W

WISC

Well Known Member
My intention is not to start a war. I need specific advice.
Situation 1700 grass strip 50 foot obstacle on one end and 75 foot obstacle on the other end. I can cut down the 75 foot tree but that is a last resort due to historical, sentimental issues.
First, is this a viable option in a RV?
If answer to question one is yes which would suit me better considering the airplanes are the same except for prop an engine:
180hp engine with fixed pitch prop
Or
160hp C/S
Again not trying to start a war, I think both would be adequate for taking off but I?m truly wondering about clearing the 75 obstacle and being able land with adequate roll out distance.
Thank you.
 
Landing: C/S Prop would win easily (HP does not matter except in go-around when see takeoff).

Takeoff: With a climb FP prop, the 180HP could be better, but once clear of the trees, it would be a very slow RV. With a normal cruise Prop, that say gave you 2150RPM static, your 180HP engine will be giving 140HP max, and putting that into an inefficient prop :eek: C/S Prop gives you 160HP throughout into optimised prop.

Andy
RV-8 G-HILZ kept on a 1600' strip with trees at each end ;)
 
That is not a short field for an RV

Look at other factors to make your decision as your runway length is not an issue. Learn to slip that puppy and you can drop right in.
 
Last edited:
It depends?

Which RV are we talking about?

I had an O-290 on my RV-9 and on a 90+ degree day at gross, I wouldn’t hesitate to fly out of that airport with the FP Catto I had.

A shortwing RV, might have an issue with that but the –9 would leap over those trees in a single bound.

Rather than cutting the tree, can you fly around it? I've done that on some of the grass strips I've landed at.
 
Going back to the original question, is anyone comfortable landing over a 50' obstacle on a 1700' strip on a routine basis? That seems very short to me, constant speed or not.
 
I appreciate everyone chiming in to help solve my problem.
I am speaking about a RV6.
Is Kyle correct? Am I crazy? Is 1700 too short? I have a fair amount of aviation experience but mostly miitary, so tell me if I am off base. I have not purchased the RV yet but it is between two RV 6's the 180hp fixed pitch and the 160hp C/S.
 
is anyone comfortable landing over a 50' obstacle on a 1700' strip on a routine basis?
Click to expand...
Is Kyle correct? Am I crazy? Is 1700 too short? I have a fair amount of aviation experience but mostly miitary, so tell me if I am off base
Click to expand...
Over in the UK there are plenty of <500m strips (1600'), and a proportion of them do have obstacles. With aircraft/owners based/living there, they must be happy using it on a "routine" basis. Indeed, is the routine more or less hazardous than "occasional"?

You do need "rules" such as where you've touched down by - or go-around, and you do need to fly speeds/approach more accurately.

Dean - you'd want to get very familiar with the RV, and the exact characteristics of the strip to judge the answer to << Am I crazy? Is 1700 too short?>>

Andy
 
WISC said:
My intention is not to start a war. I need specific advice.
Situation 1700 grass strip 50 foot obstacle on one end and 75 foot obstacle on the other end. I can cut down the 75 foot tree but that is a last resort due to historical, sentimental issues.
First, is this a viable option in a RV?
If answer to question one is yes which would suit me better considering the airplanes are the same except for prop an engine:
180hp engine with fixed pitch prop
Or
160hp C/S
Again not trying to start a war, I think both would be adequate for taking off but I’m truly wondering about clearing the 75 obstacle and being able land with adequate roll out distance.
Thank you.
Click to expand...

You did not mention what the altitude of the airstrip is. 10' MSL in Alaska is different that 6,000' MSL in Brazil... :)

Also, there are fixed pitch props pitched for climb - if you are willing to give up knots, the FP is lighter and will give satisfactory performance.

But, more power is never wrong - go with an IO-375 and a CS and have the best of all worlds. :D
 
Last edited:
Either will work. Carry less fuel when its warm if your worried. (like above 90) One third flaps for takeoff and you will be up and away no problem.

Leave the grass a bit longish during the summer, it'll help slow you down after touchdown. Learn to "slip" the A/C down to the runway. Be on speed.

Have fun!
 
Yes

Kyle Boatright said:
Going back to the original question, is anyone comfortable landing over a 50' obstacle on a 1700' strip on a routine basis? That seems very short to me, constant speed or not.
Click to expand...

Our strip is 2000' with 100' tree's on one approach end, 50' on the other. The only reason you would be landing over the end with higher trees is if the wind favored it, giving you the advantage of a head wind aiding in your ability to land short. The extra 300' on our strip is not necessary for an RV.
We have 8 or 10 RV's on our field including an 0320 fixed pitch 6 and 4. We hold an EAA event at the park every year drawing as many as 40 or 50 RV's, all types. We see a few go arounds, but most manage just fine first shot and I have never seen anybody just give up.
 
I had the good fortune for some period of time to own both a 180hp f/p RV6 as well as a 160hp f/p (then upgraded the 160fp to a 180 cs) that operated out of a similar grass strip with trees on one end.

We flew the 180fp airplane in/out of that strip for years in every weather climate from soaking hot to below zero with a snowy strip. Even without lots of practice you'll get in/out ok, but with the FP you do need to watch your speeds on approach fairly closely or you can eat up lots of runway by floating. With the FP planes and short grass strips it really helps if you're like me and you like to slip. You can come in over some trees, slip it down to the ground and grease it on (at least it sounds easy)!

Honestly I wouldn't be afraid of either one and personally I'd probably like the 180 just a bit more in the end for cruise. A well tuned up 180FP plane with the right prop and the plane lightweight will just about outrun everything C/S powered on the top end in the right conditions. We don't need to start arguing about fuel flows, takeoff/climb distances, etc.. because I know the whole story - been there done that. What I am saying is don't be afraid of the FP props and a 180hp airplane because it's a really terrific combination. C/S props are fun but they have their downsides as well.

Anyway, that's just my 2 cents. Right now I'm operating an RV6 with 180 C/S and love it....but that's only because I ended up with a really cheap paddle blade hartzell from someone who was upgrading to the blended airfoil (I operate with the standard beer budget). Otherwise I'd probably still be flying with a FP prop.

Cheers,
Stein
 
You must log in or register to reply here.