Landing on a non-runway

[forseth11]

Are we allowed to land a plane in a field during a non-emergency. Not a grass strip, but just a regular field which is not on the charts at all. Is there a rule against this, or would the 500ft away from man made stuff cover this, but does it not since it would be for the purpose of landing?

 

[OkieAviator]

Nothing regulatory wise that prevents you from landing on an unimproved field. Now your insurance policy or some state or local laws might have issues with it.

 

[forseth11]

Nothing regulatory wise that prevents you from landing on an unimproved field. Now your insurance policy or some state or local laws might have issues with it.

Well besides the insurance, is there an easy way to check on state or local laws?

 

[DaleB]

You would need the permission of the owner of the property, and you should check to make sure there are no local ordinances prohibiting it. FAA regs don't say you have to land on a runway... otherwise there wouldn't be much market for floats, skis or tundra tires. I know of guys who land in all kinds of non-airport environments. Dry lake beds, beaches, pastures, etc. Looks like a lot of fun to me, if the plane and pilot are capable.

 

[OkieAviator]

Well besides the insurance, is there an easy way to check on state or local laws?

Not that I know of... Do you have some place in mind? If it's your buddy's 2 acre backyard outside Ft. Worth it's probably not a good idea... If it's a buddy's farm/ranch that is zoned agricultural than less to worry about.

Even though I fly a STOL I wouldn't land on anything short of a maintained grass strip.... unless I got some Tundras.

 

[forseth11]

Not that I know of... Do you have some place in mind? If it's your buddy's 2 acre backyard outside Ft. Worth it's probably not a good idea... If it's a buddy's farm/ranch that is zoned agricultural than less to worry about.

Even though I fly a STOL I wouldn't land on anything short of a maintained grass strip.... unless I got some Tundras.

No idea yet. Just I have in the past, but I wasn't so sure about it, and I remembered today, so I'm asking.
I think I thought about some place right on the boarder of DFW's airspace 9 miles west of Spinks (KFWS).

 

[RyanB]

It's mostly a "Land at your own risk" type of deal. As Okie mentioned, your insurance provider would have a few words to say and it might void any payout if an accident were to occur.

 

[saddletramp]

As far as the insurance co goes one could always make a" precautionary landing" because engine didn't sound right. Wink wink.

The landowner could get ****ed off though. We land out in gliders more often than we like to admit.

 

[Brad Z]

Well besides the insurance, is there an easy way to check on state or local laws?

Usually you go to the municipal website of the town, county, etc. and follow a link to their local ordinances. Check zoning too.

No laws online? If the backwater municipality is not sophisticated enough to have their code online, they probably don't care about such trivial things like landing a plane in a backyard!

^(don't quote me on that)

 

[DaleB]

If it's within city/town limits, I'd be very leery of landing. Most places have local ordinances designed to allow the cops to either arrest you or cite you for pretty much anything they don't like for one reason or another.

Outside city limits I think most counties have far fewer ordinances that you'd need to worry about, but trying to get a straight answer from someone who actually knows might be a challenge. Land owner permission would probably be enough in most rural areas. But do check your insurance policy, and of course make darned sure you know exactly what you're landing on. One badly placed rock, fence post or gopher hole could ruin your whole day.

 

[luvflyin]

Well besides the insurance, is there an easy way to check on state or local laws?

Lotsa states have a Department of Aviation or some similar name. That might be a good place to check. There are also State Pilot Associations.

 

[bflynn]

I've always wondered about this with regards to the grass next to a closed runway. You see, the runway is closed, but the grass next to it is just a field, right?

 

[coloradobluesky]

The answer lies in the jurisdiction of whoever owns or controls recreation on the field. The FAA doesnt prohibit it, but they might give you a fearless and reckless citation...

 

[forseth11]

If it's within city/town limits, I'd be very leery of landing. Most places have local ordinances designed to allow the cops to either arrest you or cite you for pretty much anything they don't like for one reason or another.

Outside city limits I think most counties have far fewer ordinances that you'd need to worry about, but trying to get a straight answer from someone who actually knows might be a challenge. Land owner permission would probably be enough in most rural areas. But do check your insurance policy, and of course make darned sure you know exactly what you're landing on. One badly placed rock, fence post or gopher hole could ruin your whole day.

Yea. Awhile back, I was thinking of shortening a trip to a friends house by having them mow part of their land and rid if of big bumps, holes, and rocks.

 

[bflynn]

I've always wondered about this with regards to the grass next to a closed runway. You see, the runway is closed, but the grass next to it is just a field, right? };-J>

The answer lies in the jurisdiction of whoever owns or controls recreation on the field. The FAA doesnt prohibit it, but they might give you a fearless and reckless citation...

Careless and reckless. But then they could cite you for that landing on an open runway poorly.

 

[Dana]

As others have said, nothing in the FAA regs about it, unless you do it more than some number of times at the same location. There may be state laws (NJ used to prohibit landing anywhere other than state licensed airports), and local laws or zoning may have something to say. Other than that, landowner permission (otherwise you're trespassing, though the owner may or may not care). I've landed in farm fields many times.

If you screw up, the feds may get you for "careless or reckless". And nowadays you're as likely as not to have somebody call 911 on their cellphone to report an "airplane crash".

If you can't inspect the field on the ground first, as a minimum you should fly low and slow and "drag the field" before landing. Is that even taught any more? It was when I learned to fly in the 1970s.

I regularly land on the grass alongside the paved runway at KSNC where I'm based, as do many of the taildragger pilots. Makes the tires last longer.

 

[Stewartb]

If all I had was proper runways? I'd quit flying. Off-airport dominates my flying. My primary plane is a Skywagon on 29" tires and that's pretty sweet but my new EX Supercub with 35" tires will go about anywhere. Alaska is mostly public land without aircraft restrictions and Alaskans are more airplane friendly than in most places. Its a great combination.

 

[mondtster]

And nowadays you're as likely as not to have somebody call 911 on their cellphone to report an "airplane crash".

I have not found that to be true at all. Everyone that I've ever run into when landing off airport is simply curious, and love asking questions and taking pictures.

 

[farmerbrake]

If all I had was proper runways? I'd quit flying. Off-airport dominates my flying. My primary plane is a Skywagon on 29" tires and that's pretty sweet but my new EX Supercub with 35" tires will go about anywhere. Alaska is mostly public land without aircraft restrictions and Alaskans are more airplane friendly than in most places. Its a great combination.

That moment when your supercub has bigger tires than my jeep......

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

 

[James331]

Do it all the time, no biggie, just be sure whomever owns the property is OK with it, I'd also (obvious I know) walk it, and maybe also drive on it before to check it out.

Fun stuff, and what real flying is all about

 

[Shawn]

When inquiring with the local jurisdictions there is a BIG difference between the questions "Can I land there?" and "Is there anything preventing me from landing there?"

 

[camel]

This comes up more for helicopters, which can land in almost any field. I don't know the laws, but I seem to recall that they can't land in national parks without prior permission, but (I think) they can land on other BLM land? Ask on a helicopter forum, you may get some good answers.

 

[forseth11]

Thanks for all the responses guys. People I know have told me a mooney is good on grass strips (I haven't landed one yet, but heavy aircraft with somewhat small wheels and sitting close to the ground does not soUnd the best to me). Would it be safe to land a mooney on a field like these or should I do it in only large wheeled airplanes?

 

[champ driver]

Thanks for all the responses guys. People I know have told me a mooney is good on grass strips (I haven't landed one yet, but heavy aircraft with somewhat small wheels and sitting close to the ground does not soUnd the best to me). Would it be safe to land a mooney on a field like these or should I do it in only large wheeled airplanes?

It all depends on the actual surface conditions. Some grass strips are in much better shape, or worse, than others, and sometimes those conditions can change from day to day.
I would never call a Mooney "good" on grass. That being said, I've seen Mooneys, Bonanzas, Grumman Tigers, Senecas and many others on nice smooth firm dry approved strips.

 

[James331]

..., I've seen Mooneys, Bonanzas, Grumman Tigers, Senecas and many others on nice smooth firm dry approved strips.

What do you mean by "approved"
How does that factor?

Think it's the care and condition of the strip that makes it safe, not its paperwork.

 

[champ driver]

I was talking about regular landing strips, not outback bush flying.

 

[James331]

I was talking about regular landing strips, not outback bush flying.

Gotcha

I only mentioned that because there are many very nice grass strips folks have made, but they just don't have any "papers"

 

[Stewartb]

A pilot is always responsible for operating on an appropriate surface. Learning how to decide when there's no gov't agency taking care of the surface is an aquired skill. Fly over it. Look at it. Drag your gear on it. Do whatever it takes to satisfy yourself. Self responsibility is part of the fun.

Sometimes a control tower will advise a runway is closed and operations are at the pilot's risk. Same deal. You can still come and go but you need to decide whether you and your equipment can handle it.

 

[Palmpilot]

...fearless and reckless citation...

Reminds me of my motto: "Never ride with a pilot who knows no fear."

 

[JoseCuervo]

Landed on taxi ways when issues with runways.

And, there are some highways that are awful handy to Mogas fuel pumps.

Go for it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[German guy]

Thanks for all the responses guys. People I know have told me a mooney is good on grass strips (I haven't landed one yet, but heavy aircraft with somewhat small wheels and sitting close to the ground does not soUnd the best to me). [...]

I am only familiar with Mooney M20Cs and Es, these are however not far off from Cessna 172s, in this regards.

The Mooneys have 6.00-6 on the mains and 5.00-5 on the nose wheel - the same size Cessna was using for all model year 172s.

The Mooney M20Cs and Es have a max. gross weight of 2,575 lbs.. Cessna 172s range from 2,200 lbs. (early straight tail) to 2,550 lbs (latest 172S). The typical 160 hp 172 has a max. gross weight of 2,400 lbs.. It appears as whether the Mooney's empty weight is even lower than the empty weight of at least the newer 172s.

I never compared our Mooney M20E's prop clearance to a 172. Compared to a 182, with a properly inflated nose gear strut, the prop clearance is around 1" less. However, the Mooney sits on rubber pucks, whereas the Cessna nose gear is pretty soft and needs to be properly inflated. A 182's nose strut, I saw last weekend at a fly-in, was not inflated correctly. Its prop clearance was about 3" less than at our Mooney.

Personally, I take our Mooney anywhere I would take a 172. Actually, compared to our old 172G with the 145 hp engine, the Mooney does much better on shorter fields, particularly heavily loaded, due to the much better take off and climb performance. 200 hp + a constant speed prop do make a difference and overcompensate for the moderately higher speeds, for take off and Vx.

The only thing I want to avoid, compared to a 172, is high grass, as I am concerned that it might damage the gear doors.

I am certainly not trying to sell Mooneys as serious backcountry machines. A standard 172 or Piper PA28 however doesn't fit that mission either. I am convinced that, at least the older Mooneys, are closer in regards to where they can land and take off to 172s or PA28s than many people realize.