Plane for Short Field, Grass Strip, Beginner?
MBDiagMan
Background:
I am about a 60 hour, non current pilot who hasn't flown in about 13
years. I have a pipeline coming through my place that has produced
funds and this Summer will take out a clump of trees that will free up a
place for about an 1,100 feet grass strip in the direction of the
prevailing wind.
I solo'd in an Aeronca Champ and then did most of my flying in a 150. I
flew once in a Hershey Bar Cherokee 140 and liked it, although it felt
quite different than the other planes I had flown.
Question:
I would like to get something for under $20K that I can use for
recreational flying and on a nice day, take my wife to visit her twin
sister about 200 miles away. I don't need a fancy panel, just the
basics. I don't need a real fresh engine because I won't by piling on
hours at a rapid pace.
I will need a plane for the relatively short grass strip I described for
daylight take off and landing. My idea is a 150 or a Cheorkee 140. I
would love an old tail dragger like a Champ or a Cub, but they seem
quite pricey and probably not well suited for a 200 mile flight with my
wife.
I plan on using the plane for the instruction flying that I will need to
get current again and will have an instructor work with me to get
comfortable with my grass strip.
Any comments, advice and/or plane recommendations are appreciated.
Doc
--
MBDiagMan
Bug Dout
you might get on barnstormers.com and do a search by price; this will
bring up a number of aircraft for you to consider. Is LSA important?
--
Pity the warrior that kills all his foe.
~ Star Trek
MBDiagMan
Thanks for the reply Bug Dout!
I've been doing some looking and I seem to be coming up with the Aeronca
Chief and Aeronca Champs as choices. I really don't like the idea of my
wife sitting behind. I'm not worried about the CFI sitting behind,
because he's the same guy that solo'd me in the Champ and seems to enjoy
the back seat.
Since I started looking I've found a few souped up Cessna 140's that
might fill the bill although they're a little over my budget. With the
pipeline money, I can probably stretch the budget although that would
eat into my planned hanger material money.
LSA is not important. I plan on getting my PPL. I have most all the
flying specifics behind me except the long cross country. I will just
have to get my flying edge back, fly my long cross country and then be
ready for the check ride. Then I will work with my instructor to get
comfortable in and out of my grass strip.
Since I wrote the original post, I have done some measuring and it looks
like the strip length will be more like 1,300 feet. In fact I can also
prepare a crossing runway that will be more like 1,500, but will be
crosswind most of the time.
Thanks again.
--
MBDiagMan
brian whatcott
and parts are going up. My last annual came in at 2 grand, and the plane
was in quite respectable shape before hand.
It would be better to buy a new plane, but that's not gonna happen
on your budget. Perhaps if you could find a sympathetic A&P thereabouts,
you could make it work out...
Brian W
Bug Dout
> The C-150 would work for you, except that annuals are getting pricey,
> and parts are going up. My last annual came in at 2 grand, and the
> plane was in quite respectable shape before hand.
> It would be better to buy a new plane, but that's not gonna happen
> on your budget. Perhaps if you could find a sympathetic A&P
> thereabouts, you could make it work out...
Annual inspection prices are a factor but they are highly variable and
rather controllable. First, one can buy a decent used aircraft that
doesn't need a lot of repairs. Second, one can do a lot of work under
the supervision of the IA and that saves a lot of money. It's OK if
you're not a wrench-head, but you must be willing to learn and find an
IA who is willing to work with you.
Given it's a short grass strip, my first choice would not be a tricycle
gear. What's on either end of the strip: empty fields? Crops? 150' oak
trees? Any obstacles to overcome will be an important factor in the
choice of aircraft. You may need something with a good climb rate and
the C-150 doesn't leap to mind with that consideration. Maybe a Texas
Taildragger (a C-150 converted to taildragger, often with a more
powerful engine). Don't know what the prices are.
Another idea is to continue renting and buy a simple kit-build
(e.g. Kitfox) and start on that. In 1 to 3 years you could have a new,
much better performing plane for about the price of a used, 50-year-old
certificated plane. And you can then legally do all your own
maintenance, adding non-certificated gadgets like autopilots, glass
panels, etc. are up to 1/4 the price of the certificated equivalents.
--
Almost all absurdity of conduct arises from the imitation of those
whom we cannot resemble.
~ Samuel Johnson
MBDiagMan
First of all, thanks for the replies.
As further information on my proposed field. It would have two strips,
one about 15/33, 1,200 feet or a little more with short fences at either
end. The other would be about a 3/21, same length with 100' tall trees
on the South end. The prevailing winds would make the 21 the most
common, meaning taking off over the trees.
I am currently looking at a C140A with 100HP and a climb prop. It is
for sale near by and I should get a demo flight as soon as the weather
cooperates.
Thanks for any further comments and advice.
--
MBDiagMan
Bug Dout
> I am currently looking at a C140A with 100HP and a climb prop.
Excellent. That should do the job on takeoff and climb out. I forget,
does that have flaps? Is some small amount of flaps recommended for
soft-field takeoff?
Check its ability to slip (for landing), as well as any restrictions on
slipping with flaps.
--
What is either a picture or a novel that is not character?
- Henry James
MBDiagMan
Bug Dout;765065 Wrote:
> MBDiagMan MBDiagMa...@aviationbanter.com writes:
> -
> I am currently looking at a C140A with 100HP and a climb prop.-
> Excellent. That should do the job on takeoff and climb out. I forget,
> does that have flaps? Is some small amount of flaps recommended for
> soft-field takeoff?
>
> Check its ability to slip (for landing), as well as any restrictions on
> slipping with flaps.
>
> --
> What is either a picture or a novel that is not character?
> - Henry James
Thanks Bug, that is some great information to have and good questions
about the plane.
I do know that the C120's had no flaps while the C140 and C140A did. I
have read that the 140 flaps are only marginally effective and the 140A
flaps are only slightly more effective than that.
Investigating it's slipping capabilities is something I had not thought
about, so thanks for pointing this out. I will also investigate flap
usage for soft field take off.
I will be able to go fly it next week if we get the weather for it.
Thanks again,
--
MBDiagMan
Dave
Check out the Cherokees...
Parts cheaper than Cessnas, and slipping with full flaps (no
restrictions) will bring it down like a cinder block safely.
Find one with Art Mattisons gap seals and VG's and the short runway
would be no issue.. (or add them later... easy.....)
We have these mods on our Warrior, and the low speed, takeoff/landing
performance is stunning.... :)
Plus, two more seats and FAR more comfortable (and suitable) for cross
country flights..
Late 60's and early 70's 140's with a mid time engine/ light panels
should be on $$$ reach..
Good Luck!
Dave
MBDiagMan
'Dave[_1_ Wrote:
> ;765111']OKaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay.....
>
> Check out the Cherokees...
>
> Parts cheaper than Cessnas, and slipping with full flaps (no
> restrictions) will bring it down like a cinder block safely.
>
> Find one with Art Mattisons gap seals and VG's and the short runway
> would be no issue.. (or add them later... easy.....)
>
> We have these mods on our Warrior, and the low speed, takeoff/landing
> performance is stunning.... :)
>
> Plus, two more seats and FAR more comfortable (and suitable) for cross
> country flights..
>
> Late 60's and early 70's 140's with a mid time engine/ light panels
> should be on $$$ reach..
>
> Good Luck!
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2011 12:19:42 +0000, MBDiagMan
> MBDiagMa...@aviationbanter.com wrote:
>
> Bug Dout;765065 Wrote: -
> MBDiagMan MBDiagMa...@aviationbanter.com writes:
> -
> I am currently looking at a C140A with 100HP and a climb prop.-
> Excellent. That should do the job on takeoff and climb out. I forget,
> does that have flaps? Is some small amount of flaps recommended for
> soft-field takeoff?
>
> Check its ability to slip (for landing), as well as any restrictions
> on
> slipping with flaps.
>
> --
> What is either a picture or a novel that is not character?
>
>
> Thanks Bug, that is some great information to have and good questions
> about the plane.
>
> I do know that the C120's had no flaps while the C140 and C140A did. I
> have read that the 140 flaps are only marginally effective and the 140A
> flaps are only slightly more effective than that.
>
> Investigating it's slipping capabilities is something I had not thought
> about, so thanks for pointing this out. I will also investigate flap
> usage for soft field take off.
>
> I will be able to go fly it next week if we get the weather for it.
>
Thanks very much for the reply Dave!
I have always been a fan of the Cherokee, but several folks elsewhere
have said that it wouldn't be a good choice for my proposed field. They
might have said that before I realized the field will be closer to 1,300
feet than my originally estimated 1,100 feet.
That said, the forward slip is fine for getting in, but I don't think
that getting in will be a problem. Getting out over those trees will be
the problem. If there's an economy nose wheel, four place plane that
can do it, I'm all ears.
Thanks again for all the comments.
--
MBDiagMan
Edward A. Falk
MBDiagMan <MBDiagMa...@aviationbanter.com> wrote:
>
>'Dave[_1_ Wrote:
>> ;765111']OKaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay.....
>>
>> Check out the Cherokees...
>>
>> Parts cheaper than Cessnas, and slipping with full flaps (no
>> restrictions)
That's sort of an urban legend. Slipping with full flaps in a
Cessna is "not recommended", but that's not a formal restriction.
The reason it's not recommended is that there can be some buffeting,
but it's not dangerous. My old cessna had johnson-bar flaps that could
go from 0 to 40 degrees as fast as you could pull the lever (modern
Cessnas only go to 30) and I never hesitated to slip it in with full
flaps if the situation called for it.
--
-Ed Falk, fa...@despams.r.us.com
http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/
Dan_Thom...@yahoo.com
> OKaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay.....
>
> Check out the Cherokees...
>
> Parts cheaper than Cessnas, and slipping with full flaps (no
> restrictions) will bring it down like a cinder block safely.
>
> Find one with Art Mattisons gap seals and VG's and the short runway
> would be no issue.. (or add them later... easy.....)
>
> We have these mods on our Warrior, and the low speed, takeoff/landing
> performance is stunning.... :)
>
> Plus, two more seats and FAR more comfortable (and suitable) for cross
> country flights..
>
> Late 60's and early 70's 140's with a mid time engine/ light panels
> should be on $$$ reach..
>
> Good Luck!
>
> Dave
>
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2011 12:19:42 +0000, MBDiagMan
>
> >> -
> >> I am currently looking at a C140A with 100HP and a climb prop.-
> >> Excellent. That should do the job on takeoff and climb out. I forget,
> >> does that have flaps? Is some small amount of flaps recommended for
> >> soft-field takeoff?
>
> >> Check its ability to slip (for landing), as well as any restrictions on
> >> slipping with flaps.
>
> >> --
> >> What is either a picture or a novel that is not character?
> >> - Henry James
>
> >Thanks Bug, that is some great information to have and good questions
> >about the plane.
>
> >I do know that the C120's had no flaps while the C140 and C140A did. I
> >have read that the 140 flaps are only marginally effective and the 140A
> >flaps are only slightly more effective than that.
>
> >Investigating it's slipping capabilities is something I had not thought
> >about, so thanks for pointing this out. I will also investigate flap
> >usage for soft field take off.
>
> >I will be able to go fly it next week if we get the weather for it.
>
> >Thanks again,
Neither the Cessna 150 or the Cherokee 140 are known for their short-
field performance. We used to run a couple of 150s in the school, and
on warm days the 3000' paved runway, at 3000' altitude, was getting
marginal. Grass would be way worse; the drag of grass or stubble
mustn't be underestimated. I've seen the Cherokees eat a lot of
runway, too. The best bet for a cheaper airplane for this field would
be a Champ 7EC. We had a 7EC that had been converted from the 90 hp to
100, and it outran those Cessna 150s every which way. The later
American Champion airplanes are much heavier and have less useful load
and use a LOT more runway than the old Champs.
Shoot, even an Ercoupe can make a 150 look sick. I flew a 90-hp Alon
Aircoupe, the last iteration of the Ercoupe series, and it took off
shorter, climbed faster, and cruised faster than the 150s. I have no
idea what the 150 is doing with its 100 hp.
Dan
Bug Dout
> Neither the Cessna 150 or the Cherokee 140 are known for their short-
> field performance. We used to run a couple of 150s in the school, and
> on warm days the 3000' paved runway, at 3000' altitude, was getting
> marginal. Grass would be way worse; the drag of grass or stubble
> mustn't be underestimated. I've seen the Cherokees eat a lot of
> runway, too. The best bet for a cheaper airplane for this field would
> be a Champ 7EC. We had a 7EC that had been converted from the 90 hp to
> 100, and it outran those Cessna 150s every which way. The later
> American Champion airplanes are much heavier and have less useful load
> and use a LOT more runway than the old Champs.
>
> Shoot, even an Ercoupe can make a 150 look sick. I flew a 90-hp Alon
> Aircoupe, the last iteration of the Ercoupe series, and it took off
> shorter, climbed faster, and cruised faster than the 150s. I have no
> idea what the 150 is doing with its 100 hp.
>
> Dan
I agree. You'd have to do a lot of mods to a Cherokee 140 to be safe on
a grass field. I have an Alon Aircoupe, and it comes close in cruise and
climb to a run-out C-172. If the OP had a paved field, I'd recommend an
Alon for his needs (200-300 mile trip, ~$20K as I recall). But not from
a short grass strip. The plane he's going to look at, a 100hp C-140,
should be fine.
--
And the users exclaimed with a laugh and a taunt: "It's just what we
asked for but not what we want."
brian whatcott
That makes your rwy 21 iffy, though the C140 has better performance.
Brian W
Dave
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Od9s_VEXS8
I am the pilot, 150 hp Warrior, temp is 7 deg C. Fuel is at tabs, 70
lbs in baggage, I am alone (160 lbs)
Camera is 600 ft down the rny..
Mattisons mods (seals and VG's) and his takeoff technique...
Good luck with your search!
Cheers!
Dave
MBDiagMan
Dave,
Thanks very much for the link to your Youtube! It was very impressive.
My question now is.... would the same modifications do the same thing
for a Hershey Bar Cherokke?
Thanks again,
Doc
--
MBDiagMan