What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

short runways

Too many variables to provide a blanket answer to your question - obstructions, trees, elevation, slope, pilot experience, go around options, over-run conditions, comfort level, etc. It's an individual limit. It doesn't matter what anyone else is comfortable with, but plenty would be fine landing an RV on 1000' of runway assuming clear approaches and go around options. Others would not.
 
It's clear on one end with trees on the other. I would plan on just going around if I missed my touchdown spot. I was comfortable when I was training in a 152 landing on the numbers. I have 240 hours, mostly in the 152. My plane isn't built yet so I have no comfort level yet. I'm going to take transition training so hopefully I will have my comfort level before I get in it. Am I building a death trap, lol?
 
Transition training is one thing, but the RV flies so much differently than a trainer that I think it's optimistic to assume that you'll be completely comfortable operating a new airplane out of such a short strip. I'm sure it's been done, but given a choice I'd much rather have an 'easier' field near me for my first 40 hours. What if a nasty crosswind pops up while your in the air? Will you have alternatives nearby?

Chris
 
Too many variables to provide a blanket answer to your question - obstructions, trees, elevation, slope, pilot experience, go around options, over-run conditions, comfort level, etc. It's an individual limit. It doesn't matter what anyone else is comfortable with, but plenty would be fine landing an RV on 1000' of runway assuming clear approaches and go around options. Others would not.

In that vein, I flew in Germany in a Jodel DR400 (180HP 4 seater) from an 800 ft paved strip. However, this 800 ft strip was in the middle of a HUGE flat plain of grass. The paved part could have easily been shorter. :eek:
 
Too short for an aborted takeoff

If you were taking off on a wet day, I'm not sure you could abort a take-off without running out of distance starting from mid-field, allowing for perception-reaction time and reduced braking effectiveness.

FWIW, these discussions almost always degenerate into brag responses about what a short distance the "hero sticks" can take off/land in. Personally, I am not Chuck Yeager. 85% of the time I make the mid-field turn-off at my 2400 ft. home turf airstrip (3% downhill), which means 15% of the time I don't. YMMV.

Moderators, please feel free to close this thread when we get to the "mine's bigger than yours" posts. Thanks

Larry Tompkins
544WB -6A
W52 Battle Ground, WA
 
Just because the airplane can do it, doesn't mean it should. Longer runway means more options. The closer to the limits you fly, the fewer options you are leaving yourself.
 
It's clear on one end with trees on the other. I would plan on just going around if I missed my touchdown spot. I was comfortable when I was training in a 152 landing on the numbers. I have 240 hours, mostly in the 152. My plane isn't built yet so I have no comfort level yet. I'm going to take transition training so hopefully I will have my comfort level before I get in it. Am I building a death trap, lol?


RV9A will bring you the comfort of 152 landing on the numbers. She can make it even shorter. Keep building those hours :)
 
I have flown my -6 out of my 1500' runway here in Texas for about 20 years.
Many of my friends are not comfortable flying in here. And that's fine.
When you add in hi temps, density altitude, and other factors, my biggest concern is a direct crosswind.
I have flown into shorter runways, but considering all factors, I would not be comfortable with anything much shorter than 1500' for continued operations.
RV-9 and -12 could get by with less, but not much.
 
I'd be comfortable with 1000' unobstructed for takeoff but for landing, I'd want double that.
 
AJ - that's is an EYEs WIDE video!

I'm with Mel and I'm on 1900'.

Turbo - I want that new single seater you have !
 
Margins

For me, 1400 ft with 75 ft trees both ends in RV6a. The problem is that you don't have any margins for mistakes, temp, DA, and so forth. Also, you have to nail it every time and the carrier landing can be hard on the nose gear models. Taking off you have to keep the nose wheel light so there are a lot of things to consider when flying into and out of a marginal length field. Here is a video of RV-6a taking off and then landing on my field.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eJP674OiJQ0

By the way, I don't recommend you doing this right after transition training. It took me a solid month of daily doing spot landings at 5000ft paved strip before I had the confidence and fortitude to do the stol with repeatability.

My advise is to take the advise of the well respected posters above. They know what they are talking about.
 
My home strip for the 172 is 2500' with power lines across the threshold on both ends, leaving about 2000' useful - and that's about as tight as I want for regular operations. With the increased performance of a 9A over the 172 I'm sure I'll be happy with that distance once I have gotten some good transition training.
 
Thanks for all of the responses. So is the 500 foot landing roll listed on Van's website wishful thinking, or is that about right? Also, all of my flight test hours will be at a paved strip, so I would have time to practice. I'm thinking long term for building the strip. I just want to know if it's worth the investment of building it.
 
Thanks for all of the responses. So is the 500 foot landing roll listed on Van's website wishful thinking, or is that about right? Also, all of my flight test hours will be at a paved strip, so I would have time to practice. I'm thinking long term for building the strip. I just want to know if it's worth the investment of building it.

The 500' landing roll is dragging it in under power and plunking it down under ideal conditions. Not your normal every day landing.
 
Thanks for all of the responses. So is the 500 foot landing roll listed on Van's website wishful thinking, or is that about right?

Not wishful thinking if you're on a surface with good braking traction and touch down at min. speed. But there's a big difference between a 500' rollout and landing on 500' of usable runway. Doesn't matter if you can rollout in 500' if you float for 1000' and then bounce a couple times before getting stable on the ground for hard braking.
 
You guys can have it! I come home to a lit, well paved, 6500x150 runway and a control tower. :D

1900x40 is my record with big power lines on one end, and water off both ends. Airplane did it no problem but dealing with that every day would get really old.
 
You guys can have it! I come home to a lit, well paved, 6500x150 runway and a control tower. :D

1900x40 is my record with big power lines on one end, and water off both ends. Airplane did it no problem but dealing with that every day would get really old.

I'm with you...my idea of fun is to land at my training airport's 2887 ft. runway on the numbers, then slow to make the taxiway at the midpoint easily, with almost half the runway remaining. It's a very easy, unobstructed approach, though.
 
take-off distance.....factors?

Since no-one has mentioned it.....are you planning a climb prop or C/S?
If not, you are not getting a ton of hp from your engine in the crucial first 10 seconds or so.
Loading to gross, on a hot, calm day may put you outside your comfort zone, but it can certainly exceed the aircraft's ability....it would be a shame to be grounded on those nice days.
 
I'd be comfortable with 1000' unobstructed for takeoff but for landing, I'd want double that.

I second that notion.

RV's are wonderfully manueverable airplanes that inspire flying confidence in all of us, but to land - day in and day out - on a 1000' strip would require perfect conditions and perfect piloting EVERY time. That's a bit much to ask for. :)
 
aim point considerations

Suggest you consider moving your aiming point, wherever you base your aircraft, and give yourself more options.

I'm a low time pilot, and aimed at the numbers because that's what I learned. A high time pilot pointed out that means my error margin was +5000 feet, and -0.:cool: This great stick and rudder pilot used the visual touchdown markers, with plenty of room to slow without braking before turning off the runway.

I now aim for the touchdown markers, which gives me much more room for error, and aligns me with the VASI. Nice how that worked out...

With respect to the video of the RV-6 touchdown in the pine forest on a very short grass strip, the audio is worth a listen:

"No F****** S***
Please never %^%^&&*@ do this again. D-you hear me?"
 
Last edited:
C/S prop effect on landing distance

Since no-one has mentioned it.....are you planning a climb prop or C/S? ....

I was thinking the same thing, although I was thinking of the drag benefits of the constant speed prop in fine pitch during the landing phase. No one has mentioned it, but it has been reported that a lightly loaded RV will tend to float in ground effect with a fixed pitch prop with the engine at idle. Maybe the -7 floats less than a -9, but it is something to consider.

For me, I'd say get it flying first, base it at a longer runway, become proficient at taking off and landing, and THEN make the decision to build your own runway. I'd want it at least 2000 feet with unobstructed approaches on each end.
 
I was planning on a constant speed prop with a 180 hp engine. I was figuring if I missed my landing point I would just throttle up and go around. The video has me a little confused. If that's a 1000 foot strip and he touches down at the beginning, why does it take him 1000 feet to stop? It seems like he was just trying to scare his passenger.
 
... excellent approach, great touchdown, and barely made it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZThhf9-98Y

:eek::eek::eek::eek:
nnrdt.gif
 
I was planning on a constant speed prop with a 180 hp engine. I was figuring if I missed my landing point I would just throttle up and go around. The video has me a little confused. If that's a 1000 foot strip and he touches down at the beginning, why does it take him 1000 feet to stop? It seems like he was just trying to scare his passenger.

Any sort of rough surface is going to greatly reduce braking ability and therefore increase stopping distance. It looked to me like that surface was very rough. 3-4 knots too fast along with any tailwind could easily have you eat up that much grass, I would think.
 
cones

Yes, I put those out there to cover the washed out areas so I wouldn't dig the nose wheel in and be another flip-over statistic. I complained to the airport owner about her going out there and filling those holes and planting grass (after she cooks supper) but she got all ill about it.

As far as stopping distance, I got a lesson on wet grass and a little 5 kts tail wind. I think I slid about 700 ft, almost to the hay bales at the end. I needed a reverser or maybe fred flintstone feet. Its amazing how a little wind and really make a lot of difference.

Congratulations! At 5:35 your camera is almost perfectly aligned with the two orange cones on your airfield. Not sure if that was intentional, but when I saw them, I thought, "What was that?" :)
 
My Practice Field!

... Below is a link to my RV-9A practice field. I take off and land regularly at this field in an attempt to stay sharp with short field operations. This little runway is exactly 500 feet long with no obstacles and is at 1700 foot elevation. When I am practicing, regardless of the runway, be it long, short, paved or unimproved I always pick a touchdown spot to shoot for. I also practice from all possible altitudes, high and low, full fuel, low fuel, with and without flaps on final at hitting that chosen spot. While doing this on a longer paved runway, I do it with the prop windmilling and stopped as well. When the necessity to be very precise presents itself, the last thing you need is to float over or land short of the spot you have picked. Thanks, Allan...:D
.
https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=34.097789,-117.118099&spn=0.001341,0.002064&t=h&z=20
 
RC 9A?

... Below is a link to my RV-9A practice field. I take off and land regularly at this field in an attempt to stay sharp with short field operations.

Alan,
this looks like a model airplane field, do you really land here in a "full sized" 9A or are you joking?
 
Alan,
this looks like a model airplane field, do you really land here in a "full sized" 9A or are you joking?

...Yes! But this is my short field limit on purpose. Low weight, low fuel, full flaps, C/S in flat pitch and no tail wind. I can actually land much shorter but it could get interesting on the takeoff. :eek: Thanks, Allan...
 
...Yes! But this is my short field limit on purpose. Low weight, low fuel, full flaps, C/S in flat pitch and no tail wind. I can actually land much shorter but it could get interesting on the takeoff. :eek: Thanks, Allan...

Alan my hat is off to you! I find that absolutely incredible you can land on a 500 foot runway! When I saw the picture I thought you were joking. I'm not comfortable with less than 2500 feet of pavement in front of me. I can't even imagine attempting to take off with 500 feet, let alone land!
 
Alan my hat is off to you! I find that absolutely incredible you can land on a 500 foot runway! When I saw the picture I thought you were joking. I'm not comfortable with less than 2500 feet of pavement in front of me. I can't even imagine attempting to take off with 500 feet, let alone land!

... I have actually had my airplane / me perform at Vans published numbers listed below. I am not overly confident using them as any variations and it can go bad in a hurry. The 500 ft is actually very comfortable landing with some left over and the take offs are usually dead on 300 to 350 ft. Thanks, Allan..:D
Vans numbers for RV-9A:
Ground Performance - Solo Weight / 160 hp
Takeoff Distance 300 ft
Landing Distance 300 ft
 
Apples and Oranges...

Alan my hat is off to you! I find that absolutely incredible you can land on a 500 foot runway! When I saw the picture I thought you were joking. I'm not comfortable with less than 2500 feet of pavement in front of me. I can't even imagine attempting to take off with 500 feet, let alone land!

Hi John,
I operated my Harmon Rocket regularly out of my Dad's tree-encrusted 1100' grass strip with practice, my RV4 had lots of extra room. Six hundred feet with no obstacles is very realistic and with practice, attainable. Slow flight and high AOA approaches in any airplane are simply max performing the design, and knowing it well. Look at a Taylorcraft, Bonanza, Beech 18 or T34 and note the airfoil. NACA 23012, the short wing RV is nearly identical vice the chord. No accident, Van operated his TCraft off a 600' farm strip when he built the prototype RV-1 and later RV3 to operate there. The Glasair is a completely different animal, and wing.
However comma, with practice you could shoehorn it into a short-er runway.
:)

V/R
Smokey
 
Last edited:
1,000'.?

Ok, here's my answer on your 1,000' strip question. I've been flying for over twenty years with about 5,000 landings and have flown all the cessnas, most pipers and a few other makes. Not many are easy to land on strips that short. Having said that, I've just recently finished my RV7A and completed the first ten hours in it. I can tell you that the first time you fly an RV, you will be surprised. Get some time with another pilot at least that has time in the rv series. They are fantastics birds trying to get to heaven once airborne and things happen a whole lot faster than a 152. The airplane is much more capable of many things, much more than most pilots are prepared for I might dare say. So to answer your question: the plane can do it but only when the pilot is exceptionally trained and prepared. By the way, just remember, as a pilot your training should never end. Small goals first. You will love the airplanes capability in time. I myself am still an RV pilot in training and I personally like the extra runway for now.
Have fun and be safe
mike
 
A very interesting comment about insurance back there. With no time in type and low time overall I can't see anyone in their right mind insuring you (or me). All the flight schools around here restrict rentals to 3500 ft paved runways amongst other restrictions simply because of the insurance.

I have the privilege of working with professional ex military test pilots several of whom are RV owners. One of them told me to stay away from tight grass strips until I build up some confidence in myself and a new airplane. I plan to take that advice. But certainly the RVs are very capable in the hands of an experienced proficient pilot and it is sure going to be a blast when I get there.
 
Back
Top