New airfield – advice needed

My 2p worth, I like grass but hard runway is generally more attractive and easier to operate.

Re the hard surface, no real preference whether concrete or tarmac. Water draining properties are more important and don’t build it up side down like Odiham!!!

The key thing re old surfaces is to ensure the used areas are properly sealed so material is not dragged into props or engines. Remember you don’t have to have to prepare all current surfaces, only those that will be used. Markings can show non-prepared areas off limits.

Re airspace, I strongly suggest you maintain control but have good liaison with nearby facility to work out procedures, ATZ shape. CAA in any case will requires this.

Don’t forget you will need a massive local PR campaign to get local support. Include running local charity events etc. You will need historical use records in planning case; hopefully use was not ages ago.

And for nimby’s, pointing out airfield use maintians a green space with minimal disruption and is a local asset. An industrial estate, race track or detention centre may not be popular if rumours of those get around!

And good luck!

PP you have a PM.

Asphalt Runways

Anyone had a runway re-surfaced recently and at what cost???:confused:

LL, I’ve been on both sides of the planning debate [both non-aviation and aviation related] and it can be a minefield; good luck!

It might even pay to get a Noise Assessment prepared by a consultant as part of your Planning Support / Environmental Study documentation portfolio.

Just seen a bill for a local roundabout that was resurfaced, hot rolled asphalt granted but £90,000! Gawd knows how much for a thousand yards of Runway, peritrack and parking:eek:.

Most just ban the Cessna 336 / 337 😉

LL
I think noise levels are part of type approval these days and some of these documents are on the web, if not the CAA/FAA would have the data.
Some airfields that were MOD owned and operated, which subsequently have become redundant(or seen limited use) have had real trouble getting planning permission to allow continued civilian use.
Until the recent financial troubles old runways were a valued commodity just for the amount of agragate that could by produced by crushing them, an example being Greenham Common’s runways which became the Newbury bypass. But the logistics of then relaying a grass runway in place of the tarmac one might be enormous.
I wish you all the best.

Richard

What level of ATSU are you planning?

Presumably A/G to start with, extending to FISO as traffic builds?

Keep it under your own control I’d say, but why not go and talk to the ATSU at the major airfield at this point in the planning process? They may have a lot to contribute.

Moggy

agreed – we’ll only have a handful of movements per day with perhaps a couple of dozen on weekends, so we need the utmost basic cover we can legally get away with. Our main problem is that we are right on the edge of the controlled zone – the airfield is actually the VFR marker for the zone…..!

Cost isn’t so much of an issue to be fair – it will all go into the grand application. The airfield is only a small part of what we are doing. (Words you thought you’d never hear No.1…….)

TwinOtter, you are dead right. The residents will complain…. alot…. However, if we can go to them with a suitable plan, we can get the council’s backing reletively easily. Planning permission shouldn’t be much of an issue as the site has been used by the MOD, albeit very intermittently, within the last 10 years. There have been prior applications submitted, but none of them we what you could call ‘effective’ propositions. Most seem to be of the type ‘ we are pilots, we must fly.’ No thought has gone into the wider community.. We are different. With any luck, we should be in a position to show you all what we are up to within the next few months, but for now, we need to keep the fuss to a minimum. (hence I can’t say where…)

Thanks so far – anyone delt with this stuff before? http://www.grassreinforcement.com/airfields.html

There are many alternatives products and the choice depends on loading requirements etc, but none of them are cheap!

With ‘creative’ justifications and providing you fulfil various criteria you can even get grants to purchase and lay the stuff. This has been done at Newark albeit not for flying use!!

IMHO I suggest that your biggest hurdle is planning permission for change of use back to aviation use.

What level of ATSU are you planning?

Presumably A/G to start with, extending to FISO as traffic builds?

Keep it under your own control I’d say, but why not go and talk to the ATSU at the major airfield at this point in the planning process? They may have a lot to contribute.

Moggy

Thanks so far – anyone delt with this stuff before? http://www.grassreinforcement.com/airfields.html

we are right on the border of a major airport’s controlled zone. Would it be better to see if we can extend their zone to include ATC at our strip (tower located at the airport), or have our own?……

many thanks again!

Not my area really but my gut feeling is to keep control yourself,anything to do with airports is going to be (potentially) expensive and possibly very restrictive..
If you are lucky ATC at the airport will be cooperative and helpful anyway.

cheers baz

PM sent.

I wish you well with this.

Thanks so far – anyone delt with this stuff before? http://www.grassreinforcement.com/airfields.html

Sadly we don’t have an option of a grass strip next to the tarmac one – we’d have to cross two existing sections of tarmc runway (which are in good condition! (Can’t use them as there is housing at one end ….) It would have to be a choice of one or the other.

Here’s something else to add to the mix – we are going to licence the airfield, BUT we are right on the border of a major airport’s controlled zone. Would it be better to see if we can extend their zone to include ATC at our strip (tower located at the airport), or have our own?……

Finally, where can I find a list of GA aircraft’s noise levels? We are reasonably close to housing and don’t want to upset the locals. We may end up having to restrict the types coming in despite the fact that there is no over-flight of any residence. The taxiway will terminate within a couple of hundred yards from one property…….

many thanks again!

Depends on the drainage.
Moggy

Absolutely…there is a good reason why so many old airfields became gravel pits 😀
Agreed that grass needs mowing etc…but it can be done by almost anybody with an old mowing machine,whereas tarmac/concrete needs more professional care perhaps ??

cheers baz

tarmac/hard surface means you are not at the mercy of wet weather,but of course more expensive to lay than grass 😀 and more upkeep as well.

Depends on the drainage. Knettishall is grass and has never been closed through wet weather in the eight years I flew there.

Don’t forget that grass needs mowing. So there are upkeep costs there. Plus it does attract the local yobs so they can practive cool handbrake turns in their scorchingly fast modded Novas and Saxos.

As a pilot I’d generally prefer grass to tarmac that was even slightly less than top condition. Chipped props are bloody expensive.

Moggy

Tarmac is preferred, but as others have said, the whole old runway doesn’t have to be resurfaced. You mentioned a taxiway as well.

There is one airfield fairly close to me which has taxiways in such a poor state with loose stones and chippings that I’m reluctant to visit it any more because of likely damage to the prop. So. the taxiway and parking area surface is also important and will be an added expense.

It is always possible to lay a grass runway alongside the tarmac one.

Good luck with this, it’s always nice to hear of somewhere opening instead of closing!

tarmac/hard surface means you are not at the mercy of wet weather,but of course more expensive to lay than grass 😀 and more upkeep as well.

cheers baz

Not really fussed about surface as ive landed on grass and tarmac. Although you’ll probably find you’ll attract more aircraft with tarmac.

Just out of interest whats the airfields name? I can understand if you dont want to give out that info yet.

Modern GA, Cirrus and the like prefer tarmac as it suits the small wheels with which they are fitted so as to reduce drag.

Old fashioned GA (Like me) prefer grass as it disguises how cr@p our landings are.

Certainly 800 – 900 yards/metres is all that is really required

Moggy