Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 50

Thread: Faa acknowledges turf operations

  1. #1
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    21,893
    Post Thanks / Like

    Faa acknowledges turf operations

    Read this from the RAF today and downloaded what the FAA said and posted below. I mow and operate on two 660 foot adjacent areas at my home airport. Trying tpo decide if I want to make it official and deal with the Feds on this or just keep doing what I do. From personal experience it is sometimes not worth the headache dealing with a Fed who interprets things differently than I do.

    https://theraf.org/faa-acknowledges-...R3mt96ewSDymBo

    2.10.6 Aircraft Operations in the Unpaved Runway Safety Area (RSA).The primary function of a standard RSA is to enhance the safety of aircraft thatundershoot,
    overrun, or veer off the runway. Pilots of certain aircraft (such asultralights, powered-parachutes, helicopters, gliders, agricultural aircraft, tailwheels,aircraft with large balloon type “tundra” tires, etc.) occasionally use the unpaved portionof the RSA adjacent to a runway for takeoffs, landings, or other operations (e.g., bannertowing). While aircraft operations from the unpaved portion of an RSA are notinherently unsafe, such operations have the potential to introduce various hazards andrisks to the pilot, as well as other aircraft, vehicles, individuals, and facilities on theairport.

    2.10.6.1 Key risk factors to consider include:
    1. The separation standards of Tables G-1 through G-12 in Appendix Gdo not consider landing and takeoff operations from the RSA adjacentto the paved runway surface.
    2. Aeronautical studies do not cover operations to and from the RSAadjacent to the paved runway.

    2.10.6.2 From an airport design perspective, the optimum approach for an airportwith a demonstrated need for operations from a turf surface is thedevelopment of a standard turf runway, per paragraph 3.20. Runwayjustification conditions and regular-use criteria apply if the airport desiresFederal assistance with development of a turf runway.

    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.

    2.10.6.5 The Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) specialist serves as the initialpoint of contact for a safety assessment. The FSDO engages other FlightStandards
    offices, as appropriate, to assess and determine if an acceptablelevel of safety for aircraft operations within the unpaved portion of anRSA exists. In many cases, current FAA regulations, guidance, andoperational procedures are sufficient to establish an acceptable level ofsafety. In other cases, operational mitigations are necessary based onFlight Standards safety assessment and guidance. Contact the applicableFSDO specialist for questions related to the safety of aircraft operationswithin the unpaved portion of an RSA. Seehttps://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/field_offices/fsdo/ for FSDOcontact information.

    2.10.6.6 Airport design standards do not account for these types of operations.Consider the following factors when assessing aircraft operations in theRSA:
    1. Education of the pilot community to reflect an operation in the RSAadjacent to the paved runway surface represents an operation on thepaved runway.

    2. The separation values and hold line locations on the runway side,where RSA operations occur, may be inadequate to mitigate identifiedrisk.
    3. Provision for enhanced inspection and maintenance of the RSA toensure a serviceable condition.
    4. Provision of airport informational notes in the Chart Supplement andAutomatic Weather Observation Systems (AWOS) broadcasts.
    5. Provisions based on State laws on landing and takeoff areas.6. Consultation with the Part 139 inspector at certificated airports.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Likes Hardtailjohn liked this post

  2. #2
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    12,115
    Post Thanks / Like
    Just remember, when landing a turf area adjacent an active runway on a tower controlled airport, that the ATC admonition “Landing in the grass adjacent to runway XX is at your own risk” does NOT authorize you to enter ANY controlled surface after landing.

    That means you cannot cross the paved runway surface you just landed next to, nor can you taxi onto any CONTROLLED taxiway, without specific clearance from ATC.

    Our local tower has long permitted operations in the grass adjacent runway 03. A pilot was chewed out (but not violated) for crossing a controlled surface after landing there.

    Just understand in that situation, you are not “cleared” by ATC to do anything. Land adjacent a runway, then if you need to cross that runway, request clearance, just like any other case.

    MTV
    Thanks jrussl, RVBottomly, 40m, Bill Rusk thanked for this post
    Likes Herc, Pete Schoeninger, courierguy, AZinAK liked this post

  3. #3
    hotrod180's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Port Townsend, WA
    Posts
    3,885
    Post Thanks / Like
    We talked with our airport administrators about having an "alternate grass landing area" (AGLA) added to our next official airport layout plan (ALP).
    The idea was to provide a place for grass operations but without the legal ramifications of it being a runway.
    Turns out there's almost as much red tape & BS involved as if it was an actual "runway",
    and just about as much legal culpability.
    I think everyone decided "don't ask, don't tell" (DA/DT) is a better policy, for us anyways.
    Cessna Skywagon-- accept no substitute!
    Likes Delta Cub liked this post

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    7,852
    Post Thanks / Like
    When we shut down our main runway for repaving for over two months I blocked out two 1000 foot turf runways to relieve the secondary runway. They laughed at me - said it would cost too much to hire a biologist.

    Then, surprise - they hired a full time biologist! (Pleasant, attractive young girl with an office elsewhere). Still no turf runway.

    Now all we want is for them to delay mowing until the flowers go to seed - nah - gotta mow when the grass exceeds two inches.
    Likes mixer liked this post

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    7,852
    Post Thanks / Like
    And PS - Mike - I always wondered whose risk it is at when I land on the properly paved, marked, and certificated runway?
    Likes akavidflyer liked this post

  6. #6
    akavidflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soldotna AK
    Posts
    289
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by bob turner View Post
    And PS - Mike - I always wondered whose risk it is at when I land on the properly paved, marked, and certificated runway?
    I have asked the tower that same thing. When they advised landing "at your own risk" I came back with "as apposed to any other landing in what way" and all I got was crickets. I think its just something they like to say.
    Likes Brandsman liked this post

  7. #7
    frequent_flyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2021
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    Posts
    739
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by akavidflyer View Post
    I have asked the tower that same thing. When they advised landing "at your own risk" I came back with "as apposed to any other landing in what way" and all I got was crickets. I think its just something they like to say.
    Things they should say versus things they may like to say are defined in Pilot/Controller Glossary - https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publ...g_10-12-17.pdf.

    When I wondered what "at your own risk" implied I tried to find the phrase in the glossary. The word "risk" appears twice but neither reference is relevant.

    However, this article provides a path to an explanation - https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/...9/training-tip

    The paragraph numbering has changed but the reference can be found in "VFR Helicopter Operations at Controlled Airports" para 4-3-17.

    https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publ...section_3.html

    The significant difference seems to be whether the tower has control over, and responsibility for, movements on the landing surface.

  8. #8
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    12,115
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by akavidflyer View Post
    I have asked the tower that same thing. When they advised landing "at your own risk" I came back with "as apposed to any other landing in what way" and all I got was crickets. I think its just something they like to say.
    That statement is required terminology, and for good reason.

    If you were to land on an “approved, certified runway”, there are all sorts of assurances that the airport and the FAA provide to you. If there’s a pothole, or major FOD on that runway, and you hit it, you MAY have standing to sue the airport for damages. This is a surface that was specifically prepared AND certified for landing aircraft.

    And, ATC can clear you to operate (land/takeoff/taxi) on that surface.

    But, land alongside that certified surface, and there are NO assurances, other than that no obstacles can penetrate the side slope requirements. But, there could be a ditch, a culvert, a massive badger den, ground squirrel colony, or ??? So, ATC cannot CLEAR you to land there. If you land and hit an obstacle…..tough deal, AND FSDO could investigate for careless operation.

    Controllers can only clear you to operate upon certified surfaces and areas. Anything else is at your own risk….no assurances. You’ll also hear this statement from ATC when helicopters land somewhere other than a helipad or runway.

    MTV
    Likes 40m, jrussl, akavidflyer liked this post

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    7,852
    Post Thanks / Like
    Hear it all the time. They have stopped making me say "I will maintain visual separation" when what they really want is "waive the wake turbulence."

    But there are times when it all gets silly - they had to change taxiway India so we wouldn't confuse it with Runway One. And now the notices are absorbed directly by the air missions, completely bypassing the learners on the flight deck. And don't get me started on "line up and wait."
    Likes 62E, siegel185, RedOwlAirfield liked this post

  10. #10
    frequent_flyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2021
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    Posts
    739
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mvivion View Post
    You’ll also hear this statement from ATC when helicopters land somewhere other than a helipad or runway.
    Also for operations from helipads that are outside the movement area.

  11. #11

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    1,393
    Post Thanks / Like
    Funny thing with all this, at FDK, years ago the FAA paid in part to install a grass operations area for the glider club. About 8 or 10 years ago the airport manager wanted to get rid of the glider club and in concert with the FAA Airports office decided that the grass operationas area was no longer suitable for glider (or airplane) operations. A legal battle resulted, FAA and the airport covered up and lied, and the airport and city won the case, then jacked up the rent for the club almost 3X what we were paying. Fortunatly we also had our own airport about 20 miles away, so consolidated operations at the one airport we own. I suspect that if that FAA Order revision had been done back then, we may have gotten our way.

  12. #12
    FdxLou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Canton, GA
    Posts
    1,922
    Post Thanks / Like
    We all owe our very own Jeff Russell (WI Jeff) a big thank you for all his efforts over the last 3 years to bring this program to life. He worked tirelessly with the RAF along with input from EAA and especially AOPA to open up this process.
    Thanks Jeff!
    Lou

  13. #13
    hotrod180's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Port Townsend, WA
    Posts
    3,885
    Post Thanks / Like
    I thought I'd see just what the new AC actually said.

    AC 150/5300-13B, Airport Design, March 31, 2022 (faa.gov)

    434 pages. I didn't get very far.
    It made me think of this--
    just substitute "AC decoder" for "TAF decoder".

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	TAF decoder.jpg 
Views:	80 
Size:	45.7 KB 
ID:	60965
    Cessna Skywagon-- accept no substitute!
    Thanks LMartin thanked for this post
    Likes MoJo liked this post

  14. #14
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    21,893
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hotrod180 View Post
    I thought I'd see just what the new AC actually said.

    AC 150/5300-13B, Airport Design, March 31, 2022 (faa.gov)

    434 pages. I didn't get very far.
    It made me think of this--
    just substitute "AC decoder" for "TAF decoder".

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	TAF decoder.jpg 
Views:	80 
Size:	45.7 KB 
ID:	60965
    I posted the pertinent part.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Likes DENNY, jrussl liked this post

  15. #15
    jrussl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    752
    Post Thanks / Like

    Faa acknowledges turf operations

    Quote Originally Posted by FdxLou View Post
    We all owe our very own Jeff Russell (WI Jeff) a big thank you for all his efforts over the last 3 years to bring this program to life. He worked tirelessly with the RAF along with input from EAA and especially AOPA to open up this process.
    Thanks Jeff!
    Lou
    Thanks, Lou! It was my pleasure to work on this effort on behalf of the RAF and in collaboration with EAA and AOPA.

    And thanks Steve Pierce for posting the relevant info. All of the new turf references are in 2.10 and only two pages, 34&35.

    Jeff


    Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app
    Thanks FdxLou, Bill Rusk thanked for this post

  16. #16
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    21,893
    Post Thanks / Like
    Thanks Jeff for all you have done. I think my next step will be to contact my FSDO with details of our two operation areas and see what happens from there. Maybe a CYA in case anyone ever has a problem with where and how we operate
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Likes jrussl, FdxLou, Bill Rusk liked this post

  17. #17
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    12,115
    Post Thanks / Like
    Steve,

    First person I'd contact is the Airport Manager, THEN talk to the FSDO. But, from the FAA standpoint, the Regional Airports folks are the ones the FSDO will/should refer you to. I'd get the local manager on board (or is that you??), then go to the FAA and TELL them what you're doing. I've talked to the airports guys for MT/ID about marking grass runways with "practice runways" like they're doing in AK, and they just said if it doesn't have an instrument approach, go for it.

    MTV
    Likes jrussl liked this post

  18. #18
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    21,893
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mvivion View Post
    Steve,

    First person I'd contact is the Airport Manager
    Good idea. That I don't step on any toes, besides, it is his job that he gets paid for.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    FL001
    Posts
    58
    Post Thanks / Like
    I tried several times here at KFCI (central VA) as they have an ideal turf area on the side of runway 15. I even did a video showing the proposed landing areas, runway 15 being the ideal side. Airport manager isn't having any of it. This airport doesn't seem to care for GA traffic, they want the corporate customer. Their mission is "overflow from KRIC, our international airport" but there isn't, never has been, never will be a need to be an overflow for KRIC, not much traffic or volume. Anyways, here is the response I got and the latest from the RAF was a 3rd swing and I'm out. Throwing in the towel.

    Video presented: https://youtu.be/Scwxaitq0RU

    After reviewing the request with Virginia Department of Aviation this is what was relayed to me:

    The Department would require FCI to amend its license. The proposed landing area falls under VA Code § 5.1-7. Licensing of airports and landing areas. In order to pursue a license for the turf landing area, FCI would need to undertake the following actions:
    1. Update the Airport Layout Plan showing the location of the turf runway
    2. Design of the turf runway must meet FAA AC 50/5300-13A separation standards
    3. An Environmental effort to determine environmental impacts and mitigation measures must be completed
    4. A public hearing to issue the license must be held.
    If the airport decides to pursue this, I strongly encourage that you also include the FAA WADO with your plans. Feel free to call me if you have any questions or concerns.

    This above list would be similar to an airfield capital improvement / construction project and would take quite some time, effort and funding. Currently, I would not be able to justify the efforts with the small amount of utilization of the grass area.

  20. #20
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    21,893
    Post Thanks / Like
    So can you now use this FAA document to allow operation on the RSA and not designate it as a runway?
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

  21. #21

    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    FL001
    Posts
    58
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    So can you now use this FAA document to allow operation on the RSA and not designate it as a runway?
    I provided him the RAF post and the PDF of the updated AC. His response:

    Thank you for passing along this information. With the updated 150/5300-13B, the local FSDO must ensure that operations in the proposed area can take place safely in order to approve it.

    50/5300-13A has not changed and the remaining list below would still need to be met. With that, the below remains the position of the Airport, we could not justify the efforts with the small amount of utilization of the grass area.

  22. #22
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    21,893
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hawgdrvr View Post
    I provided him the RAF post and the PDF of the updated AC. His response:
    I would contact the FSDO myself.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

  23. #23
    daedgerton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    230
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hawgdrvr View Post
    I tried several times here at KFCI (central VA) as they have an ideal turf area on the side of runway 15. I even did a video showing the proposed landing areas, runway 15 being the ideal side. Airport manager isn't having any of it. This airport doesn't seem to care for GA traffic, they want the corporate customer. Their mission is "overflow from KRIC, our international airport" but there isn't, never has been, never will be a need to be an overflow for KRIC, not much traffic or volume. Anyways, here is the response I got and the latest from the RAF was a 3rd swing and I'm out. Throwing in the towel.

    Video presented: https://youtu.be/Scwxaitq0RU
    I'll come down and use that "grass area" !

  24. #24

    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    FL001
    Posts
    58
    Post Thanks / Like
    I think if you "ask" you're not going to like the answer when it comes to airport managers it seems. I was just north of me at KOFP getting a Garmin service done and figured I'd ask the airport manager there about the nice grass area between runway and taxiway. Yep, got the nope, wet lands, risk, etc. Back to KFCI, as a hangar tenant we have a rule book and it specifically mentioned off runway ops so my hands were tied. In my last round of efforts I told him all I need is a "land at your own risk" and not hold me in violation of the hangar tenant rules. Didn't work. I'm at the point now where I don't even want to try "not asking" and getting in hot water. I'd like to see airport notes reference "turf operations - land at your own risk" so I know of locations that allow this otherwise I have to ask and asking is never going to yield the answer we want it seems.

  25. #25
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    12,115
    Post Thanks / Like
    You’re dealing with several layers of bureaucracy when proposing this kind of thing. All the “guidance” provided by the FAA in that AC does is says the highest level of that bureaucratic ladder is good with it.

    Frankly, I don’t think that level of FAA ever gave a hoot about this…..it’s been going on at some airports for decades in any case.

    But, the defining rule maker is nearly always the Airport Management. That is where you have to start. You can use this AC as “guidance”, but I guarantee every level of the FAA is going to tell you to talk to the Airport Management.

    If, as hawgdriver describes, that management says flat no, it’s not going to happen. So, in those cases, it’s going to take a LOT of work, and maybe a new Manager. Is there an airport Commission? Talk to them, one on one at first. Get them on board, etc.

    Nobody ever said dealing with bureaucrats is easy.

    MTV
    Thanks jrussl, Delta Cub thanked for this post

  26. #26
    hotrod180's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Port Townsend, WA
    Posts
    3,885
    Post Thanks / Like
    I think that a lot of us based at public airports are in the same position--
    the airport management is pretty much spring-loaded to the no position
    when it comes to doing anything GA that's not plain vanilla or at all out of the ordinary.
    "Here, read this 434 page AC about grass ops" probably isn't gonna get any traction.
    And it doesn't take much (if anything at all) to make them not want to stick their neck out by allowing grass ops,
    esp when some yahoo is likely to ball up his airplane trying to emulate his youtube heroes.
    Skagit airport (KBVS) near me developed a nice little grass strip adjacent to rwy 22 a few years ago,
    but closed it after somebody who probably shouldn't have been out there had a mishap.
    They don't need the liability, and I can't really blame them for avoiding it.
    Cessna Skywagon-- accept no substitute!
    Likes mixer liked this post

  27. #27

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    1,393
    Post Thanks / Like
    When I lived in Poughkeepsie, we got the airport manager to OK a grass runway, but the tower wouldn't let us use it. Part time tower, so we started going out every morning before they opened and did T&Gs on the grass. When the tower opened and they wouldn't clear us to land we simply responded that they lost X number of aircraft operations. It took a couple weeks for them to catch on as the number of operations sets the GS pay grade for the tower operators. Once they figured it was impacting their paycheck, the started letting us use the grass!

    00286AD (faa.gov)

  28. #28
    hotrod180's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Port Townsend, WA
    Posts
    3,885
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hotrod180 View Post
    I think that a lot of us based at public airports are in the same position--
    the airport management is pretty much spring-loaded to the no position
    when it comes to doing anything GA that's not plain vanilla or at all out of the ordinary.
    "Here, read this 434 page AC about grass ops" probably isn't gonna get any traction......
    We had an "airport committee" meeting yesterday.
    All three pilots in attendance were taildragger guys.
    One of the other guys brought up this new AC, I immediately sent the port director (also in attendance) a link.
    Like I thought though, he wasn't too interested, citing:
    1) costs of preparing a suitable operating area
    2) costs of maintaining said area
    3) legal ramifications of having an official grass strip.
    There are plans afoot to build a new parallel taxiway farther away from the runway,
    the existing parallel has potential for being suitable for a grass strip after the pavement is removed.
    But that project is 4 or 5 years down the road.
    Cessna Skywagon-- accept no substitute!

  29. #29
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    12,115
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hotrod180 View Post
    We had an "airport committee" meeting yesterday.
    All three pilots in attendance were taildragger guys.
    One of the other guys brought up this new AC, I immediately sent the port director (also in attendance) a link.
    Like I thought though, he wasn't too interested, citing:
    1) costs of preparing a suitable operating area
    2) costs of maintaining said area
    3) legal ramifications of having an official grass strip.
    There are plans afoot to build a new parallel taxiway farther away from the runway,
    the existing parallel has potential for being suitable for a grass strip after the pavement is removed.
    But that project is 4 or 5 years down the road.
    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

  30. #30
    12Geezer2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Eau Claire, WI
    Posts
    1,095
    Post Thanks / Like

    Smile

    "at own risk" I have ALWAYS thought that ALL I DO is at my own risk. Not all at my home base were happy with my off runway operations but looked the other way MOST of the time. Snow plow guy did not always make it easy for ski operations but a bit of time with my snow shovel allowed access. Life is good !-----geezer Dan
    Likes Kid Durango liked this post

  31. #31

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Rangely, Co
    Posts
    90
    Post Thanks / Like
    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.
    Likes 12Geezer2 liked this post

  32. #32
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    21,893
    Post Thanks / Like
    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."
    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.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

  33. #33
    jrussl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    752
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mvivion View Post
    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
    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
    Likes Steve Pierce liked this post

  34. #34

    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    FL001
    Posts
    58
    Post Thanks / Like
    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.
    Thanks jrussl thanked for this post
    Likes jrussl liked this post

  35. #35
    frequent_flyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2021
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    Posts
    739
    Post Thanks / Like
    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.

  36. #36

    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    FL001
    Posts
    58
    Post Thanks / Like
    Guessing you input something wrong. click here

  37. #37
    frequent_flyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2021
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    Posts
    739
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hawgdrvr View Post
    Guessing you input something wrong. click here

    Same place and shows the 1,500 ft long 30 ft wide "runway".

  38. #38

    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    FL001
    Posts
    58
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by frequent_flyer View Post
    Same place and shows the 1,500 ft long 30 ft wide "runway".
    Haha - I was wondering. You could do that "once" and I'm sure the FBO right there would love that!

  39. #39
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    12,115
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    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.
    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

  40. #40
    hotrod180's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Port Townsend, WA
    Posts
    3,885
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mvivion View Post
    You and your Manager are misconstruing the point of the AC. ....
    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.
    Cessna Skywagon-- accept no substitute!

Similar Threads

  1. Airports with turf and fuel
    By Flying Dave in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 02-19-2020, 01:06 PM
  2. Hazards of Operating from Turf...or Asphalt
    By WindOnHisNose in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 08-29-2018, 10:48 AM
  3. turf roller
    By scout88305 in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 07-18-2012, 08:32 PM
  4. Nice turf field in Olympia, WA area?
    By Rookie in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-06-2007, 12:41 PM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •