Grumman Tiger on med length grass fields?

J

Johnbo

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Apr 15, 2019
Messages
189
Display Name
Display name:
Johnbo
Here is the situation. I am in the market for a family plane to haul my wife and young kid around to destinations 450 nautical miles and below. My home field is 2400’ of grass and is at 500’ msl, in the summer we see density altitudes of 3300’ max.

I have been shopping for 182s but they are selling for crack prices even with worn out engines and junk avionics, I am now looking at the Cherokee 180 and 235 but the extra fuel and overhaul cost of that O540 are putting me off so by default I am shopping for a Cherokee 180 but boy are they slow.

I have read online that the Grumman tigers are not well-suited to grass or short runways but the book value on distance required to clear a 50 foot obstacle is quite similar to a piper archer or even a Cherokee 180 so where do they get that reputation from and how accurate is it?

i like the speed and visibility of the Grumman but obviously if I can’t safely operate at home base there is no point.

we have an archer and Cherokee 180 at our field and they do fine all summer long even loaded up with more folks than I have to haul. By using those planes as a benchmark can I assume that the tiger will perform similarly or are the real world figures substantially different than book for shorter field operations?

thx
 
2400'? How are the approaches? Is there a paved field nearby where you can stage for "loaded to the gills" flights?
 
What about a Commander 112. TO 1460 feet and landing 1310 feet over 50 foot obstacle. Cruse 140 kts.
 
I fly a Tiger, and running the POH numbers just now at MGTOW=2400, OAT=99 deg F, 0 headwind, field elevation=500’, hard surface, I calculate 1890’ over 50’ obstacle. Then “they” say add 50% to the book values, so that turns into 2,800’. That’s based on the stock McCauley prop. You’ll have to add a factor for grass.

You can make the numbers better by getting out earlier in the day before it gets hot, departing at less than MGTOW, and getting a Tiger with the Sensenich prop.

Bear in mind that kid will grow, and may put a sibling on his/her Christmas list.
 
Also consider the need for a go-around when you’re part way down the runway on a landing.
 
A Tiger isn’t a great choice sod fields. I am visualizing a private pilot flying out of two sod fields in my area.

Airport 1 with DA <3001 ft, low x wind, gross weight, 2400 ft dry smooth level sod runway with minimal obstacles and pilot with proper make/model check out doing this safely.

Airport 2 with a DA <3001 ft, gross weight, 2400 ft soggy or rough runway, >10 kts X wind with shear, and pilot without a good checkout flying by his seat of his britches.

Are you pilot 1 or 2?
 
There are many variables. What is the obstacle clearance like on the ends? While in some situations I think it wouldn’t be a problem...other times hellll no. Powerflow and a climb prop could help. I personally wouldn’t want to be based at a field where it would be a sometimes issue.

2F7C4EC5-90DB-4764-86B3-E84760A6F23B.png
 
mr_happyland said:
There are many variables. What is the obstacle clearance like on the ends? While in some situations I think it wouldn’t be a problem...other times hellll no. Powerflow and a climb prop could help. I personally wouldn’t want to be based at a field where it would be a sometimes issue.

View attachment 80135
Click to expand...

trees are at the down hill end but probably 400’ away from that end. Tricky to say with the slope and tree height but I bet we have an equivalent of 2800’ to clear a 50’ tree.

also, thx for the performance chart data...I wonder what the ones for archer and Cherokee 180 look like?
 
As a former Tiger and a former 182 owner, the 182 is perfectly suited for this, the Tiger not so much. I personally wouldn’t feel comfortable basing a Tiger off a strip like you have described. It would probably work okay, but “probably” is not a great recipe for success.

Pricing on 182s has grown, sure, but it really depends on how the plane is equipped and how new it is. Some of us think the oldest ones are the best, and maybe you don’t need an autopilot and fancy new glass and leather seats. In that case, $50k is not an unreasonable budget (and in the same ballpark to what you would pay for a Tiger).

Overhauling a O-540? Sure it’s expensive but if you play your cards right, the chance that you’re the one actually overhauling it or taking the overhaul value hit, is low. It’s like a home - people expect to live in them forever, but on average they move every 5 years. Same with planes. If you buy a low to mid time aircraft, the chance that you’ll still own the plane when it comes time to overhaul is low. To this point, anticipating the objection that you’ll just take the hit on resale, ehhh... I get that, but these things are not perfect 1:1 correlations and the hit you take on resell is never exactly equal to the cost of overhauling (once you get into the overhaul, it’s always more!). A 182 with 400 hours is worth almost exactly the same as a 182 with 600 hours. You start to see it crop up when comparing 300 and 1200 SMOH planes, but it is not representative of the total overhaul cost by any means.
 
Johnbo said:
trees are at the down hill end but probably 400’ away from that end. Tricky to say with the slope and tree height but I bet we have an equivalent of 2800’ to clear a 50’ tree.

also, thx for the performance chart data...I wonder what the ones for archer and Cherokee 180 look like?
Click to expand...

Ever hear of reading a POH?

http://www.grummanpilotsassociation.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/AA-5B-POH-1977-78-79-SM.pdf
https://stpeteair.org/wp-content/uploads/PA-28-181-Archer-II-POH-.pdf
 
AA5Bman said:
As a former Tiger and a former 182 owner, the 182 is perfectly suited for this, the Tiger not so much. I personally wouldn’t feel comfortable basing a Tiger off a strip like you have described. It would probably work okay, but “probably” is not a great recipe for success.

Pricing on 182s has grown, sure, but it really depends on how the plane is equipped and how new it is. Some of us think the oldest ones are the best, and maybe you don’t need an autopilot and fancy new glass and leather seats. In that case, $50k is not an unreasonable budget (and in the same ballpark to what you would pay for a Tiger).

Overhauling a O-540? Sure it’s expensive but if you play your cards right, the chance that you’re the one actually overhauling it or taking the overhaul value hit, is low. It’s like a home - people expect to live in them forever, but on average they move every 5 years. Same with planes. If you buy a low to mid time aircraft, the chance that you’ll still own the plane when it comes time to overhaul is low. To this point, anticipating the objection that you’ll just take the hit on resale, ehhh... I get that, but these things are not perfect 1:1 correlations and the hit you take on resell is never exactly equal to the cost of overhauling (once you get into the overhaul, it’s always more!). A 182 with 400 hours is worth almost exactly the same as a 182 with 600 hours. You start to see it crop up when comparing 300 and 1200 SMOH planes, but it is not representative of the total overhaul cost by any means.
Click to expand...

thx for this. Too bad the tiger doesn’t have a CS prop and an extra 20-HP or I bet it would be perfect.
 
I owned a Tiger for over 10 years. Total use-able bodies and baggage will vary from 630 to 650 lbs with full fuel. You didn't say how big the 3 of you are, but with fuel to the tabs (38 instead of 52) may help a little. With pants, probably not a good idea on grass unless very short like Llano TX (KAQO).
 
Tantalum said:
I heard those do really well on sod and grass fields..

lol.. sorry I could not resist
Click to expand...
I'd wager they're about the same gear wise, and the mooney has the engine and prop. The Grumman might have a higher prop clearance, not sure.
 
An AA5X would not be my first choice for flying off a 2400 foot grass strip with a max load. With my AA5 (with high compression STC and STC prop) I'd still like 2500 paved or 3000 grass to be really comfortable with safety margins. Getting in is no issue. It's getting out, especially on hot days.

I realize that an AA5 is not the same but I'm 200 lb lighter MGW and only 20 less HP.
 
How good is the field? Also, you lose a not-insignificant amount of speed the second you take those wheel pants off, which a lot of grass strip people do.

I'd not have a problem running my Tiger off a field that short, but I also have a Tiger with a Sensenich, Jaguar Cowl, Lycon Port/Polish and a Powerflow. I can regularly rotate at or before the 1000' markets from a static takeoff and clear a 50 footer so fast that I have a problem even pitching up to Vx long enough to count on a checkride. I'd still not want to regularly use my plane on a grass strip, especially a short one. If you want to operate from grass, get a 182 or Bonanza.

Van Johnston said:
I fly a Tiger, and running the POH numbers just now at MGTOW=2400, OAT=99 deg F, 0 headwind, field elevation=500’, hard surface, I calculate 1890’ over 50’ obstacle. Then “they” say add 50% to the book values, so that turns into 2,800’. That’s based on the stock McCauley prop. You’ll have to add a factor for grass.
Click to expand...

Get rid of that McCauley. Tomorrow. Why would you want such a limited prop? You can't even run it at all RPMs.

Johnbo said:
thx for this. Too bad the tiger doesn’t have a CS prop and an extra 20-HP or I bet it would be perfect.
Click to expand...

There is a CS prop STC for an MT prop on the Tiger.

Clip4 said:
There is an STC for 200 hp / CS mod for the Tiger.
Click to expand...

Not 200 HP, but definitely for a CS prop. The 200 HP STC is getting a Powerflow and a LyCon port/polish O-360. That is officially still 180 HP, but definitely does better than that.
 
Clip4 said:
There is an STC for 200 hp / CS mod for the Tiger.
Click to expand...
N1120A said:
Not 200 HP, but definitely for a CS prop.
Click to expand...
You're both right, in a sense.

There's actually a few 200hp/CS STC's for the Cheetah/Tiger. There's also an 260hp IO540 STC. However these are all one-offs and therefore not publicly available.
 
asicer said:
You're both right, in a sense.

There's actually a few 200hp/CS STC's for the Cheetah/Tiger. There's also an 260hp IO540 STC. However these are all one-offs and therefore not publicly available.
Click to expand...

Yeah, were not talking about the Sabretooth or other one offs. There is one guru who is trying to get a real 200 HP STC for an IO360 Tiger.
 
Johnbo said:
Here is the situation. I am in the market for a family plane to haul my wife and young kid around to destinations 450 nautical miles and below. My home field is 2400’ of grass and is at 500’ msl, in the summer we see density altitudes of 3300’ max.

I have read online that the Grumman tigers are not well-suited to grass or short runways but the book value on distance required to clear a 50 foot obstacle is quite similar to a piper archer or even a Cherokee 180 so where do they get that reputation from and how accurate is it?

thx
Click to expand...

I've been out of the left seat for over a decade, but back then I had amassed about 100hrs in rental Grummans AA5's.. It did just fine on short, and on turf. Put in some flaps, full throttle, and lift off with the stall horn blaring felt like it was climbing like a homesick angel. Felt like we were at 50-100 ft AGL before 2000 ft of runway had passed by at our base airport.

What you DONT want is rough unimproved fields... the nosewheel is a bit more delicate compared to other light planes... but taking off on a properly maintained grass strip was never a problem. Landed on turf many many times without a problem.
 
N1120A said:
Yeah, were not talking about the Sabretooth or other one offs. There is one guru who is trying to get a real 200 HP STC for an IO360 Tiger.
Click to expand...

Gary Vogt at AuCountry is working on a 180hp IO360
 
I was expecting someone to suggest that you: Calculate or estimate stopping distance at Vr. Be conservative.
Pace off that distance from the departure end and mark with a small flag/rag.

You can utilize any over run area. If not flying when you approach the marker, abort. For an extra safety factor, try it first on a paved RW. A sod RW should require less stopping distance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top