Grass strip questions

[Cluemeister]

As most of you know, I'm a student pilot and looking to get an aircraft. Now I am researching where to hangar it. About 5 minutes from my house is a grass strip on private property with about 5-10 hangars. I've spoken with the owner, and although he doesn't officially rent the hangars, he did invite me to come by. I'm taking that as a good sign.

I'm making a lot of assumptions that I would be able to hangar there, but if that does occur, I want to know what to ask the owner. I've heard some grass strips can be soft, others can be rough to land on. The strip is 2000' x 50'.

What would you look for, and what would you ask?

[Nomore767]

Is the strip an approved strip? Local ordinances and zoning. Neighbors and noise. Tax liens and future development. Are the approaches cleared? Drainage, especially in winter and wet weather.

Fuel...if he doesn't have it how is he with you storing it or bring it in gas cans? Who cuts the grass and maintains the field?

Your insurance..will you be covered flying out of this field? If you require maintenance does the owner allow for you or your mechanic to do work on site? Is he insured to cover you if the hangar burns down?

Utilities?

[MrMorden]

There is nothing inherently wrong with grass. BUT:

* The underlying surface is important! If it's rough, it makes for additional wear and tear on gear.

* If the grass is long, it increases rolling resistance, meaning longer takeoffs, shorter landings.

* Grass makes airplanes filthy. Grass seed, clippings, bugs, etc. get all over props, wheel fairings, and cowlings.

* Wet grass makes for longer takeoffs and can be a little slippery for landings. Be careful using brakes on roll out.


As to this particular strip:

* 2000ft is not "short" for most LSA, but it's not long. Tall trees, power lines, buildings or other obstacles can make it seem much shorter. at 1:30 in this video is a landing where I landed a little long on a 1700ft grass strip (should have kept the slip in longer). As you can see, there is rising terrain at the other end; if I'd had to do a go-around, it would have been a challenge, and I'd have had to angle off to the right to miss the ridge:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8MNtanDvGc

* 50ft width is pretty narrow, especially for a new pilot. I land occasionally at a private (paved) airport that is 38ft wide. But I won't go there in a crosswind, just too much potential for things to go wrong. If your home field is 50ft wide, you might find yourself unwilling or unable to fly on days that are flyable from wider runways. OTOH, if you learn to takeoff and land from such a narrow place, it will generally make you a better pilot and "normal" runways will seem really wide!

[Nomore767]

I would add...what happens in winter? Will it be closed for months due to snow, ice frost and will the owner give up mowing till spring?

You're left not being able to fly whereas you could on an asphalt strip.

[drseti]

You also need to consider the willingness of a CFI to instruct you off a private strip. I've had students buy planes and base them on my field -- instructing them has been no problem. But, if a student's plane were based elsewhere, any driving time between my airport and theirs would cut into my available time to fly with other students, so this would have to be worked into my schedule and fees.

[Cluemeister]

Thanks so much for the questions and your experiences. I have put together a great list!

[drseti]

FWIW, I was a founding member of a private airport with a grass strip in central CA about 35 years ago, based my plane there for a decade, and still own a hangar and membership share there. I love operating off grass! My flight school is on a public airport in PA that has parallel grass and asphalt runways. My students stay on the pavement thru initial solo, after which I transition them to grass. Nothing wrong with operating an LSA off grass, as long as you address the issues already mentioned in this thread.

[rsteele]

As someone who as all of three lesson in a tail wheel and two whole landings on grass, I'm going jump in here and suggest that at least some tail draggers (Champ in my case) really prefer grass. Fair Statement?

Ron

[MrMorden]

As someone who as all of three lesson in a tail wheel and two whole landings on grass, I'm going jump in here and suggest that at least some tail draggers (Champ in my case) really prefer grass. Fair Statement?

I think it's the pilots with the preference...the airplanes don't care!

[Flocker]

As to this particular strip:

* 2000ft is not "short" for most LSA, but it's not long. Tall trees, power lines, buildings or other obstacles can make it seem much shorter. at 1:30 in this video is a landing where I landed a little long on a 1700ft grass strip (should have kept the slip in longer). As you can see, there is rising terrain at the other end; if I'd had to do a go-around, it would have been a challenge, and I'd have had to angle off to the right to miss the ridge:

Surrounding terrain would be near the top of my list of concerns. The more options the better in an emergency.

[Nomore767]

As someone who as all of three lesson in a tail wheel and two whole landings on grass, I'm going jump in here and suggest that at least some tail draggers (Champ in my case) really prefer grass. Fair Statement?

Ron

I would say that aircraft like the Champ, Cub, Taylorcraft, Luscombes etc were designed and built at a time when most airfields were simply grass strips.

The DH 82A Tiger Moth I used to own (1940) originally had a tail-skid as opposed to a tail-wheel because it was designed when most RAF and civilian fields were grass. Not only that, most airfield were basically square allowing the aircraft to always take off into wind rather than off a particular runway.

Personally, when I looked at the legend Cub/CC Sport Cub as possible Light Sport aircraft for my own mission, part of the deal for me was being able to find a good grass airfield not far from me, preferably with fuel and maintenance. Unfortunately, those type of strips are very few and far between these days and hard to find within convenient distance to home.
An alternative would be re-locating to a grass airpark and I thought about this although in the end my wife and I decided it wasn't for us.

[3Dreaming]

As someone who as all of three lesson in a tail wheel and two whole landings on grass, I'm going jump in here and suggest that at least some tail draggers (Champ in my case) really prefer grass. Fair Statement?

I think it's the pilots with the preference...the airplanes don't care!

Actually the airplanes do care. Landing on grass is much more forgiving than pavement. Not such a big deal for tricycle gear aircraft, but it certainly is for a tail dragger.

[MrMorden]

Actually the airplanes do care. Landing on grass is much more forgiving than pavement. Not such a big deal for tricycle gear aircraft, but it certainly is for a tail dragger.

We have tons of taildraggers at my paved home field, the only gear failure we ever had was a Cessna 170 that had a rusted through tail wheel attach bracket break. I did have a friend in a Piper Pacer hit a divot on a grass strip and flip on its back though.

Unless you slam it in, I still don't think the airplane cares.

[drseti]

To those who say that taildraggers prefer grass, I say:
Stop antropomorphizing inanimate objects. They hate that!

[Cluemeister]

A an old favorite of mine...