I dream of having enough land to keep a plane on. Is there a good rule of thumb for an average pilot with regards to minimum runway lengths needed for given/known/assumed/expected performance data?
Thank you.
Thank you.
I dream of having enough land to keep a plane on. Is there a good rule of thumb for an average pilot with regards to minimum runway lengths needed for given/known/assumed/expected performance data?
150%, as @MauleSkinner mentioned it a good starting point. But there are so many variables. Is it a one way strip? Do you want your friends to be able to come visit? Are you good about maintaining currency? Is the penalty for an overrun a hassle getting the plane out of the weeds, or is it injury or death? Are there obstructions? Will you be oriented into the prevailing winds? Will the terrain create swirly winds? Will you be on turf? Pavement? Gravel? Do the economics makes sense compared to just buying a house *near* a strip, instead of buying land sufficient for a strip?
An interesting exercise you might consider doing is real world analysis of how much runway you usually take to land in different configurations, and that might help you get a better idea of what your own limitations are.
Depends on plane and pilot.

I've used a 1000' grass runway in a Challenger II with a passenger.
I'm eyeballing a piece of property with 1200' in the clear, 3600' elevation. That's about my minimum.