[Genghis the Engineer]

I would trust the BMAA numbers in a HADS beyond anything from a manufacturer's sales blurb.

The BMAA numbers for the Escapade are on the last page of this document...

http://www.bmaa.org/files/hm12_escapade.pdf

Nothing there suggests to me that you want to be flying it from a 220m strip at that weight, with any engine combination - and given that, nor anything heavier with the same basic wing and airframe.


Very seriously OP - have you considered learning to fly flexwings if you're determined to fly off your very short strip? Any of the main 912 engined flexwings would be quite happy on 220m once you know it - and second hand prices are down around £10k now for something like a Blade 912 or Quantum 912. Or, if you can afford it a QuikR or PulsR - which are quite gorgeous flying machines.

G

[nallen]

The BMAA numbers for the Escapade are on the last page of this document...

http://www.bmaa.org/files/hm12_escapade.pdf

Nothing there suggests to me that you want to be flying it from a 220m strip at that weight, with any engine combination.

Genghis, out of interest, why does the Jabiru in the Escapade give so much better takeoff performance than the 912? Is that down to weight?

[Private Jet]

Good advice from the above, and for what my low hours are worth, I would echo all of it. I operate a 582 engined Kitfox from a 580m grass strip and for most of the time, if there is a slight headwind I'm airborne and land in under 200m. However, last weekend and in perfect conditions, my attention slipped a little, I bounced a little and I used well over the half the runway. If the grass is long or the strip soft, I will need well over 250m to takeoff. So it's all down to how confident that you'll never need a margin for error. What's on each end of the strip matters too - the last owner of my aircraft flew from a 220m strip with high tension lines on one end, although he did have a handy divert a few miles away.

I was flying with a local Kitfox expert on Saturday and he was airborne and fully stopped on the grass section of runway 11 at East Fortune, which is a shade over 150m, but there is 450m available and we have both used all of it due to brakes binding on takeoff! As Dirty Harry says, "Do you feel lucky?".

[Genghis the Engineer]

Genghis, out of interest, why does the Jabiru in the Escapade give so much better takeoff performance than the 912? Is that down to weight?

I'm not entirely sure, but my best guess is that the higher prop speed and lower power of the Jabiru means that you end up with a prop pitch and power curve combination better for thrust at low speed than the 912-gearbox combination, which is much more optimal at cruising conditions.

It's not weight, as both will be tested close to, and standardised to, the same MTOW.

G

[The Laird]

These are all very helpful replies, and I'm pleased nobody has (yet) taken the opportunity to reprimand me for perceived "irresponsibility".... thank you everyone!

I have a 4 seat touring aircraft based at my local airport 10 minutes away but it's too fast and impractical for solo missions of an evening loitering and enjoying the countryside.

I originally wanted an MTO Sport,having already flown one and loved it, but I was led to believe they require a significant distance for take off that wouldn't fit with 220m? The CH750 ticks all the boxes; I want one but kit builds are not practical for me so I was disappointed they don't offer a factory machine.

Are flex wings really that much more capable of STOL? It's not something I have considered. Are they as practical for slow observation flight? The thing I liked about the Eurofox was its supposed 100mph cruise which seemed a useful bonus.

I haven't researched an Escapade but will do so now.

[rogcal]

If you are looking at a good cruise speed (100 - 120 mph) and STOL capability have you considered the CTSW?

I have a friend who has been flying his CTSW at his 250m strip for several years without any issues and often two up.

OK, so the CTSW isn't regarded as STOL and can be a bit "floaty" if you don't nail the airspeed spot-on on the approach but he is down and stopped in 150m and off in 90m.

He has adapted his strip to provide a "braking" area consisting of longer grass either side of a narrow strip cut close for his take-offs.

Works well for him and despite the limited distances he has to play with he can get places a lot faster than most STOL aircraft and as already stated he has never experienced any issues even when you throw in such things as flying at MAUW, wet grass, limited/no headwind, strong crosswinds.

[MercianMarcus]

...

I originally wanted an MTO Sport,having already flown one and loved it, but I was led to believe they require a significant distance for take off that wouldn't fit with 220m?

...

Well RotorSport quote 10 to 70m take of distance. From memory the distance to clear a 50' obstacle is 300m. I have an MT03 912 fixed pitch and would not want to take off on grass at MUAW and nil wind with less than 400m. But I have heard the turbo makes a big difference. Add VP and short field technique (more RRPM) and you could be OK.

I wouldn't rule it out if you are keen.

[kanga]

I've seen a picture of Leia in a ball gown, believe it or not...

ffotograff, os welwch yn dda ?

[Paul_Sengupta]

Ffacebook...

[kanga]

Ffacebook...

ddiolch, fe fyddaf i'n edrych

[leiafee]

Ffacebook...

ddiolch, fe fyddaf i'n edrych

Bygrs - y dau ohonoch chi!

But really...

solo missions of an evening loitering and enjoying the countryside.

Are you sure you don't want a dear little X'Air?

[MercianMarcus]

This kind of thing?

[Genghis the Engineer]

Are flex wings really that much more capable of STOL? It's not something I have considered. Are they as practical for slow observation flight? The thing I liked about the Eurofox was its supposed 100mph cruise which seemed a useful bonus..

Yes.

A £2k Pegasus XL will fly off 200m of grass and give you a couple of hours at 45mph. A £15k Quantum or Blade 912 50-70mph for 4 hours. A £30k Quik 90mph.

You can spend more! But most flexwings will be quite happy on your short strip, all will be safe - mostly you are paying for refinement and speed range.

G

[Big Dex]

As a former Escapader, it is a cracking aircraft, and I have landed on the 130m strip at Courseille sur Mer, and taken off alongside the same runway on the 300m parallel runway... At the time I was solo with a fuel load below 15 litres, and in this format, 220m is fine. Heavy (by which I mean 450kg plus), I wouldn't consider less than 300m.

Cracking aircraft though, and the wing fold is superb.

[Paultheparaglider]

There is a difference between what can be done on a short strip, and what can be done consistently in varied conditions. I've had a number of different types land in my 200m. A Eurostar, SkyRangers of different variants, Rans S6s, and a number of flexwings. The thing is, though, they have mostly tried in very benign conditions, and have all been highly capable pilots.

In the real world, though, very short strips have pretty much zero margin for error. When you fly from a more benign strip, it is easy to remember the 95 times you landed nice and short, and forget the 5 times you needed a bit more room. At my place, that would be 5 visits to a hedge. I've had to drive a couple of pilots home who tried slightly more challenging conditions. Others came close.

I can land and stop my Blade 912 one up in good conditions in 100m. With a passenger, I'm often closer to 150m. Very occasionally, say damp grass or switching thermic conditions or gusty crosswinds, that comes closer to 175m. On two or three occasions over the last ten years, I've been wondering if I'd stop in time.

And, that is the nub of a very short strip. What can be done and what actually happens in the real world of flying are two different things. It has been a real eye opener for me operating from mine, and has made me extremely conservative in my own personal choice of aircraft. And, equally conservative in my recommendations to others thinking of operating from tiny strips.