Narrowing it down... Comanche?

Whoops -- forgot one more thing: Soft field capability. I know several
Comanche owners who won't fly into Amana's grass strip, which is an awful
shame. We fly in there -- and several other excellent grass strips --
all the time.

That's just pathetic. Not being able to go offroad would have been a deal
killer when I was looking at the Bonanza.

I confess to not knowing enough about the Comanche's gear to comment. Is it
that they *can't* or that they *won't* fly into a soft field?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:
I confess to not knowing enough about the Comanche's gear to
comment. Is it
that they *can't* or that they *won't* fly into a soft field?

There is nothing inherent about the Comanche landing gear that
would prevent it from using a turf runway. When you start talking
about a "soft" field... how soft? The "softness" of the field
would be of equal concern to any tri-cycle gear airplaine with
small wheels.

The hight of any grass or brush on the runway would be more
of a concern to a retract because of the gear doors hanging
down. I know that Mooneys are notorious for not being very
friendly to fields with vegitation because the doors are so
close to the ground when the gear is down.

Jay Honeck wrote:
Whoops -- forgot one more thing: Soft field capability. I know several
Comanche owners who won't fly into Amana's grass strip, which is an awful
shame. We fly in there -- and several other excellent grass strips --
all the time.

That's just pathetic. Not being able to go offroad would have been a deal
killer when I was looking at the Bonanza.


I confess to not knowing enough about the Comanche's gear to comment. Is it
that they *can't* or that they *won't* fly into a soft field?


They all can land off pavement. Look when they were designed. Most GA
planes landed on grass/dirt a significant number of times. And it's not
necessarily soft field that concerned me. I wouldn't land my 182 in a
mud hole. The West is a desert, therfore very dry. What's more
important is rough field. Most strips I land on are just plowed with a
road grader and maybe cut a couple times a year to keep the grass less
than 6 inches. They can be pretty bumpy.

On 2006-02-21, Jay Honeck wrote:
I confess to not knowing enough about the Comanche's gear to comment. Is it
that they *can't* or that they *won't* fly into a soft field?

Won't, I wager. I know a friend who takes his twin Comanche into a
(fairly rough - really, graded cow pasture) airfield. The single
Comanche has proportionately much stouter gear than the twin (same gear,
but the twin is heavier). The real issue with the twin Comanche is the
prop tips go green in modestly long grass because there's very little
prop clearance.

But for small retract gear planes with rough field capabilities, I don't
think anything beats the Bonanza. Very stout gear and decent sized
wheels, and reasonable prop clearance.

--
Dylan Smith, Port St Mary, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net

Dylan Smith wrote:


But for small retract gear planes with rough field capabilities, I don't
think anything beats the Bonanza. Very stout gear and decent sized
wheels, and reasonable prop clearance.

I have more prop clearance with my Bo than my 182 had with the big
tires. And when you look at where the nose gear attaches on the two
planes the Bo comes out even farther ahead, there's no way a Bo can
wheelbarrow up on the nose wheel like a 182. The mains on my Bo are
7.00x6, bigger than most single engine planes.