As I’m new here, I realise this topic/question will more than likely have already been covered, so apologies if this is the case!!
When Just Jane takes to the skies once more (I say “when” as I firmly believe it will happen) where abouts will she take off from? I’ve just had a quick look on Google Earth and the remaining stretch of concrete runway looks about half of it’s original length. Is the remaining piece sufficient enough for a Lanc to take off from? If it is, how stable is the surface? Will volunteers be needed to help mix and pour some concrete into the cracks (my bucket and shovel’s ready and waiting)? I realise that the Jane would not be laden with a full fuel, bomb and ammunition load, so it wouldn’t require the full 1-2 miles of runway needed in the 1940’s, but how much will be needed?
Also, is the LAHC’s new Dakota purely a taxying exhibit now? Or can we expect her to also fly in the nearish future?
By: Yak 11 Fan - 25th March 2010 at 20:44
I can vouch for the fact that the concrete/grass runway at East Kirkby is lovely and smooth, even made my landing in there in the Stearman look good last year… Looking forward to visiting again in 2010.
By: nx611_1945 - 25th March 2010 at 20:01
There os no problem with landing over a grass/concrete split as long as it is a smooth join, our grass strip at the moment is currently half grass half concrete and we have anything from Spits to P-51’s to Daks to Cessnas landing, so we know we would be ok with a split runway.
Sadly landings on tyres are purely measured on number rather than wear, BBMF lanc are only allowed something like 500 landings before the tyres are lifed. But one would think it would be ‘kinder’ on the airframe.
By: Peter - 25th March 2010 at 19:51
Wouldnt landing on grass be much kinder to wheels tires landing gear assemblies etc etc??
By: Moggy C - 25th March 2010 at 18:19
The original main runway was the 02 – 20 (Now more like 01 – 19)
Moggy
By: McQuaggy - 25th March 2010 at 17:27
The other option is to reinstate the length and direction of the original main runway (from 1943-1945) as a grass strip.
Would this mean the runway would be split into half grass and half concrete? It looks like the main runway would need to be extended by about 400-500 metres. So could the concrete be repaired where necessary and then extended to the West with grass? Or would it have to be concreted?
A lot of questions all in one there, sorry about that!!
By: nx611_1945 - 25th March 2010 at 17:08
Over much conversing and deliberation it has been suggested that we would need around 5500 ft minimum to operate NX611.
There is currently 4000ft of USAF laid concrete runway to the east/northeast of LAHC, extending this towards the A16 would be one option but there lies a problem of crossing the airfield road and we have been told we woukld need stop lights etc.
The other option is to reinstate the length and direction of the original main runway (from 1943-1945) as a grass strip- trhe land at EK is very well drained and we have been operation a grass strip for the last couple of years and it has been servicable for the whole of the season (we even landed N473DC C-47 in January).
So there are a couple of options open to us and thankfully the neighbouring farmers are very accomodating.
By: SADSACK - 25th March 2010 at 16:35
re;
Well consdiering how fantastic drag ’em oot looked last year, i guess she will be flying…
By: 50sqnwop/ag - 25th March 2010 at 16:26
I guess NX611 can fill us in on the gen you seek… ?
Sign In
March 25, 2010 at 3:28 pm