I'm pissed at the airport board because they keep using goo and gravel to patch every thin spot around the airport. Of course the gravel comes loose and gets everywhere. I'm savvy to the rolling mag check and I use it off site but geeze, a guy should be able to do a runup at his hometown airstrip. Now I've got nicks in my Simitar prop. Talked to the head guy today and he says that's all we can afford, asphalt is too expensive. Anyone else have this stuff at their airport?

Sounds like you need to get involved in your local airport commission meetings. Do they even know the damage this practice causes? Do they know that purposefully distributing FOD on an airport is illegal? Most airport commissions are made up of non flying politicians who know nothing of what they are doing.

Sounds like they're doing the chip sealing wrong / poorly. Asphalt and chip seal both use rock. Chip seal is used pretty much everywhere for small repairs until massive paving can be done. BUT, the catch is, Fog seal SHOULD be used over chip seal to protect aircraft. Also, chip seal sucks on grooved runways. AC150/5320 is our bible.

So after my bitch fest, they swept it yesterday and did a fine job, the best it's ever looked but the problem remains. Here's what it looks like one day later from traffic driving across the patches:

Here's what's left of the patch they made in May. This is our only exit, right in front of the welcome mat, again 1 day after a clean sweep:

Bleh, someone doesn't know what they're doing at all!

That really doesn't look all that good. What airport is that? Those airports apply for thousands of dollars worth of airport improvement money from the feds & and give you a lousy job on the chip seal then pocket the rest of the money into the general city fund.

Glidergeek wrote:That really doesn't look all that good. What airport is that? Those airports apply for thousands of dollars worth of airport improvement money from the feds & and give you a lousy job on the chip seal then pocket the rest of the money into the general city fund.

If they did get AIP funding, they can be fined by the FAA for not doing the work properly with it.

Then that's maybe something to look into.

Glidergeek wrote:Then that's maybe something to look into.

The downside for pilots though is if the FAA comes and sees poor use of funding, they fine, but then have to restrict use of whatever it is...in this case, it could lead to a closed runway until it's repaired properly. Again, this is only if they received funding under AIP.

I'm trying to get input so I can write a fair letter to the board. It's not Fed dollars being spent here but it is the fees collected from hangar owners and some city and county dollars. They spent all their money putting in electricity to a new hangar (and for future hangars) justifying it as an investment of public funds that were going to result in lease revenues from future hangars. I argued that it was benefiting privately owned buildings and not the public, but I'm not a board member, plus I had electricity. I am however, a paying renter at the airport and I'm not happy about being told there's no money to properly maintain the place because they spent it making a hangar builder happy. There's one flying member on the board and he's an ag pilot, as long as there's nobody slowing him down, he's happy. The others don't fly anymore and thus having no expensive props to damage, are more concerned about saving money. I'm the new guy (7 years) around here and I've had a few run ins with them already, anything I say at this point better be spot on because I'm on thin ice.

Tadpole wrote:

Glidergeek wrote:Then that's maybe something to look into.

The downside for pilots though is if the FAA comes and sees poor use of funding, they fine, but then have to restrict use of whatever it is...in this case, it could lead to a closed runway until it's repaired properly. Again, this is only if they received funding under AIP.

So the solution is apathy? Maybe a fine would wake these politicians up. In the mean time you beat the crap out of your plane with those tiny little rocks?

Tadpole wrote:Sounds like they're doing the chip sealing wrong / poorly. Asphalt and chip seal both use rock. Chip seal is used pretty much everywhere for small repairs until massive paving can be done. BUT, the catch is, Fog seal SHOULD be used over chip seal to protect aircraft. Also, chip seal sucks on grooved runways. AC150/5320 is our bible.

*EXACTLY*.

Fog sealing is not difficult, and can be done in patches with simple equipment...it's know-how, having the right tools (really not a big deal), and the right materials more than anything.

It sounds like it's just an education problem if they say its a question of economics. They won't bother to do anything else once they become informed and see the results.

Av8r3400 wrote: Do they know that purposefully distributing FOD on an airport is illegal?

AV8R- I sent notice to the Field Operations Division via their Fax On Demand that there would be hell to pay if they poured any more Fiber Optic Devices on the runway. The Facilitator On Duty (A Funky Old Dyke with Female Orgasmic Disorder) put me in touch with the Fixed Operations Director of the Financial Operations Department. I about Fell Over Dead when he told me to F- Off and Die. Any advise? Did I say it wrong?

Glidergeek wrote:That really doesn't look all that good. What airport is that? Those airports apply for thousands of dollars worth of airport improvement money from the feds & and give you a lousy job on the chip seal then pocket the rest of the money into the general city fund.

I think Nosedragger is based out of St Anthony, Idaho

lesuther wrote:*EXACTLY*.

Thanks! BTW, it's a big part of my new job.

Nosedragger wrote:

Av8r3400 wrote: Do they know that purposefully distributing FOD on an airport is illegal?

AV8R- I sent notice to the Field Operations Division via their Fax On Demand that there would be hell to pay if they poured any more Fiber Optic Devices on the runway. The Facilitator On Duty (A Funky Old Dyke with Female Orgasmic Disorder) put me in touch with the Fixed Operations Director of the Financial Operations Department. I about Fell Over Dead when he told me to F- Off and Die. Any advise? Did I say it wrong?

Sounds like you're on the right track. Just don't fly off da-handle.

The guy with the expensive turbine ag plane will have lots of fun when the Foreign Objects and Debris get sucked through his million dollar engine and destroys it.

Av8r3400 wrote:

Nosedragger wrote:

Av8r3400 wrote: Do they know that purposefully distributing FOD on an airport is illegal?

AV8R- I sent notice to the Field Operations Division via their Fax On Demand that there would be hell to pay if they poured any more Fiber Optic Devices on the runway. The Facilitator On Duty (A Funky Old Dyke with Female Orgasmic Disorder) put me in touch with the Fixed Operations Director of the Financial Operations Department. I about Fell Over Dead when he told me to F- Off and Die. Any advise? Did I say it wrong?

Sounds like you're on the right track. Just don't fly off da-handle.

The guy with the expensive turbine ag plane will have lots of fun when the Foreign Objects and Debris get sucked through his million dollar engine and destroys it.

Ah, FOD's, I get it now.
I'm waiting for the once a month Citation to suck some of those little gems up it's snout.

Thats a bummer 'dragger. They seem to do a nice job on the airport over in Rexburg... is St. Anthony the red-headed-stepchild of Madison county?

I'd keep making noise.

Nosedragger wrote:.... They spent all their money putting in electricity to a new hangar (and for future hangars) justifying it as an investment of public funds that were going to result in lease revenues from future hangars. I argued that it was benefiting privately owned buildings and not the public, but I'm not a board member, plus I had electricity.....

What my airport did the last hangar-building frenzy was to install the storm drains taxiways etc with 95% FAA funding, then divvy up the remaining "infrastructure costs" (in other words, anything that the FAA didn't fund) between the hangar developers.

Why don't you just get a Maule with 32's???