> If I had a grass runway I would covertly reinforce it with that green plastic mesh, immediately.
I would do, too. It’ll probably make it a bit easier to keep in good shape too.
I’m sort of the opposite to you – I’d prefer to always operate off grass but in reality I never get to do so (I think in the last 12 months I’ve landed at one grass airfield only!). My plane was built in 1945 when hard surfaced GA airports were rare, and was designed for it. We’ve got fat main gear tyres to make operating off unimproved surfaces better, too. We’ve also got a solid shopping trolley style free castoring tailwheel which isn’t so good on hard surfaced runways. Places like Ronaldsway especially (with a grooved runway and ultra grippy runway surface) I always wheel land and keep the tail up until I’m going quite slow to stop the tailwheel from suffering from excessive wear.
The Bonanza also was designed in this era – the first Bo was on the market in 1947. One notable thing about the Bonanza when you compare it to (say) a Mooney or even an Arrow is that the Bonanza has very tough landing gear with the gear doors remaining reasonably clear of the surface (and quite big wheels), and also quite a lot of prop clearance.
But I have also been to a “1200m” grass strip where I needed ~ 1000m to get airborne.
It gets really interesting if the grass strip is submerged under 5cm of water…
I am sure many take a different view if it’s not their plane, and I used to fly to places in rented PA28s which I would not go to today.
Actually, for me it’s the other way round. I rather ruin my own stuff.
IMHO life is too short to be constantly worried about the perfect “as new” condition of one’s aircraft.
That’s very much how I feel. Anybody likes a shiny plane without dents better than a beat up old dog, especially if it’s a high qualiyt touring airplane like a TB20, Bonanza, Cirrus or Mooney (a beat up old CUB can be very charming, i think). But then…, Do i have the plane to GET TO PLACES, or am I a slave of the airplane?
Of course i can understand Peter too. That really is bad.
I was thinking about this a lot when I had to make the decision if I will fly the SR22 to work. The airport next to our company in CZ is a pretty rough grass strip, but long and not terribly bad. But since it’s on a hill and the underground is sandy, it’s never muddy. So i decided for it. After all the flight is only 40 minutes compared to 3+ hours (if I drive fast that is) by car.
I do see a chance that I will regret it, but I did it three times now, landed slow, flat and with the nose up high… and it seemed okay. Take-off is no problem at all… 300 m is all i need to get it off the ground and to accelerate in ground effect.
The narrower the runway, the easier it is to stay on the center line – proof that nature doesn’t always conspire again you.
Huh? I learned to fly on a 7000 ft rwy and flew for many years from a 9000 footer. Never had an issue with finding the center line. Only thing is, it’s almost as wide as the nacelle of the Cessna ;-)
If I had been in the position to have wrecked my shiny new aircraft in an unmarked pothole at a grass airstrip, I would probably feel somewhat similar.
It was at a hard runway airport, on a grass/concrete transition.
But I have also been to a “1200m” grass strip where I needed ~ 1000m to get airborne. Grass maybe 20cm long. Aircraft completely covered in green sh**t.
I am very much a “go places” pilot myself.
If going to totally unknown grass, it comes down to one’s attitude to risk (more or less what I said earlier). My attitude is that if going to somewhere in S. Europe, or actually most nice places in Europe, I am a very long way from home and the logistics of doing a repair would be hugely complicated. I don’t think my view would be different in a Cirrus. I am sure many take a different view if it’s not their plane, and I used to fly to places in rented PA28s which I would not go to today.
Always keep your margins.
That’s not easy if you are landing at a new unknown place, and regardless of what you find there you still need to take off sometime later.
The fact that this thread (which was about an obstacle clearance departure) has turned into a discussion of short fields and soft fields only shows too well that these things get totally mixed up in GA flying training. As long as these three things will not be properly separated, standards will not improve.
Anyway, since we were not talking about grass, I agree with Peter that grass is not like grass.
On one end of the scale there are “northern european” grass runways, where the grass is often very “thick and dense”, crerating lots of drag. Also, the ground can be very mossy (Gigha comes to mind) and thus soft. And then of course, most northern european grass runways tend to be soft and muddy after long rainfalls, and generally in winter, spring and even early summer. I remember one april departure from Glenforsa. Had it been asphalt, I would have used 300 metres of runway to liftoff. In reality, it was about 550 metres, so almost double the amount. However, since these fields are soft, they are more gentle with the mechanics and avionics of the aircraft.
On the other end of the scale, there are many “southern european” grass runways, where the grass is often much less dense, creating far less drag. The ground is often rock hard and barren, making takeoff and landing rolls very shaky. On the positive side, take-off rolls are often only something like 5 or 10% or so more than it would be on an asphalt runway. On the negative side, the mechanics (and especially high value avionics) get a real shakethrough each time one taxies, lands, or takes off from such a runway.
What Peter and I will never agree on is the value of grass runways in european GA flying.
First off, I have a certain understanding for Peter’s position. If I had been in the position to have wrecked my shiny new aircraft in an unmarked pothole at a grass airstrip, I would probably feel somewhat similar.
Alas, most of us haven’t had such bad luck and get a lot of enjoyment from grass airfields. And that’s not only the VFR bimbling people with their Cubs.
I am very much a “go places” pilot myself. And I have to say, my flying so far would have been so much less interesting without these.
Tons of destinations I would have never got to if I had refused to use a grass strip. Lots of nice people I have met at grass airfields. A lot of great places in Europe only have grass runways, especially so on the British Isles, Denmark, Poland, Italy, and (to a lesser degree) also in Germany. Of course, one could always land at the next bog standard IFR airport, take a rental go car and then go places. But it’s totally not the same.
Is using grass airfields good for your aircraft, particularly one with expensive avionics? Certainly not. Anyway, IMHO life is too short to be constantly worried about the perfect “as new” condition of one’s aircraft. It’s a weighing up of pros and cons.
Does flying at grass airfields bring about more “risk”? Certainly, since they are far less “predictable” (see above) than asphalt runways. Out of the five times I was close to making damage to my aircraft, two occasions involved grass operations. Always keep your margins.
It saved time I guess, and allowed the DPE to check three boxes quickly. 
A friend of mine likes to request an ‘early turn-out’ at this place with the 8000 ft runway, then start a curving take off roll completely across the run-up area, eventually reaching 45 degrees (mis) alignment with the runway centerline before lifting and making a 45 degree turn to crosswind. I don’t do that but when landing and in the flare, I find myself getting a bit lost: the sides of the runway are 75 ft away and so far out in my peripheral vision.
The narrower the runway, the easier it is to stay on the center line – proof that nature doesn’t always conspire again you.
US Private check ride included several type of takeoffs, at least three of which were one after the other on the same 8,000 × 150 ft runway.
That was awfully short, I’d never be able to make 3 take offs and landings in 150 feet. Did you notice the runway was especially wide (8000 feet). 
My US Private check ride included several type of takeoffs, at least three of which were one after the other on the same 8,000 × 150 ft runway.
