One aircraft in particular, the P55 Tornado, caught the attention of enthusiasts by winning the prestigious Giro di Sicilia air race. From that success, the family gained enough notoriety and confidence to start the first company—Partenavia.

From humble, pre-World War II beginnings to multiple state-of-the-art facilities today, Tecnam strives to be a dominant player in the piston market. The plan to find niches that can be exploited and dominated by aircraft designed to be class leaders has served the company well and is gaining traction. Tecnam produces a range of aircraft from light sport aircraft, to piston twins used in short haul commercial applications, to the recent 2024 FLYING Innovation Award winner two-seat trainer P-Mentor, capable of taking students from zero time through instrument and commercial. 

The upscale variant of the P2010, the Gran Lusso, is another example of the company’s ability to fill a void with a well-designed product.

The P2010 (or “twenty-ten”) Gran Lusso, like all current Tecnam aircraft, begins its model designation with the letter “P” that pays homage to the proud Pascale family lineage—no harm there. The number that follows the P indicates the year when the design was born and the aircraft began to take shape. The challenge here is two-fold. First, aircraft development takes years to advance from paper airplane to fully certified aircraft. Thus by the time a model appears on the market, the model name gives it the illusion of being a couple years old. For example, the 2024 Gran Lusso I tested is dubbed the P2010. Second, the naming convention doesn’t provide much indication as to where various products fit in the model line-up. For example, the P2002 is a single, the P2006 is a twin, the P2008 is a single, the P2010 is a single, and the P2012 is also a twin. 

• READ MORE: We Fly: Piper M700 Fury

But what’s in a name? In the case of the 2024 P2010 Gran Lusso, the thing to focus on is why the aircraft is deemed Gran Lusso, Italian for “grand luxury.” The aircraft is elegant looking, tastefully appointed, and its refinements (thanks largely to its FADEC turbo-diesel powerplant) include simplicity of operation from one-button start to the elimination of both mixture and prop controls. 

Airframe

The aircraft has attractive, sleek contours, common among composite fuselages, accentuated by complementary finish of a beautiful paint scheme. Italian fashion models have long been heralded for their curvaceous lines and chiseled features, and the Gran Lusso has similar sex appeal on its own runway. 

Interestingly, the P2010 variants have three different tail configurations based on what is slung firewall forward. Empennage configuration changes slightly with different powerplants—Continental CD-170 (170 hp), Lycoming IO-360 (180 hp), and Lycoming IO-390 (215 hp)—to achieve the desired handling characteristics. Also curious is the blend of airframe construction methodology, including a metal wing mated to a composite fuselage. 

The beauty of composite construction lies in the speed of production (with far fewer parts and labor required), its favorable weight-to-strength ratio versus aircraft aluminum, and the ability to craft complex shapes seamlessly (with lower parasitic drag) from large-scale molds. However, carbon fiber materials are generally more expensive than aircraft-grade aluminum. Consequently, even with the added production time of riveting overlapping skins to stamped metal ribs and bulkheads, aluminum construction can be more cost-effective. Some may argue that making metal field repairs may also be easier in the case of hangar rash or bird strike. 

• READ MORE: Ultimate Issue: We Fly the Cessna T182T Skylane

Regardless of the manufacturing strategy, the airframe is a thing of beauty with attention to detail in such mundane items as a door handle portends that no detail is too small to be thoughtfully designed. And speaking of doors, the aircraft also boasts another thoughtful feature rare in a four-place piston single—a rear passenger door (more on that later). 

Cabin

Approaching luxury automotive fit and finish best describes the interior in a single sentence. Legacy aircraft designs have long perpetuated an odd juxtaposition between the bougieness of what one drives to the airport and what one flies away.

Aircraft designed in the 21st century have all benefited from and exploited a path that brings the aircraft experience closer to the auto interior experience (noise level aside). And given what new pistons single retail for these days compared to luxury cars, making the aircraft feel like a luxury auto experience helps make the price tag seem like a better value for those who need the justification. 

In the Gran Lusso, everything the pilot and passengers see, touch, and interface with has a premium feel, most of which is wrapped in Italian leather and hand-stitched—the French way. The interior is also available in six color schemes with carbon-fiber inlays.

Vents, cleverly ducted from the front of the engine cowl to the panel provide an immediate airflow for cooling upon engine start. Even if the fuselage has been turned into a terrarium by the summer heat, the airflow facilitates evaporative cooling until the temperature lapse rate of higher altitudes substitutes for air conditioning.

The front seats are electronically adjustable up and down, and manually fore and aft. At 6-foot-1, I had ample leg room without the seat at the rear stop leaving extra leg room for back-seat occupants. The rear passenger door makes ingress and egress more elegant than adjusting seats and seat backs and clambering from front to back. Even with the front seats fully aft, the rear door provides an unobstructed entry portal. Once comfortably seated, passengers will find ample options for charging devices, lighting, and cooling.

The baggage area is also flexible and accommodating. The rear seats are relatively easy to remove as are the baggage-area panels, making it easy to load larger, longer items like downhill skis through the rear passenger door, serving as a much larger cargo door.

Avionics

Garmin provides the interface for the last two-thirds of the aviate–navigate–communicate equation. The G1000NXi suite coupled to a GF700 autopilot is an increasingly familiar and incredibly robust panel. Both the G1000NXi and GFC700 have feature enhancements not found in earlier iterations.

The G1000 suite receives plenty of attention, largely because it has become so popular in new aircraft like the ones we cover in FLYING. In reality, fewer than 20,000 aircraft in the fleet boast G1000 avionics, so it’s still worth discussing what’s new. 

• READ MORE: Embraer’s Phenom 300E Full of Bossa Nova Style

The NXi version has an updated multifunction display (MFD) featuring a split-screen feature. This allows the pilot to have more pages visible, thereby reducing the need to switch between them to display desired information. The MFD screen can be split horizontally, vertically, or a combination of both for maximum customization. 

U.S. operators will benefit from enhanced terrain awareness through the addition of color-coded contouring when the aircraft is 2,000 feet (green shading), 1,000 feet (yellow), and 100 feet (red) agl. Map options include VFR sectional or IFR enroute.

Wireless connectivity now enables the pilot to stream information such as traffic and weather between compatible devices and apps so animated radar imagery can be overlaid on the MFD and the HSI inset on the PFD. Users can also transfer flight plans created on a remote device directly to the G1000NXi. 

The GFC 700 also includes visual approach capability for vectors or straight-in approaches with a coupled vertical flight path down to pilot-selectable minimums. 

The Gran Lusso’s G1000 is also equipped with features including synthetic vision (optional) and basic envelope protection in what Garmin calls ESP—electronic stability and protection. The system helps avoid loss-of-control scenarios by providing increasingly stronger forced feedback through the yoke if pitch or roll exceeds programmed limits. If the system is activated for an extended period, the autopilot will bring the aircraft back to straight and level flight. This feature can help avoid inadvertent stalls or other loss of control scenarios possibly induced by spatial disorientation.

The good news is, first, the forced feedback can be relatively easily overcome with firm control inputs, and second, the system can also be manually disabled for training purposes.

Engine

The Gran Lusso is powered by an overhead cam, liquid-cooled, fuel-injected, FADEC-controlled, turbocharged, intercooled, high compression, jet-A burning 170 hp powerplant. If that litany of engine tech sounds like something you’d find in an auto brochure, you’d be correct. This Continental CD-170 is a heavily modified Mercedes-Benz engine capable of a cruise speed of 140 knots on less than 9 gallons an hour.

Another welcome surprise is the much lower-than-expected ambient cabin noise than one generally experiences in a legacy piston single. While it isn’t the 65 decibel noise level of your family truckster at highway speed, in-flight conversations without a headset are possible with power pulled back to cruise.

Walkaround

My demo pilot for the day was Nate Weisman of CieloBlu, one of Tecnam’s U.S. dealers. Weisman is an instructor, demo and ferry pilot, salesman, marketer, and just all-around good guy. He is just what every aircraft dealer needs—someone who knows the aircraft, is easy to fly with, and can give you pointers while demonstrating.

During the walkaround for the aircraft  preflight inspection, Weisman pointed out the usual and customary items and also some that, again, speak to the attention to detail on the P2010. 

For example, there’s a small, almost unnoticeable drip sill attached above the front doors to divert rainwater away from the opening. Additionally, rather than hanging down into airflow, the wing fuel sumps are sculpted into the end of a small fairing. The baggage door doesn’t require a key and adds a level of security through a hidden release located inside the cabin.

Performance

Start-Up

The turbo diesel adds a number of practical benefits to this beautiful aircraft. But if you didn’t get a whiff of jet fuel while walking around the aircraft, the start-up procedure gives the first indication of what’s bolted to the firewall.

The aircraft has a single push-button start while still requiring a prestart checklist. The procedure is basically, flip the master on, engine master on, push and hold the engine start button until the engine fires, then release. 

Unlike gas-powered internal combustion engines, diesel engines do not have spark plugs but rather glow plugs to assist in the combustion process. Since glow plugs take a few seconds to heat up, there is a very brief pause required before cranking an engine to start. Once the GLOWSYS ACTV cas message appears, simply push and hold the start button until the engine fires.

Taxi

The fully castering nosewheel requires differential braking to taxi, but it also enables a very tight turning radius. Since the nosewheel isn’t connected in any way to the rudder, dancing with the rudder pedals isn’t going to provide any steering inputs while taxiing because the weak aerodynamic forces on the rudder at such low speeds typically will make the rudder ineffective.

Gently using the toe brakes for differential braking will keep you aligned on the centerline. For those who haven’t taxied a castering nosewheel, this may take a bit of driving around the airport to get a good feel for it.

When we taxied out to the runway for the demo flight, I couldn’t quite get a coordinated feel for where to place my feet to best manipulate the toe brakes. I wanted to rest my heels on the floor but couldn’t quite get the feel I wanted on the toe brakes. After landing, I realized that I could rest the balls of my feet on the top of the rudder pedals and work the toe brakes by rocking my toes forward.

Run-Up 

The benefits of the dual-channel FADEC engine were obvious and reduced workload. With no mags to test, and no prop to cycle, the run-up is a fairly simple process with the fully automated and redundant FADEC system testing itself—first FADEC channel A, then toggling to test the FADEC B channel.

The only other action was selecting takeoff flaps. There are only two flap settings, takeoff (15 degrees) and landing (40 degrees). That said, it probably took longer to write this paragraph than it did to complete the run-up.

Takeoff

Automated engine controls manage prop setting and fuel metering, leaving only a throttle lever in the center console for managing power.

With everything in the green and the modified Mercedes diesel up to temperature, we brought the power up and launched out of Appleton, Wisconsin, on a hot summer midday before EAA AirVenture with clouds building around us. 

After rotation, we targeted the century mark for the climb up to 6,500 to have some fun and see how the ESP would react. I was reasonably impressed by the climb ability—as a rule, diesel engines generally have more torque than gas. This makes the P2010 with the CD-170 a powerful combination that likes to climb yet doesn’t require an unusual amount of right rudder trim. 

Once stabilized at a safe altitude and clearing turns combined with familiarization with the controls and sight picture, we executed a power-on stall.

Pulling back on the yoke made the airspeed tape scroll below Vx and filled the windscreen with nothing but blue sky—one would be hard-pressed not to recognize the warning signs of an approaching power-on stall. As expected, the ESP system kept trying to convince me to lower the nose as I kept trying to put the yoke in my lap. The power-on stall was unremarkable and the aircraft recovered as expected.

The power-off stall characteristics felt a bit more squeamish with what I deemed to be a tendency to drop a wing more abruptly than I expected. Not disconcerting, just surprising, which brought up another point I was not aware of. Unlike some high-wing aircraft with gravity feed systems, the P2010 pilot must monitor fuel and switch fuel tanks periodically to maintain balance. Keeping an eye on fuel is a part of the routine scan, setting a timer is always wise, and programming a recurring MSG in the G1000 is also a great backup to help avoid a fuel imbalance that might aggravate a stall.

After a couple stalls, we leveled off and executed some steep turns that also woke up the ESP. As the bank angle increased beyond 30 degrees, an increasing amount of control input force was required to overcome ESP’s desire for the aircraft to rollout back to wings level. It would be difficult to overcontrol the aircraft with ESP on, but I can also envision times when I’d prefer to keep ESP off.

I also wanted to see if the Gran Lusso, which lived up to its name, also lived up to its marketing hype—I wanted to see 140 knots. With the GFC700 doing the flying, we pushed the throttle forward and yes, at 90 percent power on 8.9 gph, the airspeed tape scrolled to 140 ktas as advertised.

Conclusion

The Gran Lusso is a compelling product. At its core, it checks all three boxes for my trifecta of what a 21st century general aviation, cross-country aircraft design should be with regard to airframe, avionics, and powerplant.

Modern airframe—check.

While not fully composite, it includes a sleek, spacious fuselage that reduces weight and drag. The ramp presence is strong, the fit and finish is impeccable, and the interior appointments are stunning in this class of aircraft.

GA aircraft are expensive, no question. In the past however, the premium price didn’t seem to align with the technology, fit, finish, features, and comfort one might expect when reaching so deep into your retirement fund.

In this case, everything about the Gran Lusso seemed to indicate that no corners were cut in the process of delivering grand luxury. OK, maybe a heated seat would have been a nice addition—and a key fob to remotely illuminate underwing and interior LED lighting (I’ll be looking for that next).

Modern avionics—check.

The Garmin G100NXi suite needs no more explanation. The feature-rich package, digital autopilot, and safety attributes have altered the way many of us fly. There’s considerably more features in the NXi upgrade that aren’t covered here, but it will suffice to say that the G1000 is synonymous with modern avionics.

Modern powerplant—check.

The vast majority of GA aircraft are powered by very basic, generally low-tech, air-cooled engines designed in the previous century. While engine OEMs have made vast improvements over time in reliability, fuel delivery, electronic controls, and more, simply put, aviation engine technology has not kept pace with the modernization and performance found in today’s cars and motorcycles.

If a 4-cylinder liquid-cooled, double-overhead cam, motorcycle engine can produce more than 200 hp from only 1,000 cc displacement, why are we still slogging around with 360 ci air-cooled, pushrod engines pumping out 200 hp?

Granted it’s not easy. I get it, but you see the point. The Gran Lusso has a modern engine with arguably more reliability than its 1,800-hour TBR (time before replacement) would imply. 

Unlike other powerplants, the CD-170 is replaced, not overhauled, at the currently certified end of its service life. This could be because the OEM wants to eliminate the liability of having very hi-tech engines rebuilt in the field without proper tools, training, or parts. At the prescribed time, the engine is returned to the OEM for a core credit toward the purchase of a factory new, not remanufactured, engine.

But fear not, flying 100 hours per year still provides 18 years of enjoyment before TBR. And as for relative wear and tear comparison, 1,800 hours of operation may only equate to roughly five years of use in an auto application. Given the reliability of diesel engines, and the more than 10 millions hours of testing claimed by Continental on the engine, I suspect the CD-170 could fly considerably longer than the 1,800 TBR without flinching. So kudos for engine modernization. 

Perhaps what I find most compelling about the Gran Lusso is its mission capability and practicality. With an average useful load near 850 pounds and fuel efficiency of about 6.6 gph in cruise, it can be a four-place aircraft that can fill all four seats (depending on how carefully you choose your friends) and still have enough useful load remaining to carry the fuel needed to fly farther than the closest fuel stop.

The Tecnam Gran Lusso is a wonderful confluence of technology, features, luxury, and performance. With its production rate and growing popularity, the Gran Lusso may be as elusive as a dinner and drinks with an Italian model (but that certainly shouldn’t deter you from entertaining the possibility).

Cockpit at a Glance: 2024 Tecnam Gran Lusso

A. The Garmin G1000NXi suite coupled to the GFC700 digital autopilot boasts new features and supports options like synthetic vision and Flight Stream 510 to wirelessly stream data.

B. The Garmin flight management keypad provides push button data entry as an alternative to knob twisting.

C. The center console puts important controls like flaps, fuel valve, trim wheel, parking brake, and the single power control in one convenient location.

D. Approaching luxury automotive fit and finish, the interior is also available in six modern color schemes with carbon-fiber inlays.

Spec Sheet: 2024 Tecnam Gran Lusso

Price as Tested: $690,220 (including optional Synthetic Vision)

Certifications: FAA Part 23, Transport Canada Civil Aviation, European Union Aviation Safety Agency, and Civil Aviation Safety Authority (Australia)

Engine: Continental Aerospace Technologies CD-170 turbodiesel

Propeller: Three-blade MT MTV-6-R/190-69

Horsepower: 170 hp

Length: 25.95 ft.

Height: 9.32 ft.

Wingspan: 33.79 ft.

Wing Area:  149.6 sq. ft.

Wing Loading: at max gross weight = 17.98 lbs./sq. ft.

Power Loading: 16.01 lbs./hp

Cabin Width: 3.74 ft.

Cabin Length: 7.55 ft.

Max Takeoff Weight: 2,690 lbs.

Max Zero Fuel Weight: 1,687 lbs.

Standard Empty Weight: 1,841 lbs.

Max Baggage: 88 lbs. in baggage compartment

Useful Load: approx. 849 lbs., depending on options

Max Usable Fuel: 411.75 lbs. (61 gallons usable)

Service Ceiling: 18,000 ft.

Max Rate of Climb, MTOW, ISA, SL:  MTOW, ISA, SL:  579 fpm

Max Cruise Speed: 140 ktas

Max Range: 1,300 nm

Fuel Consumption at Max Cruise: 8.7 gph

Stall Speed, Flaps Up: flaps up 63 kias

Stall Speed, Full Flaps: flaps LND 49 kias

Takeoff Over 50 Ft. Obs: 2,306 ft. (ISA, sea level @ MTOW)

Landing Over 50 Ft. Obs: 1,808 ft. (ISA, sea level @ MTOW)

This feature first appeared in the September Issue 950 of the FLYING print edition.

The post We Fly: Tecnam Gran Lusso appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

While precious little meaningful lawmaking occurred in year one of the 118th Congress, there is one very bright spot in year two—the 2024 FAA Reauthorization Act. 

This legislation demonstrates the good work that can be accomplished when the gap between the party aisle gets as narrow as the aisle in a regional jet. Since most people understand the value of aviation as a safe and efficient time-saving mode of transportation, a powerful job-creating, revenue-generating economic engine at the local and national level, and it’s just plain fun (pun intended), it’s no surprise that the industry is common ground that enables politicians to reach across that narrow aisle and do some serious bipartisan problem solving.

Now that President Biden signed the FAA Reauthorization Act into law, good things will begin happening for aviation, and general aviation specifically. Hidden within the 4-inch stack of paper are mandates that will launch feasibility studies, authorize spending, and create deadlines for decisions that will make GA pilots happy. Not found in the legislation are bizarre amendments often used as concessions to gain necessary support. So, no, there’s no crazy amendment to create a national 100 mph speed limit on interstates with 100 miles between exits. It’s all about solving aviation challenges and planning for the future.

In order to break down the 1,083-page legislation into bite-size pieces to make it easier to digest, start by searching the document for keywords like “general aviation.” You’ll immediately be rewarded with 41 instances of the exact search that lead to where the treasure is buried. Before you get too excited though, a similar doc search for the word “wheelchair” generates 68 occurrences—so there’s that.

• READ MORE: Thoughts on FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 and Data Privacy

This legislation marks the first time the GA has been added as a stand-alone section title addressing its issues. That said, it’s worth taking a deeper dive into what it has to offer that we can all look forward to during the next five years. Keep in mind that some aspects of the legislation are merely an authorization for exploration, not a promise to spend money or fix something.

Still the law draws a line in the sand as to when recommendations must be made so the next step can be taken—that’s progress. And in some cases, like Modernization of Special Airworthiness Certification (MOSAIC), the bill states that a final decision must be made as opposed to kicking the can down the road for five years until the next reauthorization.

What follows are a few examples of how GA benefits from the law. If your interest lies in unmanned aircraft systems, advanced air mobility, commercial transportation, high-altitude balloons, or supersonic flight, you’ll find those topics and more addressed in detail—there is literally something for every GA enthusiast. If your interests are in other areas of aviation, such as commercial seat dimensions, black boxes, wheelchairs, family seating policies, or whatever, there’s plenty of that too, but we’ll not delve into it here.

For the purpose of this piece, we’ve grouped items into airports, airspace, aircraft, and aviators. 

Airports

Section 716: Small airport fund 

This section helps simplify the distribution of funds to small airports to be allocated for the expansion of aprons intended for transient parking, as GA ramp space is often consumed by locally-based personal, training, and/or derelict aircraft, leaving little or no space for transient parking. 

Section 719: Protecting GA airports from closure

Closing even a single airport sets a dangerous precedent. This is often caused by residential areas encroaching on airports that were once well outside of city limits. An example of this is the much publicized battle over the fate of the Santa Monica Airport (KSMO) in California, facing a planned permanent closure in 2028. 

An airport’s remoteness does not provide protection either. Some 16 airstrips in Utah’s backcountry are at risk of closure. Countless other airports are being scrutinized by the nonflying public. This section ensures the FAA will help protect GA. Also related is Sec. 756, Banning Municipal Airport, which requires a GAO study on Banning Municipal Airports in California.

Section 726:  GA airport runway extension pilot program

While intended to improve safety and accessibility by extending runways at small airports through the Airport Improvement Plan (AIP), one unintended consequence could also be the attraction of larger aircraft and new businesses—there goes the ramp space. Generally speaking, making airports more accessible and attracting larger aircraft and businesses keep the airport strong and attractive for its contributions to the local economy, and making runways longer, wider, and safer is a positive thing.

Section 732: Populous counties without airports 

This section requires the FAA to include a new airport in the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) as long as the new facility is planned for the most populous county of a state that does not already have one. 

Section 740: Permanent solar powered taxiway edge lighting systems

Exploring the feasibility of solar-powered taxi lighting at regional, local, and basic general aviation airports, this engineering brief resulting from this project is a first step that could lead to new lighting at airports that currently have none and possible cost-saving as a replacement for existing lighting.

• READ MORE: Bipartisan FAA Reauthorization Act Signed Into Law

Section 745: Electric aircraft infrastructure pilot program

As the electrification of GA advances rapidly, this section launches a five-year pilot program allowing up to 10 eligible airports to acquire, install, and operate charging equipment for electric aircraft and to construct or modify related infrastructure as needed to support the project.

Section 749: Airport diagram terminology 

This section requires the FAA to update guidance for the clear and consistent use of the terms used to identify the types of parking available to GA pilots. For those of us who have landed at an unfamiliar airport and didn’t know where to park, this will help—especially after more ramp space is created as a result of Section 716.

Section 770: Grant assurances

As work ramps up to eliminate 100LL from airports by 2030, there is increasing concern about availability of the avgas until a new solution is readily available. Section 770 states that airports that offered 100LL in 2022 must continue to do so until 2030 or the date on which a FAA-certified unleaded avgas alternative is available to GA aircraft operators (some limitations apply). Airports not in compliance are subject to fines up to $5,000 per day.

Section 783: Expedited environmental review and one federal decision 

This section reforms and expands the applicability and responsibility of the FAA’s expedited environmental review process for airport capacity enhancement projects, including new ramp space and safety improvements. 

Section 1024: Technology review of artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies

There’s no denying the fact that artificial intelligence and machine learning will have an increasingly greater impact on aviation. This section directs the FAA to conduct a review of existing and proposed AI and machine-learning technology applications that may be used to improve airport safety, efficiency, and operations. The directive requires the FAA to submit a report to Congress by May 2025.

Airspace

Section 760: Washington, D.C., metropolitan Special Flight Rules Area 

While not a nationwide issue, airspace around the nation’s capital can be unfriendly to GA pilots—particularly those not based in the area and therefore unfamiliar with the challenges and procedures. The FAA and Departments of Homeland Security and Defense will collaborate on a study of the Washington D.C., Special Flight Rules Restricted Zone to identify possible changes to decrease adverse operational impacts and improve GA access to airports in the national capital region.

• READ MORE: Stakeholders Commend Drone, AAM Measures in FAA Reauthorization Bill

Section 1012: Electric propulsion aircraft operations study

In conducting the study, the section directs the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to assess the relevant technical competencies required for the necessary regulatory guidance and airport infrastructure requirements to support electric aircraft operations. The section directs GAO to submit a report to Congress with recommendations for legislative and administrative action by May 2026.

Section 1025: Research plan for commercial supersonic research 

Supersonic flight has largely been held back by the fact that regulation hasn’t caught up to technology (that has largely reduced the window-rattling, goat-frightening sonic boom to that of distant thunder). The FAA will collaborate with NASA and industry experts to provide a congressional briefing that identifies any additional research needed to support the development of revised federal and international policies, regulations, and standards relating to the certification and operation of civil supersonic aircraft for overland flight.

Section 627: Low-altitude routes for vertical flight

Far below supersonic flight levels, this section directs the FAA to initiate a rulemaking process to establish or update low-altitude routes and flight procedures for safer rotorcraft and powered-lift operations in the national airspace system. In initiating a rulemaking, the FAA must consult with various stakeholder groups, including the U.S. Helicopter Safety Team and the union representing air traffic controllers. Low-altitude airspace will become increasingly congested with electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft including the drone delivery fleets employed by Walmart and Amazon—see also Section 930 beyond visual line of sight [BVLOS] operations in the aircraft section below.

Section 919: Review of regulations to enable unescorted UAS operations

This section directs the FAA and DOD to review requirements necessary to permit the military to operate unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) in the national airspace without the need for an escort by a manned aircraft. Currently large drones, such as the RQ-9 Reaper and MQ-1 Predator, are escorted in controlled airspace by the Air Force auxiliary shadowing them as a surrogate.

Section 928: Recreational operations of drone systems

For recreational use of drones in national airspace, the FAA will establish a process to approve locations dedicated to UAS operations above the 400-foot ceiling within Class G airspace.

Section 952: Sense of Congress on FAA leadership in AAM

Congress is interested in establishing the U.S. as a global leader in advanced air mobility (AAM). To that end, the FAA is directed to begin working with manufacturers, operators, and other stakeholders to enable the safe entry of these aircraft into the national airspace system. 

Section 1012: Electric propulsion aircraft operations study

The GAO has hereby been tasked to launch a study that explores the safe integration and scalable operation of electric aircraft into the national airspace system. A report to Congress is due by May 2026.  

Aircraft

Section 361: Continuous aircraft tracking and transmission for high-altitude balloons

Most high-altitude balloon launches for STEM education, weather, and more do not emit signals for identification, which poses a potential hazard to other aircraft in flight. This section requires the FAA to establish an Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC) to make recommendations for high-altitude balloons to be equipped for continuous tracking by transmitting basic information about altitude, location, and identity that is accessible to air traffic controllers.

Section 812: Aircraft registration validity during renewal

Delays in the now required periodic renewal of aircraft registration has left some aircraft owners grounded or forced some to fly with an expired registration. Because of the backlog, the FAA would permit an aircraft to continue to be legally operated beyond the expiration date, assuming the operator can establish the fact that renewal was already in progress before expiration. Additionally, Section 817 requires the FAA to take steps to reduce the backlog and process applications within 10 business days after receipt.

Section 824: MOSAIC rulemaking deadline

The much-discussed MOSAIC decision is due within 24 calendar months. Many expect a decision prior to the deadline, but at the very least, a final ruling on the Modernization of Special Airworthiness Certification will occur in 2026.

Section 827: EAGLE Initiative (Eliminate Aviation Gasoline Lead Emissions)

Marching toward the 2030 deadline to eliminate leaded aviation fuel, this section specifies that the FAA will facilitate the safe elimination of leaded avgas, the approval of the use of unleaded alternatives for use in all aircraft piston-engine types, establish the requirements relating to the continued availability of avgas; effort to make unleaded avgas widely available and have  developed of a transition plan by 2030. 

In developing the transition plan, the FAA must consider: the EAGLE Initiative; airport infrastructure for unleaded avgas; best practices for protecting against exposure to lead contamination; efforts to address supply chain issues inhibiting distribution of unleaded avgas; and efforts to educate pilots and aircraft owners on how to safely transition to unleaded avgas.

Section 906: Electronic conspicuity study

This section directs GAO to study technologies needed on board UAS to detect and avoid manned aircraft that may lawfully operate below 500 feet agl. The study requires GAO to consult with aviation stakeholder representatives and report to Congress on the findings of such study. Additionally, Section 907: Remote identification alternative means of compliance requires the administrator to review and evaluate the FAA final rule to determine if unmanned aircraft manufacturers and operators can comply through alternative means.

Section 930: BVLOS operations for unmanned aircraft systems

This may be a good news-bad news scenario, depending on your perspective. The FAA is creating a pathway for UAS to operate beyond visual line of sight. The proposed rule developed under this section will establish “acceptable levels of risk” for remote pilots to fly BVLOS. Walmart and Amazon Prime Air have already been approved by the FAA to implement this action. Amazon plans to deliver 500,000,000 packages per year by drone by 2030 (the current MK-27 drone is 5½ feet in diameter).

Section 1109: FAA leadership in hydrogen aviation 

Not wanting to end up behind the power curve on hydrogen-powered aircraft as a sustainable fuel alternative, this section states that the FAA shall exercise leadership in the development of regulations, standards, and best practices relating to the safe and efficient certification of these aircraft. 

Section 1110: Advancing global leadership on civil supersonic aircraft

Also driven to position the U.S. as a global innovation leader in the area of supersonic flight, this section amends Section 181 from the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act by adding additional reporting requirements. Within one year, the FAA shall submit a report to Congress describing the agency’s efforts related to supersonic aircraft certification.

Aviators

Section 403: Women in Aviation Advisory Committee 

It’s no secret that aviation does not reflect the gender diversity in the nation, and efforts to create greater access are ongoing. To that end, the Bessie Coleman Women in Aviation Advisory Committee has been formed to advise the FAA and DOT on matters related to the recruitment, retention, employment, education, training, and career opportunities for women in the aviation industry. 

Section 404: FAA engagement and collaboration with HBCUs and MSIs 

In a similar fashion, this section directs the FAA to continue to partner with Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs) to promote awareness of educational and career opportunities related to aerospace, aviation, and air traffic control.

Section 801: Reexamination of pilots or certificate holders

This section amends the Pilot’s Bill of Rights and requires the FAA to provide timely notification to anyone subject to a reexamination of an airman certificate. The notification must inform the individual: of the nature of the reexamination and the specific activity on which the reexamination is necessitated; that the reexamination shall occur within one year from the date of the notice provided by the FAA; and when an oral or written response to the notification from the FAA is not required. If the reexamination is not conducted after one year from the date of notice, an airman’s certificate may be suspended or revoked. 

Section 828: Expansion of BasicMed

Limitations for pilots flying aircraft under BasicMed have been expanded by increasing the number of allowable passengers that can be carried up to six, the number of seats in an aircraft to seven, and the maximum certificated takeoff weight up to 12,500 pounds from 6,000. This section does not apply to transport category rotorcraft. 

The legislation is robust and wide-ranging no doubt, and we applaud the bipartisan work that it represents and appreciate the considerable effort placed on addressing GA-specific issues for the first time under its own title. Clearly the value of aviation, the willingness to support the integration of new technology, the requirements to fund infrastructure improvements, and the desire to retain America’s position as the world leader in aviation innovation is common ground—even in Washington, D.C.

This feature first appeared in the July/August Issue 949 of the FLYING print edition.

The post FAA Reauthorization Act Revisited appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

One of the things I love about aviation is that it’s the great equalizer. Being a pilot is a shared space that seems to allow who you are and what you’ve accomplished melt into the background for a while allowing the experience and joy of flying an aircraft to become the tie that binds. And if you’re paying attention, there’s almost always something you can learn from listening to another pilot.

Siebel started flying in the early 1980s. Considering the training fleet of the day—the airframes, avionics, interiors, and engines—not much was new or exciting other than the intrinsic value of exploring the science and fun of learning to fly. Like many pilots, he stepped away from flying for a while but never lost his love of aviation.

A few years later, Siebel found himself back in the seat of a GA aircraft—a Cirrus SR22—only to discover that a great deal had changed. Mesmerized, as we all were at the time, he described the integration of technology in a piston GA aircraft as “almost unimaginable.” Imagine having last climbed out of steam gauge (circa mid-1950s design) aircraft and being introduced to a sleek, composite, glass-cockpit, parachute-equipped aircraft with more bells and whistles than a model train museum. Clearly a great deal had changed, and he was ready to jump in again and not look back.

Aviation is a huge part of Siebel’s life—it’s an invaluable business tool, a source of recreation, and the mechanism to support some of his philanthropic endeavors. As one might expect of someone of his stature, he owns a Boeing BBJ, but he never once mentioned it in our conversation—probably because he can’t fly it inverted like the GB1 GameBird that he is enamored with.

Listening to Siebel talk about his aviation experience is fascinating and inspirational. As I mentioned earlier, if you pay attention, it’s easy to learn from fellow aviators, and I did. Something that fascinated me about his aviation experience (and inspired me to do better) is his unwavering commitment to safety and training.

“I’m a super enthusiastic pilot who likes to be safe,” Siebel said.

And it shows. Once, while getting some mountain flying training with a CFI, he inadvertently got into a spin while executing an aggressive 180-degree turn to simulate retreating from a canyon. That experience prompted him to get spin training, which as he explained, “the next thing you know I own a GameBird.” 

Siebel shared that he flew 300 hours last year—a big number for anyone who doesn’t fly for a living, let alone someone who’s busy day job is running a Fortune 100 tech company. But even more impressive is the fact that 50 percent of that time was devoted to training and becoming a better, safer pilot. Staying proficient in all five of the aircraft he flies certainly requires training, but dedicating half of one’s flight time to that speaks volumes. 

• READ MORE: In Depth with JoeBen Bevirt Illuminates the Joby Vision

We all have an intelligence quotient (IQ) and an emotional quotient (EQ). If pilots have a safety quotient (SQ), an ability to understand, assess, and manage the need to be safe and proficient and to take the steps necessary to maximize and maintain that, I’d say that Siebel’s SQ is very high, and he continues to stack the deck in his favor.

To that end, his new love, which also makes him a safer pilot in the realm of unusual attitudes and upset recovery, is aerobatics—something he didn’t start until he was in his 60s. His beautiful GB1 GameBird comes out of the nest for those flights of fancy. Siebel trains with world champion and aerobatic pilot Sean D. Tucker (another pilot whose SQ is off the charts). 

When not tossing the GameBird about while arguing with it over the laws of aerodynamics and physics, Siebel also has an affinity for birds that swim, owning both a Daher Kodiak and a CubCrafters XCub on floats. Also in the fun-to-fly category is his wheeled XCub.

“It’s hard to have more fun in an aircraft than in a Carbon Cub,” he said. “You can land these things anywhere. They’re unbelievable. We land in the driveway, alfalfa fields, cow pastures, mountaintops, the highway…[But] let me clarify this first—it’s lawful to land on the highway in Montana.”

His Montana ranch is also home of an annual fly-in Siebel hosts. Through his connections who share the love of aviation, his charity event generates funds to provide college scholarships for children of Montana state troopers and fish, wildlife, and parks officers.

From business to pleasure and philanthropy, aviation is woven into the fabric of Siebel’s life.

• READ MORE: In Depth With an ‘Airport Kid’

With time running short, I didn’t want to leave our conversation without asking his opinion about the role of AI in aviation. Automation in aviation (think autopilot) is nothing new, but the concept of AI (like machine learning) and the speed of its integration can be a great source of debate: Is it good thing, bad thing, and how soon will we see a required crew of two be reduced to one or even zero pilots? What should we look forward to or be cautious about?

His Q&A responses were both surprising and refreshing.

FLYING Magazine (FM): What was the first aircraft you owned?

Tom Siebel (TS): My first plane was a 140 hp Cherokee. I used to have a B36TC, a Malibu, a couple of Maules, PC6, PC12, Falcon 2000, Global Express, and others, but I’d say the planes I fly now are by far the most fun.

FM: What has been your greatest aviation experience thus far?

TS: I was able to do some formation training with the Chilean national acrobatics team. And I also trained with Sean Tucker doing formation flight in the GameBirds. It was really exhilarating and really exciting. It’s been one of the most exciting experiences of my life.

FM: What is the future of AI in the cockpit? Will we see pilotless aircraft any time soon?

TS: I don’t think so. The UAV problem is very difficult to solve. C3.AI has built some of the largest and most complex enterprise scale AI applications on earth for places like the United States Air Force, the intelligence agency, and others.

We can spool up 10,000 virtual machines in the cloud doing 24-bit floating point operations, say 20,000 of them on three-, four-, or five-gigahertz cycles—this is an unimaginable computing capacity. A $100 million worth of computing capacity to train a learning model, which actually has very, very little intelligence and it requires two gigawatts of power. The human brain has 60 billion neurons that make 100 trillion analog connections simultaneously. And it operates on only 17 watts of power.

As somebody who is a leader in artificial intelligence and knows something about it, I do not think we’re going to see fully autonomous, ground-based terrestrial vehicles or aircraft really anytime soon. I don’t think we need to worry about [pilotless aircraft] anytime soon. That being said, will artificial intelligence assist pilots in single pilot operations? Absolutely.

I think one of the most sophisticated applications of computing in aviation—I’m not sure there’s any artificial intelligence in there—is definitely what Garmin has done with this Safe Return system. That’s almost unimaginable.

FM: What is the best application of AI in aviation?

TS: Predictive AI is a good example. We’ve taken all of the aircraft weapons systems, F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22, F-35, KC-135, and aggregated all of the telemetry off these systems, all of the maintenance data, all of the flight history, all the information about flight stories, and the weather where they were flying. We’ve aggregated about 100 terabytes of data in a tool called PANDA (Predictive Analytics and Decision Assistant).

We run those data through machine-learning models to predict system failure before it happens. And so the idea is, if we can identify the system, auxiliary power unit, flap actuator, igniter, whatever it might be, and can identify it’s failure 50 or 100 flight hours before it happens, we can then dispatch the personnel and the materiel to converge with the aircraft, maintain it, and it flies off and doesn’t break. 

In doing so we’re able to increase aircraft availability. The United States Air Force has 5,000 aircraft, and this AI can increase availability by 25 percent on any given day.

FM: Could AI have changed the outcome of any historic crashes, like US Airways 1549 “Miracle on the Hudson,” or United Airlines Flight 232 “Impossible Landing?”

TS: Miracle on the Hudson: Could a computer have pulled that off? I don’t think so. Impossible Landing: No hydraulics, no flight controls. Whoever was flying that was thinking out of the box. A computer’s not going to do that. No way, no how.

FM: What do you find most compelling about aviation right now?

TS: I think the most interesting thing I’m seeing in aviation is things like what Sean Tucker is doing with the Bob Hoover Academy, and I think the work that AOPA has done with their STEM curriculum, using aviation as a means of teaching science, math, and engineering.

This feature first appeared in the July/August Issue 949 of the FLYING print edition.

The post C3.AI Top Executive Possesses High Aviation Quotient appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Mathematically, the term describes the shortest distance between two points on a sphere. Metaphorically, it describes the great arc of a journey that led me to this point in my aviation career—while it wasn’t a direct route, it’s the destination that matters.

My journey began with a flight at age 6 from the College Park Airport (KCGS) in Maryland. Long before I knew there was a FLYING Magazine, I was passionate about flying. The years between then and now were filled with the familiar milestones of all great odysseys–a circuitous route, complete with disappointment and triumph, missed opportunities and eureka moments, and great joy.

As this is both my first column in FLYING and our EAA AirVenture issue, I thought it might be fitting and fun to share some history of AirVenture’s past highlighting just a few projects that I brought to life on the grounds of the world’s largest airshow—the vestiges of some are still visible if you know where to look.

During my Cirrus years, and for a few years thereafter, a fully airworthy SR22 would mysteriously appear in Oshkosh at the Fox River Brewery in the outdoor dining area between the restaurant and the river—3.5 miles from the nearest airport. Back at the show, a 30-foot Cirrus control tower was designed to help visitors locate the Cirrus display from anywhere on the grounds as far away as then-Aeroshell Square.

Years later, after rebranding Columbia Aircraft, pilots flying into Wittman Regional Airport (KOSH) may have been asked by a controller to “look for the Columbia barn” with a 50-foot wide Columbia Aircraft logo painted on its roof near the RIPON intersection. There was also an exciting partnership with FLYING and Sean D. Tucker who flew a complete stock, then-Columbia 400 in an aerobatic routine at AirVenture. 

• READ MORE: The 2025 Ultimate Flying Giveaway

Beyond AirVenture, during the Great Recession, I created FLYING Magazine’s Parade of Planes. The events were designed to shorten and refine the aircraft purchase process by connecting consumers with the necessary resources to make informed decisions by leveraging the top finance company, most knowledgeable tax adviser, and strongest insurance provider.

And when it was time for Gulfstream to launch the truly revolutionary G500/G600 with its side-stick Symmetry flight deck, FLYING was the obvious choice for the dramatic six-page, double-gatefold advertisement inside the front cover showing the dynamic flight deck evolution from Gulfstream I to G500 revealed in imagery. 

Regardless of what the creative branding brainstorm may have been, I always found a way to include FLYING because it was then, as it is today, the best way to reach the aviation enthusiast.

As an aviation journalist, I’ve contributed to both FLYING and Plane & Pilot (both Firecrown media companies), written white papers on aviation technology, and served as editor-in-chief for two other aviation publications. 

For the past 25 years, my work in aviation journalism, marketing, brand management, event marketing, and business development has prepared me for this new FLYING endeavor.

There is no more prestigious title or more respected enthusiast publication with greater longevity than FLYING Magazine, and I am both thrilled and honored to be the editorial director and part of the growing Firecrown family of aviation companies.

Since 1927, FLYING has evolved to be exactly what readers wanted it to be. What hasn’t changed over time is the desire of our team to continue to be the world’s most widely read aviation publication and a knowledgeable source of essential aviation content in print and online. 

On behalf of the entire Firecrown aviation consumer group, thank you for being a FLYING reader. This is your magazine and it’s our job to help shape it into exactly what you want it to be—a trusted voice for all things aviation that engages, entertains, and educates readers about our collective passion: flying.

Thank you for taking the journey with us as we approach 100 years of serving the aviation community. 

This column first appeared in the July/August Issue 949 of the FLYING print edition.

The post The Great Circle Route appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

If you’ve ever fantasized about your own private airfield in the backyard, here are a few things to consider about making the grass strip of your dreams a reality.As an aviation marketing professional, I’ve had the good fortune to work for some of the finest aerospace companies in the world. Which means I’ve also had the great privilege of living all over these United States. From Savannah, Georgia, to Bend, Oregon, and Duluth, Minnesota, to Kerrville, Texas, east to west, north to south, I’ve moved my tools, pool table and the balance of our household belongings over a considerable amount of North American terra firma. With the prospect of each move, a familiar daydream popped into my head: “Will this finally be my chance to live with my airplane at a private airfield?”The fantasy always began the same. Pull out a VFR sectional (or most recently, ForeFlight on my iPad) and explore existing private airfields and residential airparks in the area — the ones with the familiar capital “R” inside the magenta circle that you’re never quite sure if you’re welcome to visit or not.Then I’d open my laptop and search airport communities within a reasonable commute to my new job. Fortunately, working for aircraft OEMs always meant that my employer was based on an airport, thereby making the commute from grass strip to work an easy proposition. Unfortunately, the process always ended the same (which I’m told is the definition of insanity): continuing to do the same thing but expecting different results.Perhaps a wiser course of action would be to explore buying property to build a house and my own grass strip. After all, the private strips dotting the sectionals today were built by ambitious individuals who defied admonitions from a spouse and other family members and ignored the snicker of neighbors. And who knows, perhaps the culmination of building a grass strip would unfold like the plot theme from the movie Field of Dreams. I certainly wouldn’t expect “Shoeless” Joe Jackson to come walking out of a cornfield with baseball glove in hand, but a visit from the apparition of Glenn Curtiss would make for quite an interesting hangar tale.Hollywood fiction aside, just what does it take to make a grass strip a reality? And what will the neighbors think — especially those whose property you might need to overfly at treetop level to land?

In the Zone

While you might surmise that a reasonable first step is to consult the FAR-AIM for regulations governing the development of a new airport, the FAA won’t be the chief concern. Granted, at some point you’ll need to consult FAR 157.3 and submit the requisite paperwork, but we’ll get to that later.

Actually, the place to begin the odyssey is with local municipalities to explore zoning issues. Search for any applicable zoning ordinances governing land use, noise statutes, overflight, environmental impact and a host of other items dreamed up by local lawmakers that may adversely affect your ability to build a landing zone on your own property. While researching local ordinances — quietly, so as not to set off any premature alarm bells — it might even behoove you to investigate circumstances surrounding other types of variances issued within the same municipality. If for some reason a zoning commission was willing to bend, tweak or otherwise turn a blind eye to zoning code in a prior case for one resident, that precedent might benefit you should there be opposition to your plan.

Once you’ve cleared the first hurdle of obtaining local permission to use your existing or desired land for the purpose of aircraft operations, contact your state’s department of transportation aeronautical division to discern what resources and requirements exist at the state level. While you are unlikely to discover any state funding available for private-use airports to help offset your costs, there is always a possibility that certain modifications (perhaps runway length or type) or concessions (such as granting public access) in your development plan might make your airport eligible for funding. And without a doubt, the state will have some form of paperwork to complete, so the earlier you get in touch with the state the better. Consult the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association website for a listing of states’ and territories’ aeronautical agencies, with web links and key contact information. For more information, visit AOPA.

Rules and Regs

The federal regulations that govern the construction of an airfield are found under FAR Part 157 and include FAA Forms 7480-1, Notice for Construction, Alteration and Deactivation of Airports.

Technically, you need not inform the FAA what you’re doing on your own land, providing the airspace above is not Class B, Class C or Class D to the surface and the property in question is not inside the 30-mile radius of a Class B primary airport. However, in this case, the FAA can be your friend (insert your chuckle here), meaning that if you do decide to build a grass strip and complete the requisite forms notifying the FAA of your intentions, the agency will help prevent surrounding property owners from building structures or the local cellular provider from erecting a 200-foot tower with guy-wires that might interfere with your takeoff and landing corridors.

Now would be a good time to mention that you’ll also want to engage the services of a qualified aviation attorney to help establish both a clearance easement and an avigation easement. The clearance easement will limit the height of nearby structures and may require vegetation and natural growth to remain trimmed to a prescribed height by adjacent property owners. The avigation easement permits free flights over the adjoining land — where the neighbors live — especially at low altitude for takeoff and landing. There are no hard and fast guidelines governing when and how to successfully butter up your neighbors, so use your best judgment and apply butter liberally. Start the buttering process well in advance of hatching your plan, and repeat as necessary.

Land Grab

So how much acreage is actually needed to build a grass strip? Naturally, the answer to that question hinges on what you plan on flying. Some aircraft require a longer takeoff roll to reach rotation speed. Other aircraft require a longer landing roll due to higher stall and landing speeds. In every case, grass wet from rain or dew will increase landing distance by as much as 30 percent. Obstacle clearance for takeoff and landing also comes into play. And with all things aviation-related, you’ll also want to build yourself a comfortable safety margin.

For the sake of illustration, below is a table showing takeoff and landing distances of some randomly selected popular aircraft.

This information is for basic illustration purposes only. Unless you already own enough land to recover a space shuttle, there are dozens of natural and human factors that need to be considered and carefully calculated when determining the optimal minimum length of a grass strip and the land required to build on. For example, fixed and variable items like actual sea level altitude and potential worst-case density altitudes must be considered. Are there permanent obstacles in the approach and landing corridors? How does a runway slope affect operations in one direction versus the other? How will local weather patterns potentially affect runway surface conditions at different times of the day and year? How are your short-field takeoff and landing skills? How precisely do you manage airspeed and momentum? Can you hit a specific landing spot consistently at the target airspeed and get stopped in short order? Do you know how much longer a takeoff roll is at max gross weight versus when you’re flying solo? How is your feel for braking on wet grass? What is the balanced field length? Where will you likely end up if you lose the engine on takeoff and need to land straight ahead?

All of the above and more will be part of determining the amount of linear space you need for your grass strip. Sadly, most parcels of property are not long narrow tracts that resemble runways. But once you have a feel for the requirements needed for your aircraft, skill and the local conditions, you can commence searching for acreage with a linear run that will accommodate your desire.

Green Acres

Acreage is defined in terms of square feet — 43,560, to be exact. For the sake of illustration, we’ll construct an imaginary grass strip using the familiar dimensions of an American football field, which is about 1.3 acres (57,600 square feet, end zone to end zone), with a linear dimension of 360 feet.

Certainly, many a bush pilot can set down and take off in much less space. I’ve even seen extremely talented backcountry pilots land, perform a 180-degree turn and take off again without ever letting the tailwheel touch the ground. But for those pilots among our rank who are mere mortals, a bit of extra space keeps the heart rate, and passengers, relaxed.

Proficient pilots of most tube-and-fabric products, the sportiest LSAs and STOL aircraft of any ilk can theoretically get in and out of a 1-acre football field. But even the most rusty pilots among us don’t need a 160-foot-wide runway — the width of an American football field. So if we divide the field into four equal tracks along the length axis, we could convert the surplus width of our proverbial 160-foot-wide football field into length. Then, with the four sections placed end to end, the resulting real estate at one-quarter of the width of the football field (40 feet) is now 1,440 feet long — now we’re getting somewhere. Better still, if we divide our football field into sections 20 feet wide (the width of a normal two-lane road), that creates a runway length of 2,880 feet from the same original 1.3 acres.

So, in theory, if you could carve out a linear parcel of land that is relatively straight and flat (with access to a road), you could create a private grass strip on roughly 1 acre of land. However, you’d quickly realize two things: First, 20 feet times 2,880 feet isn’t a typical or practical configuration for random parcels of land, and second, 20 feet is enough runway width for undercarriage but doesn’t account for wingspan, obstruction clearance and safety margin, so you’ll still need more land around the runway. Twenty feet of clearance on each side of the runway turns the 1-acre runway into a 3-acre parcel with a respectable grass strip measuring 60 feet by 2,880 feet.

Cleared to Land

After you’ve cleared the legal hurdles, cleared the land, constructed a safe runway and popped the celebratory bottle of Champagne that has since aged a few more years in the process of building your strip, you’ll want to submit FAA Form 5010-5, Airport Master Record. Since the airport is on private property, you can decide whether you’d like it to appear on the VFR sectional like so many mysterious restricted airfields that dot the maps.

While the use is private, there are various benefits to making the existence of the strip public even if use of the strip remains private. The most altruistic reason for putting yourself on the map is of course to aid fellow aviators by providing safe-harbor options in the event of an in-flight emergency. Perhaps the best part of revealing a private strip to your fellow pilots is conjuring a name and having it printed on sectionals for the aviation world to see. We’ll leave the creative naming convention up to you, but feel free to send Flying a note and tell us what you’d name your private strip and the genesis of the name.

Crowning Achievement

There are, of course, myriad other things to consider about the property you purchase and prep, such as soil stability, grading a crown for drainage, local bird and wildlife activity, prevailing wind direction and more. And if one of your considerations is building a paved runway rather than a grass strip, I’ll just say this: Get a rotary-wing ticket and purchase a helicopter instead; it will be infinitely cheaper, easier and equally fun.

Q&A with a Grass-Strip Builder

Swaid Rahn is the quintessential grass-strip owner, manager and caretaker. Having grown up with flying in his DNA, Rahn is a high-time pilot, air racer, ATP, A&P and runway builder. He has competed and won his class at the Reno Air Races, and even in far-off places like Thailand. He now runs a repair station from his grass strip (2GA2) in Georgia, where he repairs, restores and rebuilds general aviation aircraft.

Never satisfied with the status quo, Rahn spent seven years building an intersecting grass runway to complement the original strip on his ancestral property. Rahn even plans to illuminate the new strip using LED runway lighting.

How much time and money did you invest in your grass strip?

It took me seven years from start to finish, working on the strip when I had the time. It’s difficult to give you a total cost, but consider this: I put 2,000 hours on an excavator. I’ve dug thousands of stumps. We had 600 pines trees planted per acre, times 18, so you can do the math on that. We moved 57,000 cubic yards of dirt. A guy who did the final grading told me he normally gets $10 per cubic yard to move dirt, so I saved that money. It’s not for the fainthearted.

How much land did you use for your new strip?

The new runway is 3,800 feet by 200 feet. It sits on 18 acres.

I flew over a neighborhood adjacent to your property. How have neighbors responded to living next to a runway?

I’ve been fortunate. The runway was here before the houses, and I’ve never had a complaint about noise. I think the air conditioners [beside each house] make more noise than comes from the runway.

What insurance considerations or implications are there?

Nothing out of the ordinary. Just a release from liability and an insurance rider on my hangar policy.

What advice do you have for anyone considering building his or her own grass strip?

It’s like eating an elephant. Take one bite at a time. Don’t get too worked up on trying to meet a schedule.

The post How to Build Your Own Grass Strip appeared first on FLYING Magazine.