Who else loves short field???

MauleSkinner said:
After you make the long landing or long go around...do you keep doing long landings or long go around a, or do you fix it and put the airplane within 400 feet beyond your target?
Click to expand...
I don't know how many feet within target I achieve, but when I botch it, I definitely work to improve it the next time.
 
Alright, alRIGHT ALREADY lol

Maule...CALM THE FRICK DOWN, BUDDY! I was just taking a playful little jab. Seems like everyone else has been, don't I get a turn? Heck, it's my thread!!!
 
Palmpilot said:
We probably do argue too much. :redface:

At least no one called you a troll. I've seen way too many newcomers receive THAT treatment.
Click to expand...

Apart from the last somewhat snarky comment I made, what else did I say that could have been considered troll-ish?
 
Sazzy said:
Alright, alRIGHT ALREADY lol

Maule...CALM THE FRICK DOWN, BUDDY! I was just taking a playful little jab. Seems like everyone else has been, don't I get a turn? Heck, it's my thread!!!
Click to expand...
I think you're the one that needs to calm down...I'm just replying to posts.
 
MauleSkinner said:
400’ is generally 2 runway lights.
Click to expand...
Thanks.

My target is more nebulous. My goal at my home field (which has been shortened to 2443 feet due to the addition of displaced thresholds since I learned to fly) is to make the first turnoff when I can, and otherwise the second one. If I end up using the whole runway, I don't like it. Of course that depends partly on the airplane and the conditions.
 

Attachments

  • 09216AD.PDF
    85.3 KB · Views: 7
My home field is 11,000’ and I absolutely treat it differently than when I go to the small 2400’ field where I do my annuals.
 
I'm not a fan of long landings, it kinda trips me out. I don't like not having a ton of runway in front of me once I touch down. When I was at 96C yesterday, I almost clipped the edge of the runway a couple times because I kept trying to make sure I had as much length in front of me as possible.
 
Sazzy said:
Apart from the last somewhat snarky comment I made, what else did I say that could have been considered troll-ish?
Click to expand...
Absolutely nothing.

One of my pet peeves is that people have had a tendency to overdo troll accusations in the past. That's what I was referring to.
 
Palmpilot said:
Absolutely nothing.

One of my pet peeves is that people have had a tendency to overdo troll accusations in the past. That's what I was referring to.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm.kinda surprised at how quickly some people became so touchy lol
 
2500' is most certainly a short runway for someone used to operating out of a 4000'+ RW. I do most landings as short/soft-field just for the sake of trying to make the next one shorter or smoother than the last. The goal in this business is to keep improving your skills and if you've found something that challenges you and that you enjoy (short fields) keep doing them.

I have no idea how to imbed an instagram picture but this is one that I fly into regularly in a King Air.

https://www.instagram.com/p/B2jTFegBnkV/?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet
 
Sazzy said:
Yeah, I'm.kinda surprised at how quickly some people became so touchy lol
Click to expand...
It can be hard to tell when people are kidding. Sometimes an emoticon helps, for example: ;)
 
Sazzy, I for one will apologize... I would never want to "suck the feeling of accomplishment" out of anyone. This place can be a tough crowd. I can see how 2500' could seem intimidating if you're used to 4500'. But I hope your instructor doesn't treat 4500' as "normal" in an LSA like the CTLS. Of all the runways in the US, 6,218 (39%) are shorter than 2500', and more than half (54%) are shorter than 3000'. A large number of the longer ones are large airports where you probably won't want to be going in an LSA anyway.

Salty said:
Yes. For a student who’s been learning on 4500 feet. And, I wager for the vast majority of non commercial pilots.
Sheesh.
Click to expand...

The first sentence I agree with. The second, if true, makes me worry about "the vast majority of non commercial pilots" if they can't deal with 2500' in the "vast majority" of GA aircraft.
 
My favorite runways are short. And not paved. And usually bent. Or not even a runway at all but a place that looks clear enough to put a C-206 in it and take off again.

I am thinking of going back to work in Alaska next summer, or maybe the next 2 or 3 summers, and then call it a career. I am thinking that being over 60 is getting too old for off airport work. But checking weather in Alaska is a whole lot easier than it used to be.
 
And the positivity returns!!! (Trumpets flourish)

DavidWhite, that's a crazy pic! That definitely looks like a strip that would take a good while to get used to...

Yeah, does seem like a tough crowd around here...luckily, I'm not here to impress anyone

And thanks Dana, just remember, it's ok to let people enjoy the little things.
 
Looks like I missed a good thread. Most of my GA flying is in an SR22 and Cirrus recommends 2500ft or greater. I’m not sure what it is for the SR20. Generally, if I check the performance charts and it tells me, I’m good to go, I’ll go. The shortest field I’ve gone into is 2300ft which to me, isn’t that short.
 
Zeldman said:
My favorite runways are short. And not paved. And usually bent. Or not even a runway at all but a place that looks clear enough to put a C-206 in it and take off again.

I am thinking of going back to work in Alaska next summer, or maybe the next 2 or 3 summers, and then call it a career. I am thinking that being over 60 is getting too old for off airport work. But checking weather in Alaska is a whole lot easier than it used to be.
Click to expand...

I'm still the only person I know of to ever take a Caravan into Nanwalek......

In my defense, I didn't know any better and hadn't been there before. Luckily the Caravan is a hard airplane to break despite my best efforts lmao

Give me a shout, I may be able to point you in the direction of some work. I know K2 is looking for Beaver drivers next summer, I've been kicking around the idea just to say I flew a season on the mountain.
 
DavidWhite said:
2500' is most certainly a short runway for someone used to operating out of a 4000'+ RW. I do most landings as short/soft-field just for the sake of trying to make the next one shorter or smoother than the last. The goal in this business is to keep improving your skills and if you've found something that challenges you and that you enjoy (short fields) keep doing them.

I have no idea how to imbed an instagram picture but this is one that I fly into regularly in a King Air.

https://www.instagram.com/p/B2jTFegBnkV/?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet
Click to expand...

Kivalina.... one of my old favorites especially when the runway was packed snow and ice, then throw in the 60-90 degree crosswind, 30 sustained. If you can't land while sliding, and take off while sliding, don't try it.

Not particularly short, but always interesting.
 
This discussion reminds me of my instrument checkride. As I was on downwind for my home field at the end of the checkride, the examiner asked how my crosswind landings were. I said OK, I guess, and he subsequently urged me to make sure that I got low enough early enough, because there was a significant 90-degree crosswind, which of course meant no headwind component. He said that this often fooled people landing at Palo Alto, and they would end up running off the departure end of the runway. Anyway, my landing was normal, but after I parked and we got out of the airplane, I noticed him looking toward the end of the runway, and it turned out that the very next plane to land after me had done what he had warned me about!
 
jordane93 said:
...Most of my GA flying is in an SR22 and Cirrus recommends 2500ft or greater....
Click to expand...
I'm surprised to hear that, since my flying club has a couple of those, and our runway is only 2443 feet. I imagine our instructors probably teach people to use short-field technique when flying those here.
 
Sazzy said:
Yeah, I'm.kinda surprised at how quickly some people became so touchy lol
Click to expand...
Welcome to the asylum.

You keep posting what ever you want to share and don't stop to feed the trolls.

Being able to land on the desired spot and stop short is probably the one piloting skill most likely to be able to save your life.
 
DavidWhite said:
I'm still the only person I know of to ever take a Caravan into Nanwalek......
Click to expand...

Nanwalek..... when I was at KBay they thought it would be fun to see if I would attempt to land there. I did a touch and go. Piece of cake for a empty 206.

I did walk it and I am fairly sure I could have gotten a Navajo in and out of there. But not full of passengers for departure...:lol::lol:

It looks a lot scarier than it is.
 
Salty said:
This is seriously out of place. What's up with you today?
Click to expand...
You're arguing for lack of proficiency, and she jumped on.

$20,000 was the bill for the last bad landing by someone I flew with who argued against having a standard.

The most common reason I have applicants fail checkrides is landing 3000+ feet down the runway.

Runway excursions are the most common reason for hull losses in the airplanes I train/examine.
 
Last edited:
Zeldman said:
Kivalina.... one of my old favorites especially when the runway was packed snow and ice, then throw in the 60-90 degree crosswind, 30 sustained. If you can't land while sliding, and take off while sliding, don't try it.

Not particularly short, but always interesting.
Click to expand...

Yep,it's a classic. Tununak, Newtok, Chefornak, Danger Bay, Dry Bay, Glacier Point, Sitkanak, and Nanwalek join Kivalina in there as my favorites.
 
Zeldman said:
Nanwalek..... when I was at KBay they thought it would be fun to see if I would attempt to land there. I did a touch and go. Piece of cake for a empty 206.

I did walk it and I am fairly sure I could have gotten a Navajo in and out of there. But not full of passengers for departure...:lol::lol:

It looks a lot scarier than it is.
Click to expand...

Rumor has it a Navajo pilot in Anchorage who owns an air taxi whose initials are Juliet Bravo used to take a Navajos full of Dynamite in there......
 
Sazzy, people learn and think different ways. Which would you prefer and fit best for you? 1. Landing on a runway only 2500 ft long is really a dangerous experience out of the norm and not many could do it. Hats off to you and your CFI. You must have nerves of steel, like Tami Jo

2. Or the simple truth, which is what I would have said if I was you CFI, that in a normal light training airplane, 2500 ft is pretty normal and YOU SHOULD HAVE NO TROUBLE, DONT GET NERVOUS ABOUT IT. Fly your pattern at the correct airspeed and especially approach, full flaps and flare and if you are not on the runway in the first 400 ft go around.
 
MauleSkinner said:
You're arguing for lack of proficiency, and she jumped on. $20,000 was the bill for the last bad landing by someone I flew with who argued against having a standard.
Click to expand...
I do not appreciate you lying about my position. Please stop immediately.
 
Palmpilot said:
I'm surprised to hear that, since my flying club has a couple of those, and our runway is only 2443 feet. I imagine our instructors probably teach people to use short-field technique when flying those here.
Click to expand...
At max gross weight, ISA, and dry runway, you need 2535ft over a 50ft obstacle. That’s where Cirrus is getting the 2500ft minimum number. What generation Cirrus do you guys have? Maybe the older ones require less landing distance? All my
time is in G3 and newer and a majority of it is G5 and G6.

JTgKYVj.jpg
 
jordane93 said:
At max gross weight, ISA, and dry runway, you need 2535ft over a 50ft obstacle. That’s where Cirrus is getting the 2500ft minimum number.
Click to expand...
That’s impossible. 2500 feet isn’t a short runway. I read it on POA.
 
Sazzy said:
And ya know what dude, I was just keeping it short and light. Or did you want me to sit there and type out the entire first half of my lesson where my instructor verbally went over the different procedures for different types of landings and runways, options and responses to emergencies when there is far less room for mistakes, etc. Because he DID. I mean, DANG, I just wanted to quickly and briefly share something I was proud of! Take all the swings that you want at me, but leave my instructor out of it.
Click to expand...
The form is much more enjoyable with clip on ignore.

I’m glad you shared your experience. It sounds like a great flight with lots of learning that was fun. Keep sharing. Lots of us older more experienced pilots love to hear from new pilots becoming seasoned pilots and we get to learn stuff too.

Rock on!
 
Sazzy,

If you want to pursue short? Watch youtube video from Valdez. The best of the best have taken their turns through the years. What you'll notice should include two points that are contrary to what you're read here. 1-Hit your spot. The good guys measure their misses in inches, not feet, and sure as hell not hundreds of feet. 2-watch how most of the pilots come in steep. Some will drag in on the prop but in real world you'll manage airspeed by raising and lowering the nose in a very slow and steep final and flatten it out in ground effect.

Watch and learn. Watch the different techniques in different types. Don't think one way fits all airplanes or all days. Fly safe, have fun.
 
Last edited:
Sazzy said:
And ya know what dude, I was just keeping it short and light. Or did you want me to sit there and type out the entire first half of my lesson where my instructor verbally went over the different procedures for different types of landings and runways, options and responses to emergencies when there is far less room for mistakes, etc. Because he DID. I mean, DANG, I just wanted to quickly and briefly share something I was proud of! Take all the swings that you want at me, but leave my instructor out of it.
Click to expand...

I am not taking any swings at you. I am just trying to tell you that you need understand the risk factors if you are going to do real short field landings. Not a single item you listed is a risk factor. But I realize as a student you probably know it all until you figure out you don’t.
 
Clip4 said:
I am not taking any swings at you. I am just trying to tell you that you need understand the risk factors if you are going to do real short field landings. Not a single item you listed is a risk factor. But I realize as a student you probably know it all until you figure out you don’t.
Click to expand...

No, I didn't list anything. Did you not even read my response? Did you want me to recap my whole lesson for you?

I never assumed to know it all. I actually prefer to stay humble. Thanks to those of you who were constructive. I'll definitely look at the recommended videos from Valdez.
 
Bill Greenwood said:
Sazzy, people learn and think different ways. Which would you prefer and fit best for you? 1. Landing on a runway only 2500 ft long is really a dangerous experience out of the norm and not many could do it. Hats off to you and your CFI. You must have nerves of steel, like Tami Jo

2. Or the simple truth, which is what I would have said if I was you CFI, that in a normal light training airplane, 2500 ft is pretty normal and YOU SHOULD HAVE NO TROUBLE, DONT GET NERVOUS ABOUT IT. Fly your pattern at the correct airspeed and especially approach, full flaps and flare and if you are not on the runway in the first 400 ft go around.
Click to expand...

Well while the mild sarcasm wasn't absolutely necessary, I won't let it detract from my excitement of a brand new experience that I very much enjoyed. BUT you did spell out plain and simple good things to remember that I will take with me--apprehensiveness is ok, in my book, but yes, no need to be nervous. And yes, good point with the go-around standard.
 
Sazzy, another teaser. Not your average Cub but this is impressive just the same. Yes, the wind was blowing around 20 mph, but it takes skills to make the plane do this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top