• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

Faa acknowledges turf operations

I too use an ‘unofficial’ rwy next to the paved one. A bit different than most - our airport isn’t terribly busy except for a flight school. I spend a lot of time with a shovel. I have a very understanding manager who basically allows my maintenance operations.
 
Our airport board is always made up of city fathers and a prominent business owner's pilot, they operate a Citation out of here. The previous pilot had a Citabria and conveyed the usefulness of the grass area I have been using for years. The powers that be have no issue with it. I forwarded the above info to our airport manager and got this response.
Overall, it looks like a lot of government speak to say, "Use discretion and be careful; holler if you need help figuring that out."
Click to expand...
Figure I will reach out to the FSDO and see where it goes. I tell my customers there are two areas I land in and they can use them if they like. I guess I would just like it known more for the poor guy going cross country in a tail dragger who is fighting the crosswind and if it is established it is harder for the next generation of city father to take it away. I didn't mention I have run a business on this airport for 25 years and have never been asked to be on the airport board but I make sure I am at every meeting. ;)
 
mvivion said:
You and your Manager are misconstruing the point of the AC. The point is not to suggest development of another "runway". This AC change is simply addressing operations in an unprepared area WITHIN the safety area of an existing runway. Essentially, these areas may require zero "preparation" and minimal maintenance. Here in Bozeman, pilots often land adjacent to runway 3/21. You are truly on your own there, though, since the airport does zero maintenance there, other than mowing alongside the runway, which they do for all runways. But, nobody "prepared" the area for grass operations, nobody monitors it, and there is NO "designated" landing area. You land wherever you like, as long as it's adjacent that runway.

This area is in fact kind of rough, unless you're running big tires, and there are some culverts out there. There is NO prep, only mowing, and the point is, as the admonition of the Tower suggests, landing there is at your own risk. Don't expect a "runway", cause there isn't one there.

And, in fact, BZN has a very nice turf runway. So, why do some folks land "off airport" within the airport? To significantly reduce taxi distance, which can be harder on Bushwheels than landing.



What your Manager is talking about is DEVELOPING a dedicated grass/unpaved runway, which is an entirely different subject, and has nothing to do with this AC. Someone should point this out to him.

MTV
Click to expand...

Mike,

You are providing great guidance on this issue and it matches my experience as well.

Thank you.

Jeff


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app
 
The problem though, in my situation, I'm asking to land off the side at my own risk. My airport manager only sees the answer as a formal grass strip, surveyed, etc. Instead of just answering "land at your own risk" he reached out to Virginia Department of Aviation, who's job is to handle runway requirements, not what I'm after. Futile, it seems. Maybe someday I can try talking to the FSDO and maybe they can convince him and other airport managers what the spirit of this change is about. The problem is the usage would be ONE aircraft, me, but my hope is others will come and partake as well and promote the growth of GA which has been killed off here since I did flight school here in the 80's.

Like Steve Pierce above mentioned. We need to know when going to another airport if we can use the area off the side of the runway. Maybe AOPA can address this and database it and include it in their airport info. Then maybe it will be adopted by more. I made the same point to my airport manager as it's safer for me to land in the grass when under high crosswinds. Now the question I face is if I had to land in high crosswinds, do I go for the grass and face the music or risk the paved surface? Probably the latter.
 
A quick check on Google Earth shows KFCI has a 1,500 ft long paved crosswind "runway". That's where I would be landing if the crosswind on the main runway was over my limits and going somewhere else wasn't an option.
 
Steve Pierce said:
Our airport board is always made up of city fathers and a prominent business owner's pilot, they operate a Citation out of here. The previous pilot had a Citabria and conveyed the usefulness of the grass area I have been using for years. The powers that be have no issue with it. I forwarded the above info to our airport manager and got this response. Figure I will reach out to the FSDO and see where it goes. I tell my customers there are two areas I land in and they can use them if they like. I guess I would just like it known more for the poor guy going cross country in a tail dragger who is fighting the crosswind and if it is established it is harder for the next generation of city father to take it away. I didn't mention I have run a business on this airport for 25 years and have never been asked to be on the airport board but I make sure I am at every meeting. ;)
Click to expand...

And, there's the rub: It's one thing to simply allow local pilots to land in a certain area. It's something quite different to announce that as a potential landing surface to the rest of the world. And, the problem is, as always, the perception of liability. "If we announce this as a prospective landing area, are we liable if someone crashes, etc....".

Frankly, the fewer people involved is sometimes the best. But, as Steve accurately points out, that doesn't help the pilot on a cross country who arrives during a big wind.

My response there is, I do what's safe, and if anyone wants to argue that, I'm game. As long as my airplane and I are in one piece. And, yes, I've done so, at uncontrolled airports. Don't ask, don't tell.

The real good news is that if one of THOSE deals ever went sideways on you, you now have FAA guidance, in the form of this AC, which says it's okay....sorta. Might still have a pissing contest with a local government, but if you didn't break anything or cause a significant conflict......seems to me it'd be a stretch for the FAA to get involved.

At a Class D airport, however, not so much. Go find another airport.

MTV
 
mvivion said:
You and your Manager are misconstruing the point of the AC. ....
Click to expand...

From post #1 above:
"2.10.6.3 AIP Airport Sponsor Grant Assurance 19 requires the owner of an airportdeveloped with Federal grant assistance to operate its airport at all times ina safe and serviceable condition. Refer to AC 150/5000-17. An airportwith operations in the RSA adjacent to the runway pavement may need toassess the operational safety implications, with assistance from the FAA,to ensure an acceptable level of safety.
2.10.6.4 FAA Order 5190.6 establishes FAA policy for reasonably accommodatingthese activities while addressing safety considerations and coordinationwith other FAA offices. Flight Standards, working in conjunction with theOffice of Airports and/or ATO, will analyze supporting data anddocumentation to determine whether conducting a particular activity at anairport results in an acceptable level of safety."

The point is to allow grass ops.
The details is where the problem lies.
Other people may have luck with this,
but getting my airport operator to take it up the ladder to the fsdo would be an uphill battle.
And getting the local fsdo to sign off on it would be nigh onto impossible,
judging from the couple of interactions I've had with them in the past.
The best I can hope for is that the airport continues to officially ignore the DA/DT grass ops.
 
And, welcome to the real world, as we know it.

Every airport I’ve ever been around was more or less a fiefdom, operating within FAA guidelines, mostly, but making most of these kinds of decisions themselves.

Notice the operative term in the AC: airports MAY….

If you or someone can’t convince airport management this is a good idea, the FAA will have nothing to do with it.

But, doesn’t mean you can’t keep working that direction. Get yourself elected/appointed to the airport commission/board, etc.

Nobody said this stuff is going to be easy….or make sense.

MTV
 
Remember also, if the FAA doesn't have any $$$ invested in the airport, they have no say in how it operates. It would be the responsibility of the airport owner whether it be a municipal ownership or privately owned open to the public. Your local State aeronautics may have some say. At least that's the way it is here in my State.
 
Hmmm. At my local airport i began landing on a abandoned taxiway that the asphalt had been removed. The city crew then started mowing it for me. Now i hear the area cub pilots reporting “short final 17 left grass strip” just like i do….


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org
 
My home airport is KHCR, renowned as one of the most disliked in the USA, but we have a great airport manager and he set up a parallel grass strip marked by cones several years ago. He is super GA Friendly, loves taildraggers, always bring guests in to show them my build progress. Our city council is really great…. If only we did not have the noose of the local FBO around our necks with the ridiculous fuel prices.
 
After reading all these posts, I sure count myself lucky that I have chiseled out a stirp on my own property. While I still keep a plane in town at the local airport (uncontrolled), it seems like this state (Minnesota) is much more accomadating in general to TW type aircraft than many places. But then northern MN is predominantly TW types it seems. Floats, Skis or Big tires are the name of the game here.

Good luck to all you fellow pilots trying to improve other areas of the country to be more open to our type of aircraft. With the boom of back country type planes and flying, maybe things will improve.
 
mvivion said:
You and your Manager are misconstruing the point of the AC. The point is not to suggest development of another "runway". This AC change is simply addressing operations in an unprepared area WITHIN the safety area of an existing runway. Essentially, these areas may require zero "preparation" and minimal maintenance. Here in Bozeman, pilots often land adjacent to runway 3/21. You are truly on your own there, though, since the airport does zero maintenance there, other than mowing alongside the runway, which they do for all runways. But, nobody "prepared" the area for grass operations, nobody monitors it, and there is NO "designated" landing area. You land wherever you like, as long as it's adjacent that runway.

This area is in fact kind of rough, unless you're running big tires, and there are some culverts out there. There is NO prep, only mowing, and the point is, as the admonition of the Tower suggests, landing there is at your own risk. Don't expect a "runway", cause there isn't one there.

And, in fact, BZN has a very nice turf runway. So, why do some folks land "off airport" within the airport? To significantly reduce taxi distance, which can be harder on Bushwheels than landing.



What your Manager is talking about is DEVELOPING a dedicated grass/unpaved runway, which is an entirely different subject, and has nothing to do with this AC. Someone should point this out to him.

MTV
Click to expand...

Afton WY has (so it seems, I've never used it) a nicely maintained grass strip to the west of the main runway, but it is, as you say, too far to taxi after landing there, if one is headed to the Aviat gate. I've been landing the turf between the runway and taxiway on the north end for years, if anyone has even noticed, nobody cares.

An my strip, I once had a group of pilots all land on the county gravel road behind my place, due to a x wind, and I had to tell them "if you can't handle my strip in a x wind, keep on flying." I don't need some busybody seeing it and complaining about planes on a county road. It took a while before they realized I was dead serious!

My strip made the big time recently, (https://www.flyingmag.com/americas-shortest-runways/) yeah it's short but I know plenty of other private strips much more difficult, but not on the charts, mine is. Maule pilot Greg wins that contest, followed by Hal Stockman's, which would give Greg pause, as his wing span isn't 29' like the S-7 Hal flies....yeah, it's that tight.
 
As this change to the AC is new. When the time comes for anyone that was able to use this change for good, please share your story. I look forward to hearing how the change has helped someone make a difference.
 
Frankly, this didn’t change much, if anything. The Airports folks in FAA have been discussing this for a long time. They were well aware that these kinds of operations happen in places. Basically, this is simply an acknowledgement that people land off the runway but within the runway safety area, and that the practice does not constitute a safety issue.

The fact is that airport managements MAY view this as a good thing. But I seriously doubt this is going to change the minds of many folks in management who are opposed.

This is not a “You can do this”. From the FAA. It’s more of an “We really don’t care”.

I too hope that more airport managers get on board with allowing this sort of thing. But, the fear of liability is pretty potent, unfortunately.

The key will be getting airport management to “We really don’t care”. This AC may help, but it’ll take a lot of work by US to make it happen. And likely some frustration.

MTV
 
skywagon8a said:
Remember also, if the FAA doesn't have any $$$ invested in the airport, they have no say in how it operates. It would be the responsibility of the airport owner whether it be a municipal ownership or privately owned open to the public. Your local State aeronautics may have some say. At least that's the way it is here in my State.
Click to expand...

While it's true that FAA has a huge amount of oversight on federally funded airports,
I believe they have some oversight re safe operations even on non-funded airports.
In any event, my airport is a funded airport,
& I'd bet that most of the public airports that people here are based at have also received at least some funding.
From a recent GA News article about this AC:

There is a process — it is the FAA after all — to go through before turf operations can be authorized at an airport in which this AC is applicable.

  • The airport owner must request that a turf operations area be established.
  • The local FSDO must ensure that operations in the proposed area can take place safely in order to issue an approval.
I’ll take the turf — General Aviation News
 
hotrod180 said:
While it's true that FAA has a huge amount of oversight on federally funded airports,
I believe they have some oversight re safe operations even on non-funded airports.
In any event, my airport is a funded airport,
& I'd bet that most of the public airports that people here are based at have also received at least some funding.
From a recent GA News article about this AC:

There is a process — it is the FAA after all — to go through before turf operations can be authorized at an airport in which this AC is applicable.

  • The airport owner must request that a turf operations area be established.
  • The local FSDO must ensure that operations in the proposed area can take place safely in order to issue an approval.
I’ll take the turf — General Aviation News
Click to expand...
Perhaps that is true in Washington, here in Mass it is not. If a pilot operates in a careless and reckless manner on the ground creating trouble, then the FAA may show up. But as to how the airport is laid out, whether it is grass or hard, lighted or not, the FAA has no say. The only say I have seen is their allowing it to be charted. I say this from having been the owner of two privately owned commercial open to the public airports. A land port for 40 years and a seaplane base for 52+ years. I've only ever dealt with the State aeronautics commission.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Alex Clark
FAA drug testing policy for CFIs doing short flight seeing
Replies
20
Views
10K
Alex Clark
Alex Clark
Pilawt
KVUO: New draconian airspace change, effective 10/1/12
Replies
2
Views
2K
85Mike
85Mike
Anne
FAA GA Survey
Replies
5
Views
3K
bob turner
B
B
NWA is trying to stick it to GA.
Replies
16
Views
8K
RedEye
RedEye
hotrod180
2019 runway project at Jefferson County 0S9-- HELP!
Replies
2
Views
6K
hotrod180
hotrod180
Back
Top