How much runway is enough?

[WurlyBird]

Well there is no way around it, I am moving to Alaska. So we are starting to look at houses in the area on line. As I am sure many of you do or have done, every piece of property I look at I imagine whether a grass strip would fit in or not. I am looking at one that has a 500' long axis that runs down a hill of about 5-10 degrees. The bottom buts up to a road and then trees on the other side. Now I know that is more then enough to get in and out I am trying to figure out if there is any reason not to. Obviously an engine out at 100-300' would leave few options on departure, but, well, isn't flying out of your backyard worth a little extra risk? How wide of a swath would you want cut between trees? 100', 150'?

Av8r3400, I saw a video of yours on Youtube, did you ever land in your yard? How long is the strip?

How nice would this be?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2MFEJY3SPQ

I have landed at a buddies house, his yard is on the sectional just to keep his neighbors at bay. 1800' with 50' obstacles at either end, he flies an RV. there was two sections of tree lines on his strip that were about 75-100' apart. It's a fun approach.

[Av8r3400]

My proposed is 1100'. I've never landed it.

IMO, 500' isn't enough. Especially with trees. I can land and stop my plane consistently in 450-500' at the airport. I'd never even try that short on an obstructed turf strip.

[Dave F]

Alot is dependant on wieght and perfomrance form your setup.

For landing you need with 50' obstacle about 800 to 1100' which will give you some safety margin.
with clear approach 300 to 500 feet is planty if you know what you doing,.

Take off 100 to 300 '

If you have a tank heavy kitfox youwill certainly need more room.

I have hundreds of videos showing many situations

let me know if you need some links

[Craig Howard]

I have a KF 4 1200 with a 912 rotax 80hp, I land on a Remote control airport that is 300 feet, at 4000ft elev. here in El Paso in the summer, DA's around 6000ft. I have no obstructions to clear and that is solo, cant imagine what a fox would be like a SL.

[n85ae]

500' is fine, until you need more room ... Then you're screwed. I can takeoff
and land mine in 500', but would not plan on it for a personal strip unless the
neighbors property was a sod farm.

Jeff

[tommg13780]

If you are getting involved with a short, slope-ing, obstructed strip then it will end up being one way in/ one way out. In that case it is inevitable that you will eventually get involved with quartering or direct tailwind approach which is going to suprise you as how fast the realestate goes by. Landing with tailwind produces the sensation that the airplane is accelerating as it touches down. This is something that you normally wouldn't train for at an airport. If you are looking for excitment that will definitely be a huge element but ofcourse the downside can be even more huge, costly and perhaps downright unhealthy. To address the question more directly I'd say all circumstances need to be evaluated before a particular minimum distance can be determined. A fair amount of that analysis is you and your airplane's capabilities.

[WurlyBird]

Av8r, is 450-500' with obstacles? I would agree that 1100' with 50' trees at either end is definitely challenging/risky

Dave, I've seen most of your movies. I like them a lot and I look forward to getting my Fox up with the HKS to post videos to give you a run for your money. It's all about having fun.

All the properties I have been looking at are on slopes which is what makes me think it is feasible at 5-600'. I read an article a month or so ago that talked about how beneficial slopes were and it equated it to additional length and I wish I could remember the ratio. Something along the lines of 100' per degree. So a 500' 10 degree strip is equivalent to a 1500' flat strip. The only issue is not having more runway straight ahead if the engine fails while low. It is one way in and one way out regardless of winds. So sometimes you just don't fly because the wind is too strong of a tail wind. When I am flying my Fox I am pretty damn proficient and almost every take off and landing practices short field techniques. I can't remember the last time my wheels went past the top of the numbers on take off or landing. One of my problems is I fly helicopters way more then planes so I have a habit of looking at any spot larger then a tennis court and thinking "Yeah, I can land there."

edit to add: These sloping fields that I am looking at would be obstruction free at departure/downhill end at least to the extent of obstacles, there may not be a field there though.

[N82HB]

There is no formula for figuring this out. The biggest variable is your ability.

I spend a lot of my time exploring slopes, short, ugly places. But it isn't something I want to do everytime I fly. It is only a matter of time before something gets bent.

My airplane is a very light 100hp 912uls IV and I have 500 hours in it. You need more room.

[Pilot4Life]

WurlyBird,
There has been discussion on this topic in times past. The question I always ask myself when making a decision is always based on the "most conservative response". That is "Will it satisfy the safety requirements of the crash investigation board?" More often than not, when I am pushing the envelope, the answer is a resounding NO! I would hate to put my family's future ($$$$) in jeapardy because I wanted my own airstrip. I know, for a fact, that there are homes available in Alaska that are on regularily used airstrips. They're in abundance in AK. For a simple understanding, look at the "airports" around Witchita, KS and you'll get a better picture of what to expect in AK. Again, as always, the choice is yours...but prudence would tell ME to take a deep breath and consider the "Whole Picture". I know you're thought process having flown too many hours in HH-60L's myself. Could you?, sure...why not!... Should you, nope! Famous last words..."Watch This"....Best wishes...

[WurlyBird]

The question I always ask myself when making a decision is always based on the "most conservative response"

I respect your opinion and expected several like this, and I am not saying you are wrong. You can't argue for very long with the kind of thinking that keeps more people alive/safe. By no means do I think a short down hill strip is the best laid plan, honestly I was hoping to draw out a few stories from people with experience in strips like this. There are a lot of those people out there, there is a hand full of stories every year in aviation periodicals about one way landing strips and their challenges. That is more what I was looking for.

But I must beg that you remove that phrase from your vocabulary. "Most conservative approach" is the version of that nonsense that I was brought up with. It makes no sense in the realm of most aviation, especially in a realm such as home built experimental aircraft. The most conservative approach is to not go flying as a hobby. As an HH crew member the most conservative approach would be to never take off and instead point out the mistakes made that led to the injury in the first place. So then you can amend it to "Most conservative approach to accomplish the mission." This makes only slightly more sense and only if there is a mission that needs to be accomplished. I will argue that VERY few people flying Kitfoxes are accomplishing anything more significant then producing ear to ear grins. Unless the stated mission is to spend as much as humanly possible for a hamburger. I underlined challanges above because meeting challenges is one of my missions, which is why I exploit the STOL characteristics of my KF3 the way I do. And why I asked to go to Alaska when I was told I was going to Hawai'i. Bush flying is constantly meeting challenges and putting yourself and your aircraft in what conservative people would call stupid situations. When flying over mountains where there are no forced landing spots available regardless of your AGL altitude and landing on unimproved strips, or sand bars, just to go fishing, it is hard to imagine how somebody might describe how they did that conservatively. I think being honest with yourself and your passengers is more realistic and important, I am sure that more then a few pilots in the thousands of videos on YouTube of people flying with out an out (we Kitfoxers are not innocent of this either) like to use the "most conservative approach" saying in excess.

I will get off my soap box now. It's not you, it's me. I freakin HATE that phrase. Also, I don't know if AK is significantly different then the lower 48 but down here if I could afford a home on a runway I would probably be posting to the Carbon Cub list instead of the Kitfox one.