How to land on a grass airstrip

In article ,
Matt Whiting wrote:

No wonder the rescue operation in Iran was botched so many years ago.
This is truly scary that a military pilot has no training in landing in
unimproved areas. Wow.

You need to consider the difference between Army, USAF, Marine,
and Navy pilots and the types of flying they do. A T-38/KC-135
pilot training to land in unimproved areas would be wasting
training time.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

Bob Noel wrote:

In article ,
Matt Whiting wrote:


No wonder the rescue operation in Iran was botched so many years ago.
This is truly scary that a military pilot has no training in landing in
unimproved areas. Wow.


You need to consider the difference between Army, USAF, Marine,
and Navy pilots and the types of flying they do. A T-38/KC-135
pilot training to land in unimproved areas would be wasting
training time.

Yes, I see your point. Hopefully, those flying cargo airplanes get such
training. :-)


Matt

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 01:44:24 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:

I've encountered all sorts
of new things since getting my private and then later my instrument
rating. If I had to take an instructor along every time I faced a new
weather condition or flew into an unfamiliar airport, I'd need a CFI for
every trip. A competent pilot should have the skill to gradually expand
their skill and experience on their own. Landing on grass just isn't
something that should require a CFI.

I'd respectfully disagree with you here Matt.

The original poster asked for links leading him to tips and tricks of
landing on grass strips, so there must be some validity in everybody else
giving him sound advice to use soft field take off and landing procedures.
I wouldn't call these tips worse case scenarios, but good sound advice.

Would you want to put your plane in the hands of an *INEXPERIENCED* grass
strip pilot without some CFI guidance? I certainly wouldn't.

I certainly enlist a CFI for significant new things, like checking out
in an unfamiliar airplane,

The way you talk, why? Whether you fly a Piper, Cessna or any other single
non complex tricycle plane, you fly the plane the same way? Read the POH,
stick to the speeds and land the thing.

Oh, now maybe you are seeing the light, that each model plane maybe has a
different technique on flying / landing? Doesn't this apply to paved vs
grass strips? Different techniques on landing and ground operations for
grass vs paved?

but I don't get a CFI for every little new
thing I explore and I consider landing on a grass airstrip rather than
pavement to be an extremely minor activity. I landing in snow the first
time without an instructor aboard. Landed on ice that way. Landed at
Logan, BWI, Philly and Washington National the first time all alone as well.

Whether you land at BWI, or some simple paved uncontrolled airport, the
technique of landing and taxiing is the same. Your example is comparing
apples to oranges. We are talking about techniques on handling an
airplane, not airport operations. If he had asked for something basic like
tower operations, I would have pointed him to rec.aviation.student.

Let me guess, you would calvier to fly in the Rocky mountains without
mountain flying lessons just to expand on your experience???

You should know the area to which you are flying and the runway
conditions prior to take-off. That is part of preflight planning. I
think the OP's question was pretty simple, yet folks gave a lot of worst
case scenario responses. He didn't ask how to land on a grass airstrip
that is saturated with water and is located on a peat bog. :-)

My impressions, and hopefully the original poster will chime in, is that he
is going to a grass strip leaving from a paved airport. This may be a first
time landing, and he wanted more information.

Telling the original poster that it's normal operations on a grass strip
(which is soft field technique until you provide references otherwise) is
not sound advice.

Perusing the web, you may want to check out
http://www.whittsflying.com/page4.12...20Landings.htm for some
refresher training.

Some excerpts from the above site...

The soft-field landing technique is a rather extreme extension of what it
takes to make a good normal landing. In both, you would fly the approach so
that, on final; you have a constant airspeed and full flaps. Low-wing
aircraft flaps can be damaged on rough fields so it is advised to raise
them as soon as possible. With those constants of airspeed and flaps
settings, set power becomes your variable to adjust the glidepath in a soft
field landing. See Practical Test Standards for test specifics.

And then the very next paragraph....

Short, Soft, and Rough landings
It is very unlikely that during your training you have been prepared for
short, soft or rough runways. Any field not paved should be considered both
soft and rough. You cannot evaluate an unpaved airport from the air.
Walking or driving the strip may not suffice either. Paved runways tend to
long enough, firm enough and smooth enough; an unpaved runway is likely to
be short, soft and rough. On the unpaved surface every landing should be
made softly with the nose high and some power. The approach should be
steep, at minimum float airspeed and for a full stall landing. You should
practice the control of the slower airspeed and steeper approach path of
the short field for this landing on a paved runway before you are going to
need it for real. Get the power off and the flaps up immediately on ground
contact. Don't lock the wheels by too much braking. Keeping the nose wheel
off the ground is more important than braking if the ground is soft. Add
20% to the performance figures from the POH to allow for your less than
perfect speed control and brake application.

http://www.whittsflying.com/ is a must read for all pilots *smile*.

Allen

In article ,
Matt Whiting wrote:

Bob Noel wrote:

In article ,
Matt Whiting wrote:


No wonder the rescue operation in Iran was botched so many years ago.
This is truly scary that a military pilot has no training in landing in
unimproved areas. Wow.


You need to consider the difference between Army, USAF, Marine,
and Navy pilots and the types of flying they do. A T-38/KC-135
pilot training to land in unimproved areas would be wasting
training time.

Yes, I see your point. Hopefully, those flying cargo airplanes get such
training. :-)

Desert One was a C-130 and HH-53 operation.
Herc drivers know unimproved strips.
HH-53 operators know LZ's and PZ's.

Matt Whiting wrote:
You guys make landing on a grass strip sound like rocket science.

No one said it was rocket science. This pilot wasn't clear on something
and did the right thing before attempting it -- ASK! Regardless of the
reason (an "original" CFI that didn't spend enough time on it, an
examiner that did not cover it, a lot of time passing between having
learned it but never actually *done* it, he/she should not be made to
feel ashamed or belittled for ASKING for help/advice ... which is
exactly the attitude you took.

If you need remedial training for something you
should have learned in the first place, then I stand
by my statement that you initial instruction was deficient.

I disagree. There are many things you are taught that, once you pass
your checkride, you may not use again for months or years, depending on
the type of flying you do, where you do it, and what you fly.

A competent pilot should have the skill to gradually expand
their skill and experience on their own. Landing on grass just isn't
something that should require a CFI.

Maybe this pilot *has* gradually expanded their skill on their own.
Someone merely suggested that if they weren't clear on something, even
something that YOU feel shouldn't require one, take a CFI along. Nothing
wrong with that advice.

And by the way, if every pilot stayed as skilled and competent in
subsequent years as they are on the day of their checkride, there would
be no need for BFRs ... yet it is a requirement that a person's
knowledge and skill are reviewed and honed periodically. If something
isn't exactly up to par during a BFR, does that reflect poorly on the
"original" CFI? I don't think that's a fair assumption.

I certainly enlist a CFI for significant new things, like checking out
in an unfamiliar airplane, but I don't get a CFI for every little new
thing I explore and I consider landing on a grass airstrip rather than
pavement to be an extremely minor activity.

Good for you!
But that's YOU. People don't all expand their skills or stay competent
exactly the same way that YOU do.

If a pilot's knowledge/memory about how to do something has faded,
that's not necessarily the "original" CFI's fault, and there's
absolutely no reason why that pilot should feel incompetent if they ask
for "remedial instruction" on something they already learned. They *may*
be better off hiring a CFI than weeding through various and differing
opinions from "competent and skilled" pilots on a newsgroup.

You should know the area to which you are flying and the runway
conditions prior to take-off. That is part of preflight planning.

No argument there.

I think the OP's question was pretty simple, yet folks gave
a lot of worst case scenario responses.

And YOU gave one that may or may NOT have been the correct one for the
grass strip he is going to land on, *assuming* that it is a hard surface
beneath the grass. A perfect illustration of why a CFI could better
answer the question and/or provide in-flight "remedial" instruction for
the specific strip this person plans to land on.

Having worked at a flight school, licensed pilots came in for refreshers
on various things from time to time. IMO, that doesn't mean they *or*
their "original" CFI are unskilled or incompetent. Kudos to them for not
feeling too ashamed to ask for a refresher, and thank God no one
responds to their request by saying, "Didn't you learn that in your
private pilot instruction? You shouldn't NEED more training in something
as simple as THAT!"

A Lieberman wrote:

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 01:44:24 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:


I've encountered all sorts
of new things since getting my private and then later my instrument
rating. If I had to take an instructor along every time I faced a new
weather condition or flew into an unfamiliar airport, I'd need a CFI for
every trip. A competent pilot should have the skill to gradually expand
their skill and experience on their own. Landing on grass just isn't
something that should require a CFI.


I'd respectfully disagree with you here Matt.

The original poster asked for links leading him to tips and tricks of
landing on grass strips, so there must be some validity in everybody else
giving him sound advice to use soft field take off and landing procedures.
I wouldn't call these tips worse case scenarios, but good sound advice.

Well, some folks will bring their lawyer to buy a car also. I guess
whatever makes you comfortable.


Would you want to put your plane in the hands of an *INEXPERIENCED* grass
strip pilot without some CFI guidance? I certainly wouldn't.

Absolutely, as long as I knew that the pilot had received sound primary
instruction. I must admit that I wouldn't put it in the hands of many
who have posted here recently. I mean not being able to take off in a
straight line in the proper direction without a white line on the
ground. Sheesh, that is scary and indicative of severly deficient
primary flight training.


I certainly enlist a CFI for significant new things, like checking out
in an unfamiliar airplane,


The way you talk, why? Whether you fly a Piper, Cessna or any other single
non complex tricycle plane, you fly the plane the same way? Read the POH,
stick to the speeds and land the thing.

Actually, I probably would do that if the insurance regulations allowed.
:-) When I checked out in my 182 after buying into the partnership, I
flew the first pattern completely without assistance from the CFI (who
was also the son of my partner). It simply wasn't a big deal, but the
FAA requires a check-out in an HP airplane so I complied with the regs.


Oh, now maybe you are seeing the light, that each model plane maybe has a
different technique on flying / landing? Doesn't this apply to paved vs
grass strips? Different techniques on landing and ground operations for
grass vs paved?

No, because the techniques aren't different for a grass strip. That is
my point. They are different for a soft field, but being grass doesn't
a prior mean it is a soft field.


but I don't get a CFI for every little new
thing I explore and I consider landing on a grass airstrip rather than
pavement to be an extremely minor activity. I landing in snow the first
time without an instructor aboard. Landed on ice that way. Landed at
Logan, BWI, Philly and Washington National the first time all alone as well.


Whether you land at BWI, or some simple paved uncontrolled airport, the
technique of landing and taxiing is the same. Your example is comparing
apples to oranges. We are talking about techniques on handling an
airplane, not airport operations. If he had asked for something basic like
tower operations, I would have pointed him to rec.aviation.student.

Not at all. Navigating the taxiways at Washington National at night was
a far cry from anything I'd done before and a far greater delta than
going from asphalt to grass. I had to land at night as I couldn't get
an IFR reservation during the day.


Let me guess, you would calvier to fly in the Rocky mountains without
mountain flying lessons just to expand on your experience???

Cavalierly, no. Fly in the Rockies to gain experience, sure. Again,
apples to oranges.


Matt

Matt Whiting wrote:
I don't assume. I find out before I take-off.

On the contrary, you obviously *do* assume! You assume that your flight
is going to go precisely as planned. You assume that you will be landing
at your planned destination, and you likely *will*. But there's always
the chance that you could have a mechanical problem and have to put your
airplane down somewhere other than where you planned ... like on a grass
area that you didn't "find out" about before take-off. According to your
prior posts, it's wrong to consider that a grass area might be soft
underneath. Those are some rather significant assumptions for a person
who doesn't assume.

unicate wrote:

Matt Whiting wrote:

You guys make landing on a grass strip sound like rocket science.


No one said it was rocket science. This pilot wasn't clear on something
and did the right thing before attempting it -- ASK! Regardless of the
reason (an "original" CFI that didn't spend enough time on it, an
examiner that did not cover it, a lot of time passing between having
learned it but never actually *done* it, he/she should not be made to
feel ashamed or belittled for ASKING for help/advice ... which is
exactly the attitude you took.

No, that isn't the attitude I took at all. I think it was great he
asked for advice. It was some of the advice that I took exception with,
not the asking for it. Read it again, Sam...


And YOU gave one that may or may NOT have been the correct one for the
grass strip he is going to land on, *assuming* that it is a hard surface
beneath the grass. A perfect illustration of why a CFI could better
answer the question and/or provide in-flight "remedial" instruction for
the specific strip this person plans to land on.

No, I gave him what he asked for. Grass strips in general aren't soft
fields. He asked about landing on a grass airstrip. He didn't ask
about landing on a soft field, or a peat bog, or a rutted cow pasture or
a logging clear-cut on top of a mountain. I gave him a very correct
answer for the question he asked. Others seemed to want to give him
answers for a lot of questions he didn't ask.


Matt

unicate wrote:

Matt Whiting wrote:

I don't assume. I find out before I take-off.


On the contrary, you obviously *do* assume! You assume that your flight
is going to go precisely as planned. You assume that you will be landing
at your planned destination, and you likely *will*. But there's always
the chance that you could have a mechanical problem and have to put your
airplane down somewhere other than where you planned ... like on a grass
area that you didn't "find out" about before take-off. According to your
prior posts, it's wrong to consider that a grass area might be soft
underneath. Those are some rather significant assumptions for a person
who doesn't assume.

If that area wasn't an AIRSTRIP as the OP stated in his question, then I
would assume the worst and prepare for it. Airstrip to me implies it is
an airport with a grass runway and information on it should be available
during preflight with a simple phone call to the owner (if a private
airport) or the operator (if a public airport).

What does airstrip mean to you? Maybe we have different definitions
here, but I don't consider a farmer's field in which I'm making an
emergency landing to constitute and airstrip.

Matt

Matt Whiting wrote:
If that area wasn't an AIRSTRIP as the OP stated in his question, then I
would assume the worst and prepare for it. Airstrip to me implies it is
an airport with a grass runway and information on it should be available
during preflight with a simple phone call to the owner (if a private
airport) or the operator (if a public airport).

What does airstrip mean to you? Maybe we have different definitions
here, but I don't consider a farmer's field in which I'm making an
emergency landing to constitute and airstrip.

A grass AIRSTRIP may or may not have the same surface under that grass
as a non-airstrip grass area. Point is you may have to land on grass
that you did not check out prior to your takeoff -- an AIRSTRIP *or* a
farmer's front yard. According to your prior posts, anyone who
associates a grass strip with a soft-field landing needs remedial
instruction because grass strips have hard surfaces underneath ... yet
you say you don't assume.