down at 5% followed by 17 to 20% up for the final 300 meters giving an overall gradient of about 13 or 15%, which was how gradients were calculated there, average between each end.
Clearly you had to 'look' low going into these but as soon as you crossed the threshold you would look high, touchdown on the downslope and POWER up the hill...usually through a big muddy hole at the bottom....just all sorts of fun
Chuck.
PS Here's a piccy of short finals at Kanobea( elev 4000') taken by Pinky the Pilot from the RHS of an Islander, presumably taken while he was on area famil before being checked in there himself. It's taken from just past the closer ridgeline...looks innocuous enough until you try it when there is 15kts of quartering tailwind from the left...power would often go from takeoff pwr to idle to takeoff pwr and back to idle again in 30 seconds of final approach. Bad enough in an Islander with instant throttle response but far more sporting in a -200 Otter with PT6-20s that had 8 seconds of spool up time between stabilised idle and any meaningfull thrust
That lends new meaning to anticipation...some days you gave it away on right base and flew home because there just wasn't enough travel in the throttles
Takeoff was a hoot in those conditions as well
Kanobea Approach
Good lad...I wasn't trying to lecture you however many pilots do try really dumb things and I was a little worried you might head off into the veld and attempt something too far beyond your experience...stretching yourself is a good thing, provided it's incremental
Steep strips are not hard of themselves Senna, 10 or so 'circuits' at Kamalai and you would, probably, have it (reasonably) down pat. The slope gives you a fair bit of leeway for little 'imperfections' in technique as long as you don't end up low...that can be a killer....windsheer can make them a little more sporting but on a calm morning they are just good fun. Kanobea is flat but the terrain(and strong winds at certain times of the year) was the killer...from memory there were 4 wrecks at Kanobea one of which was a Tubine Porter.
Can't work out why spotting Stoke was so hard...look in the middle of most peeps piccies and you see the subject
.Aerobatic Flyer,
That little spot looks like a hoot.
The rule of thumb we used for steep strips in PNG was, < 5% Vref, 5 to 10% Vref + 5kts, > 10% Vref + 10kts...power stayed on till you were in the landing attitude, came off a bit for touchdown then straight back on again to get you to the top.
17% average is as steep as I've ever experienced but the steeper the better as far as I'm concerned. At 25% 250m is probably the equivalent of 750m+ flat...except you couldn't stop from more than about 15kts on takeoff on that slope
Final approach was always flown exactly as you would to any flat runway, ie 3%, except you obviously must 'look' very high going into a steep runway. We had a bunch in PNG where the first 60 or 90 meters was down at 5% followed by 17 to 20% up for the final 300 meters giving an overall gradient of about 13 or 15%, which was how gradients were calculated there, average between each end.
Clearly you had to 'look' low going into these but as soon as you crossed the threshold you would look high, touchdown on the downslope and POWER up the hill...usually through a big muddy hole at the bottom....just all sorts of fun
Chuck.
PS Here's a piccy of short finals at Kanobea( elev 4000') taken by Pinky the Pilot from the RHS of an Islander, presumably taken while he was on area famil before being checked in there himself. It's taken from just past the closer ridgeline...looks innocuous enough until you try it when there is 15kts of quartering tailwind from the left...power would often go from takeoff pwr to idle to takeoff pwr and back to idle again in 30 seconds of final approach. Bad enough in an Islander with instant throttle response but far more sporting in a -200 Otter with PT6-20s that had 8 seconds of spool up time between stabilised idle and any meaningfull thrust
That lends new meaning to anticipation...some days you gave it away on right base and flew home because there just wasn't enough travel in the throttlesTakeoff was a hoot in those conditions as well
Kanobea Approach
Last edited by Chimbu chuckles; 11th October 2002 at 00:11.
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
From: www.tiovicente.com
Chimbu chuckles. No worries mate. You put it a much better way than I did. Incremental stretching is what I'm after to gain experience.
Fly Stimulator. I take it you've landed at Middle Stoke? I've had a quick chat with a guy there who tells me that they've had a Warrior and 172 in there so it should be feasible with a Katana to begin with. As it's not far from here, I won't need much fuel and Rochester and Southend are close by for a diversion if required.
I need to get a copy of AFE as it's not in Pooleys.
What is the microlight frequency? Apparently, they use this frequency and I'm not sure how it differs from the RT I'm used to?
For information. The airfield number is: 01634 270236.
Fly Stimulator. I take it you've landed at Middle Stoke? I've had a quick chat with a guy there who tells me that they've had a Warrior and 172 in there so it should be feasible with a Katana to begin with. As it's not far from here, I won't need much fuel and Rochester and Southend are close by for a diversion if required.
I need to get a copy of AFE as it's not in Pooleys.
What is the microlight frequency? Apparently, they use this frequency and I'm not sure how it differs from the RT I'm used to?
For information. The airfield number is: 01634 270236.
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
From: Home
Chuck,
The rule of thumb I use is a little different from your's. Approach is at 1.3Vs for slopes up to 10%, then - in theory - you add 1km/h (French aeroplanes.....) per % after that. Obviously things aren't as precise as that in real life, but you get the idea. So for a 25% slope, I'd be looking for an approach 15km/h faster than normal. For some short strips with a level touchdown point, a slightly slower approach is sometimes used if conditions are calm.
Power is kept on somtimes until contact is made, especially when using skis in the winter, then reduced momentarily to ensure you're firmly down before adding power again to climb the slope.
The wind and thermals can often conspire to mess things up nicely, though! This strip (also here ) is a case in point. It's 320m long, 10m wide with a 17% slope (concave then convex) at 6300ft altitude. In a headwind or crosswind from the right, the approach is flown in a descending airflow, which in summer is punctuated by vigorous thermals coming off rocks that are exposed to the sun. The density altitude is high if it's hot, and an on/off button would sometimes be more use than a throttle lever!
I'm afraid of breaking things (especially myself!) so I don't go there alone except when things are nice and calm!
Kanobea looks entertaining. I imagine with all those ridges the approach is a bit bumpy whatever the wind direction...? From the photo, it looks at least that you have an escape route to the right.
You also have a nice juicy variety of tropical bug that must help you to fix the aiming point! Do they bite?
The rule of thumb I use is a little different from your's. Approach is at 1.3Vs for slopes up to 10%, then - in theory - you add 1km/h (French aeroplanes.....) per % after that. Obviously things aren't as precise as that in real life, but you get the idea. So for a 25% slope, I'd be looking for an approach 15km/h faster than normal. For some short strips with a level touchdown point, a slightly slower approach is sometimes used if conditions are calm.
Power is kept on somtimes until contact is made, especially when using skis in the winter, then reduced momentarily to ensure you're firmly down before adding power again to climb the slope.
The wind and thermals can often conspire to mess things up nicely, though! This strip (also here ) is a case in point. It's 320m long, 10m wide with a 17% slope (concave then convex) at 6300ft altitude. In a headwind or crosswind from the right, the approach is flown in a descending airflow, which in summer is punctuated by vigorous thermals coming off rocks that are exposed to the sun. The density altitude is high if it's hot, and an on/off button would sometimes be more use than a throttle lever!
I'm afraid of breaking things (especially myself!) so I don't go there alone except when things are nice and calm!
Kanobea looks entertaining. I imagine with all those ridges the approach is a bit bumpy whatever the wind direction...? From the photo, it looks at least that you have an escape route to the right.
You also have a nice juicy variety of tropical bug that must help you to fix the aiming point! Do they bite?
Carbonfibre-based lifeform
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
From: London
sennadog,
Yes, I've been in there, but it was in one of the orange Shadows from the unfashionable corner of Redhill. They will take off and land on a sixpence, so I didn't have to worry about the bend in the runway as I never had to get that far.
Having since moved on to metal aeroplanes as well, I'd say you'd be OK in a 172 or similar as long as the ground wasn't wet and you didn't take many friends or lots of fuel along with you.
I'd imagine a Katana would handle it easily, especially if it was just 1 POB.
The microlight common frequency is 129.825. Be prepared for exciting chat along the lines of -
"You there John?"
"Yes. Where are you Bob?".
"Behind you John."
"Where's Bert then?"
I'll be at Redhill both days this weekend, so send me a private message if you want to meet up to have a look at the AFE guide. I wouldn't mind having a look around your club, since a tailwheel conversion on the Cub looks appealing.
Yes, I've been in there, but it was in one of the orange Shadows from the unfashionable corner of Redhill. They will take off and land on a sixpence, so I didn't have to worry about the bend in the runway as I never had to get that far.
Having since moved on to metal aeroplanes as well, I'd say you'd be OK in a 172 or similar as long as the ground wasn't wet and you didn't take many friends or lots of fuel along with you.
I'd imagine a Katana would handle it easily, especially if it was just 1 POB.
The microlight common frequency is 129.825. Be prepared for exciting chat along the lines of -
"You there John?"
"Yes. Where are you Bob?".
"Behind you John."
"Where's Bert then?"
I'll be at Redhill both days this weekend, so send me a private message if you want to meet up to have a look at the AFE guide. I wouldn't mind having a look around your club, since a tailwheel conversion on the Cub looks appealing.
Last edited by Fly Stimulator; 11th October 2002 at 17:36.
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
From: England
Nonradio, I flew into Nayland a few weeks ago. Afterwards, I walked the main runway and the following is just my estimate. Perhaps someone has the accurate surveyed figures?
I estimate the first 100m or so of r/w is fairly flat, followed by about a 100 foot rise in the next 200 m, (this is the bit you land on) followed by about 250 m of fairly flat ground past the hangers.
Again , this is only my estimate. Not difficult, and grass well kept and short.
I'm surprised no-one has mentioned Lundy Island. Very-rough surface with unyielding bits to avoid. You land across two fields passing through the gap in the stone wall. Unfortunately because of the curvature, you lose sight of the gap as you flare.
Plenty of nice short strips up in the Pennines. Watch out for the stone walls at the end !
I estimate the first 100m or so of r/w is fairly flat, followed by about a 100 foot rise in the next 200 m, (this is the bit you land on) followed by about 250 m of fairly flat ground past the hangers.
Again , this is only my estimate. Not difficult, and grass well kept and short.
I'm surprised no-one has mentioned Lundy Island. Very-rough surface with unyielding bits to avoid. You land across two fields passing through the gap in the stone wall. Unfortunately because of the curvature, you lose sight of the gap as you flare.
Plenty of nice short strips up in the Pennines. Watch out for the stone walls at the end !
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,795
Likes: 0
From: New South Wales
Went into a farmer's field today, not particularly short, 4-500 metres, ruts along it, much easier to land with the ruts, about 8 inches of quite thick grass / clover, no wind indication, but all went OK.
Got out fine too, two up with near full fuel and usual junk in the back, loads of room to spare, even with a slight uphill gradient (Super Cub 150 -- fantastic machine).
Came back 3 hours later... wind had definitely shifted, but hard to tell just what it was doing, looked more or less across the field according to a fire about 2 miles away, elected to land in the same direction, but came in too high, too fast, touched down long with quartering tailwind, stopped by the long grass and the slight up gradient with, well, enough room to spare, but not masses. Heart rate only 100, so things could have been worse, but I did have to go through the 'Is it going to land? Is it going to stop? If we do hit the hedge will it be a total write-off?' thought process. Not pleasant.
Two morals, totally obvious, but they were reinforced to me today and some might like to share them with me:
1. Don't try and rescue a crappy approach to an unfamiliar field in stressful circumstances. Go around.
2. If a go around isn't possible at that field and you're feeling a bit dodgy about it, don't go in in the first place!
We live (hopefully) and we learn. I'm still kicking myself for such idiocy, though. Pathetic.
QDM
Got out fine too, two up with near full fuel and usual junk in the back, loads of room to spare, even with a slight uphill gradient (Super Cub 150 -- fantastic machine).
Came back 3 hours later... wind had definitely shifted, but hard to tell just what it was doing, looked more or less across the field according to a fire about 2 miles away, elected to land in the same direction, but came in too high, too fast, touched down long with quartering tailwind, stopped by the long grass and the slight up gradient with, well, enough room to spare, but not masses. Heart rate only 100, so things could have been worse, but I did have to go through the 'Is it going to land? Is it going to stop? If we do hit the hedge will it be a total write-off?' thought process. Not pleasant.
Two morals, totally obvious, but they were reinforced to me today and some might like to share them with me:
1. Don't try and rescue a crappy approach to an unfamiliar field in stressful circumstances. Go around.
2. If a go around isn't possible at that field and you're feeling a bit dodgy about it, don't go in in the first place!
We live (hopefully) and we learn. I'm still kicking myself for such idiocy, though. Pathetic.
QDM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
From: Teddington, Middlesex
I must own up to weighing over fifteen stone. Add a passenger, cameras etc and I sometimes need more of our 450 m strip to get off the ground than I would like.
One measure—I hesitate to call it a technique—I have used is to charge onto the runway, opening up as I turn onto the centreline. Bad practice at a public aerodrome, I would suggest, but the idea is to start the take-off run with some kinetic energy in hand. I wonder if this ploy also avoids anything analogous to the helicopter ring vortex, which may occur when the propeller is running fast at zero groundspeed. (Helicopters lose lift when air recirculates through the rotor.)
Of course, my brilliant reasoning may be nothing but a heap of cack. Anybody able to confirm or counter these thoughts?
One measure—I hesitate to call it a technique—I have used is to charge onto the runway, opening up as I turn onto the centreline. Bad practice at a public aerodrome, I would suggest, but the idea is to start the take-off run with some kinetic energy in hand. I wonder if this ploy also avoids anything analogous to the helicopter ring vortex, which may occur when the propeller is running fast at zero groundspeed. (Helicopters lose lift when air recirculates through the rotor.)
Of course, my brilliant reasoning may be nothing but a heap of cack. Anybody able to confirm or counter these thoughts?
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
From: England
PW, A useful technique but needs practice to turn with power in a taildragger and you have to be constantly assessing the wind. In addition to the kinetic energy gain you can sometimes get another gain because you are starting the take-off run with a higher prop efficiency. With some fixed-pitch props part of the prop will be stalled at max static rpm with the aircraft stationary. When this happens, the thrust will increase as the aircraft initially accelerates.
This technique also of necessity prevents you using every foot of the available distance because your radius of turn is larger at higher speed. It is therefore worth assessing if the shape of the field gives a better result by positioning the aircraft tail right back in the far corner of the field. On occasions I have not been too proud to get out of my aircraft and push the tail right back to the hedge. I like to have as big a margin as I can, in case something doesn't go to plan.
This technique also of necessity prevents you using every foot of the available distance because your radius of turn is larger at higher speed. It is therefore worth assessing if the shape of the field gives a better result by positioning the aircraft tail right back in the far corner of the field. On occasions I have not been too proud to get out of my aircraft and push the tail right back to the hedge. I like to have as big a margin as I can, in case something doesn't go to plan.
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
From: www.tiovicente.com
Had a look at Stoke today and actually landed courtesy of Fly Stimulator who has this fantastic aircraft called a CT which is a kind of microlight with the 100hp Rotax.
It has very short take off and landing and is very quick with an amazing rate of climb - in other words a lot of fun. Thanks for that matey!
Back to Stoke....
It looks a bit out of my league for the moment in a 172 with power lines running adjacent to the strip and getting out again looks a bit difficult but someone suggested that Maypole might be a good idea and at 500m with what looks like a reasonable approach, I'll think I'll try there first.
It has very short take off and landing and is very quick with an amazing rate of climb - in other words a lot of fun. Thanks for that matey!
Back to Stoke....
It looks a bit out of my league for the moment in a 172 with power lines running adjacent to the strip and getting out again looks a bit difficult but someone suggested that Maypole might be a good idea and at 500m with what looks like a reasonable approach, I'll think I'll try there first.