Joplin, MO (JLN) petition...please sign

[timwinters]

I got this from a buddy of mine who lives in the area:

Joplin MunicipalAirport (KJLN) 20-Year Master Plan and Runway 5-23
*
The manager of the Joplin, Missouri, Regional Airport (KJLN) - a non-pilot - has for some time been on a mission to permanently close Runway 5-23.* Considering wind direction and velocity values prevailing in the Joplin area, this runway is essential to the continued safe operation of light aircraft at the airport; and its closure would thus cause significantly negative impacts on safety.
*
Accordingly, a Joplin Airport Users Group has been formed with the general goal of positively affecting, for all users, the long-term safety and utility of the Joplin, Missouri, MunicipalAirport; and the immediate goal of preserving, protecting and maintaining KJLN Runway 5-23.* In furtherance of these goals, the User Group has created an on-line electronic petition that pilots, aircraft operators, tenants and current and potential users of the airport can use to register their support for this important safety initiative.* If you ever use, or expect to use, the Joplin airport, and you agree that Runway 5-23 should be kept open, usable and maintained, please say so at:
*
smash here

Thank you on behalf of the Joplin Airport Users Group.

 

[Ted]

Signed. That said, with two other runways, seems unlikely it will get saved.

 

[Brad Z]

It costs money to maintain a runway. Rehabilitation, markings, snow removal, lighting, etc. has a wind analysis been conducted to determine the need for this runway?

I like runways too, but I'm not surprised that the long term plans for the airport involve getting rid of the short runway when another crosswind runway already exists. AIP funding will generally pay for rehabilitation of only the primary and crosswind runway; unless there are capacity issues the FAA policy is not to fund non-critical runways.

The airport manager (his piloting status is irrelevant in this case) is likely realizing that maintaining this runway will be difficult without federal money, and that the runway could be used for future development such as hangars, ramp space, etc. that would generate revenue for the airport. Nothing's free, as we all know.

 

[Clip4]

Where do we sign to raise hanger rent and fuel prices at JLN to pay for the maintenace of runway 5/23?

 

[ronnieh]

Now this is funny.

 

[timwinters]

Signed. That said, with two other runways, seems unlikely it will get saved.

Agreed, I almost titled it "please sign...or not..."

I was just passing it along.

What I will say, is that I've landed at JLN dozens of times, took my PP check ride there and have landed on 23 far more then the other 5 runways combined. I don't know if the prevailaing wind info is available but, it's my experience, that a SW wind is the norm.

My vote would be to turn 5/23 into a grass runway. EVERY airport should be required to have a GRASS runway!

 

[Henning]

Agreed, I almost titled it "please sign...or not..."

I was just passing it along.

What I will say, is that I've landed at JLN dozens of times, took my PP check ride there and have landed on 23 far more then the other 5 runways combined. I don't know if the prevailaing wind info is available but, it's my experience, that a SW wind is the norm.

My vote would be to turn 5/23 into a grass runway. EVERY airport should be required to have a GRASS runway!

Problem is a grass runway is even more expensive to maintain than paved, and a higher liability as well.

 

[timwinters]

Problem is a grass runway is even more expensive to maintain than paved, and a higher liability as well

Yeah, in Missouri, with our clayey low erosion soils, mowing once every 10 days to two weeks for six months out of the year (or less often and less duration if Bermuda) and rolling once every six weeks or so, is cost prohibitive. It was outrageously expensive for me to maintain 0T3 when I was airport manager...not. The cost to repave a runway would cover the cost maintaining a grass strip for far longer than that pavement would last.

I guess that's also why most everyone's private strip is grass. Because it's so much more expensive.

I won't argue the higher liability premise.

The other real benefit of 5/23 at Joplin is that on busy weekends the tower would split the traffic. Big boys would land on 18; the little boys and training ops on 23. When doing this, 18 was right traffic, 23 left. It worked well since the runways didn't cross.

That was 6 or 8 years ago, they might not do that any longer, I know CGI is no longer allowed to use LSHO like they used to so maybe JLN isn't allowed to do simultaneous landings either. Don't know.

Also, I'm not sure what their traffic is like today either. If they've taken a hit like many (mostly) GA airports, then maybe there's not enough traffic to justify it these days.

 

[Henning]

Yeah, in Missouri, with our clayey low erosion soils, mowing once every 10 days to two weeks for six months out of the year (or less often and less duration if Bermuda) and rolling once every six weeks or so, is cost prohibitive. It was outrageously expensive for me to maintain 0T3 when I was airport manager...not. The cost to repave a runway would cover the cost maintaining a grass strip for far longer than that pavement would last.

I guess that's also why most everyone's private strip is grass. Because it's so much more expensive.

I won't argue the higher liability premise.

The other real benefit of 5/23 at Joplin is that on busy weekends the tower would split the traffic. Big boys would land on 18; the little boys and training ops on 23. When doing this, 18 was right traffic, 23 left. It worked well since the runways didn't cross.

That was 6 or 8 years ago, they might not do that any longer, I know CGI is no longer allowed to use LSHO like they used to so maybe JLN isn't allowed to do simultaneous landings either. Don't know.

Also, I'm not sure what their traffic is like today either. If they've taken a hit like many (mostly) GA airports, then maybe there's not enough traffic to justify it these days.

If you already have a paved runway, it makes no sense to turn it to grass, sorry. Most private strips are grass because of the initial paving costs. For a public airport you eliminate a lot of traffic's ability to use that runway unless it is a spectacular grass runway built to PGA fairway specs like I did mine.

Does the runway in question need replaving? I haven't landed at Joplin in well over a decade.

 

[timwinters]

If you already have a paved runway, it makes no sense to turn it to grass, sorry.

That's a given and I was being facetious when I said it should be, especially since 13/31 crosses it at about it's midpoint. What you said, though, is that a grass strip is more expensive to maintain than a paved runway. Which is BS.

Does the runway in question need replaving? I haven't landed at Joplin in well over a decade.

I have no ID. I haven't landed there in a few years either. I can't imagine the airport manager wanting to abandon it if it didn't need significant mx though.

 

[Henning]

That's a given and I was being facetious when I said it should be, especially since 13/31 crosses it at about it's midpoint. What you said, though, is that a grass strip is more expensive to maintain than a paved runway. Which is BS.



I have no ID. I haven't landed there in a few years either. I can't imagine the airport manager wanting to abandon it if it didn't need significant mx though.

Depends what he can construct there and lease it for.