Pattern Madness

[BellyUpFish]

::cue clan of Superior AviatorsTM to tell me how wrong I am::

I have seen more name calling from you in this thread than by any other poster.

Idiot, wannabe, "superior aviators", etc, etc, etc..

I'm starting to think that you (I'm not painting with a huge brush here and my poo is just as stinky as the next) have a personal issue with RV pilots.

You cannot have a simple discussion without turning it into a name calling session. You can't answer simple, direct questions without some 4th grade playground attitude in your reply. SO? HUH? NEE NER NEE NER NEE NER!!

I've been waiting for you to tell me your daddy can beat up my daddy since about the 2nd page.

I'm just curious, since we are all the wannabe's and you're obviously the "real deal", what is your total time?

 

[EdFred]

I'm asking out of my own ignorance here, because I really don't know. For GA formation flights why not break formation somewhere outside of the pattern?

Because it doesn't look as cool.

 

[BellyUpFish]

Because it doesn't look as cool.

... and it would defeat the purpose to do it elsewhere.


A properly flown OB is "almost" a power off landing from mid-field @1500 feet, with a high bank (high G to bleed speed) turn back to the numbers..

BTW - you seem to have ignored me on another thread, your decision tree does not appear to include SFAR aircraft in it, and thus is not correct.

 

[EdFred]

... and defeats the purpose.


A properly flown OB is "almost" a power off landing from mid-field @1500 feet, with a high bank (high G to bleed speed) turn back to the numbers..

BTW - you seem to have ignored me on another thread, your decision tree does not appear to include SFAR aircraft in it, and thus is not correct.

Defeats what purpose? The purpose is to land at an airport. A straight in works just fine. No reason to OH break. You can assess the pattern congestion from a straight in as well.

People asking the can I log PIC in a R- don't need my flowchart. They are fully aware. Even so, it still applies.

 

[BellyUpFish]

Defeats what purpose? The purpose is to land at an airport. A straight in works just fine. No reason to OH break. You can assess the pattern congestion from a straight in as well.

So, even at a non-congested airport, there is no reason for an overhead break?

I'm not advocating screaming into a busy pattern and attempting the OB. If guys are doing that, it needs not be done.

There is zero wrong with entering a "non-congested" pattern and doing and OB.

1 plane in the pattern is not a "congested" pattern.

 

[jstro]

... and it would defeat the purpose to do it elsewhere.

A properly flown OB is "almost" a power off landing from mid-field @1500 feet, with a high bank (high G to bleed speed) turn back to the numbers..

Thanks for responding but I'm still not getting it. I thought the purpose of the formation break was to sequence the aircraft for landing. If so, it seems to me that can be done outside the pattern. And if so, then those aircraft can land as normal at the airport with the other traffic. It also seems to me this would create the least risk for conflict. Wouldn't this benefit everybody? I can see that for an emtpy pattern it might be a more convenient way of doing it though.

I'm not trying to be argumentative (I'm barely into the triple digits in my total hours), I'm just trying to understand the purpose of the overhead break in general aviation and what the benefit is.

EDIT: Disregard, I think you answered my question above.

 

[Jim Logajan]

So which "experimental" can I buy that has 4 seats 1000nm range, IFR certified GPS, 1250lbs useful load, and I can get used for $53,000?

I don't know what its range is, and the avionics may need to be added to, pushing it over the dollar amount, but there is this, which comes close and which took 2 minutes to find:

Velocity SE, asking price $47,000:

http://www.aso.com/listings/spec/ViewAd.aspx?id=125329&listingType=true&IsInternal=True&dealerid=

By the way, how many certified airplane models are there that are routinely available under $80,000 and less than 10 years old that cruise at 160 kts?

 

[EdFred]

So, even at a non-congested airport, there is no reason for an overhead break?

I'm not advocating screaming into a busy pattern and attempting the OB. If guys are doing that, it needs not be done.

There is zero wrong with entering a "non-congested" pattern and doing and OB.

1 plane in the pattern is not a "congested" pattern.

No, there is absolutely no reason for it. A straight in works just as well. So does an upwind entry at TPA with a mid field crosswind. If you want to do it to look cool, fine. But there is no other reason it must be, or needs to be done. Like I said it's easier to pick out traffic against the sky than below you. What happens when you do that overhead break and descend into the guy entering on base. I'm going to have an easier time picking him up on a straight in from just below TPA than the OH guy is.

 

[Panew]

....



Now -- someone please tell me -- why, oh why is it always these blasted RV drivers who feel compelled to do overhead breaks over public use, busy GA fields?

...

are you referring to the people in this video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1BkSph-Kj0

 

[EdFred]

I don't know what its range is, and the avionics may need to be added to, pushing it over the dollar amount, but there is this, which took 2 minutes to find:

Velocity SE, asking price $47,000:

http://www.aso.com/listings/spec/ViewAd.aspx?id=125329&listingType=true&IsInternal=True&dealerid=

1000 = 1250 since when?

Now, lets add a 340, 430, HSI, Stormscope, and a second NAV radio and what does that come out to?

 

[Fearless Tower]

A properly flown OB is "almost" a power off landing from mid-field @1500 feet, with a high bank (high G to bleed speed) turn back to the numbers..

Just curious what your reference is for a 'properly flown OB'?

That is certainly not a carrier break.

It is not the OB that the Air Force used back in the 40s and 50s.

It is not the 5-4-26 Overhead Approach procedure as decribed in the AIM.

So where are you getting it then?

 

[BellyUpFish]

No, there is absolutely no reason for it. A straight in works just as well. So does an upwind entry at TPA with a mid field crosswind. If you want to do it to look cool, fine. But there is no other reason it must be, or needs to be done. Like I said it's easier to pick out traffic against the sky than below you. What happens when you do that overhead break and descend into the guy entering on base. I'm going to have an easier time picking him up on a straight in from just below TPA than the OH guy is.

Oh, ok. I get it. We are arguing on the merits of need and must.

Best go hang up my keys and put a for sale sign on 99% of all my toys. I don't need nary a one of them. I must not have any of them.

I choose to have them. I choose to fly aerobatics. I choose to fly formation. All choices. I however do them as safely as possible.

I have personally never been a part of a flight that performed an ob to a congested field.

Need? No.
Does year mean they should not be done? No.

So I guess we agree.

 

[EdFred]

Just curious what your reference is for a 'properly flown OB'?

That is certainly not a carrier break.

It is not the OB that the Air Force used back in the 40s and 50s.

It is not the 5-4-26 Overhead Approach procedure as decribed in the AIM.

So where are you getting it then?

I think you mean 5-4-30, but even that is to be requested from ATC, and is not a power off 360 to the runway. It is depicted as setting up for a straight in. Note it shows 2 180° turns, with downwind and final legs.

 

[Jim Logajan]

1000 = 1250 since when?

Now, lets add a 340, 430, HSI, Stormscope, and a second NAV radio and what does that come out to?

Beats me. You seem to be confusing the mission that the RV series address with the mission of whatever 90 year old model that you flies around at tortoise speed that you are using to make some uninteresting point.

 

[Fearless Tower]

I think you mean 5-4-30, but even that is to be requested from ATC, and is not a power off 360 to the runway. It is depicted as setting up for a straight in. Note it shows 2 180° turns, with downwind and final legs.

I think you're correct - I was looking at an old copy (They renumbered it).

My point being that there are several 'overhead breaks' and all have significant purposes/variations.

 

[EdFred]

Beats me. The OP seems to be confusing the mission that the RV series address with the mission of whatever 90 year old model that he flies around at tortoise speed that he was using to make some irrelevant point.

Well, the E-A/B crowd always seems to tout themselves as the end-all-be-all and anyone else is insane for flying certified. I can't fit my dog in an RV3/4/6/7 safely, and he flies with me more often than not. Maybe an 8, but I don't like tandem seating. That leaves me with the RV-10 as pretty much my only legitimate E-A/B option. And those are waaaaaaaaaaaaay out of my price range. I can go through $100k of maintenance on the Comanche before I hit the break even point of buying an RV-10.

 

[somorris]

Whew. What animosity in this thread. I don't think this meets Henning's definition of the social interaction that GA needs.

 

[Jim Logajan]

Well, the E-A/B crowd always seems to tout themselves as the end-all-be-all and anyone else is insane for flying certified. I can't fit my dog in an RV3/4/6/7 safely, and he flies with me more often than not. Maybe an 8, but I don't like tandem seating. That leaves me with the RV-10 as pretty much my only legitimate E-A/B option. And those are waaaaaaaaaaaaay out of my price range. I can go through $100k of maintenance on the Comanche before I hit the break even point of buying an RV-10.

Fair enough. For its mission profile the RV seris are fine aircraft, hence their large numbers. For lots of missions they just wont do.

 

[EdFred]

Oh, ok. I get it. We are arguing on the merits of need and must.

Best go hang up my keys and put a for sale sign on 99% of all my toys. I don't need nary a one of them. I must not have any of them.

I choose to have them. I choose to fly aerobatics. I choose to fly formation. All choices. I however do them as safely as possible.

I have personally never been a part of a flight that performed an ob to a congested field.

Need? No.
Does year mean they should not be done? No.

So I guess we agree.

I have no problem with formation flight. I have no problem with aerobatics. I've done them both. But the only reason for the OH break is to show off. The formation can be broken 3 miles from the field, and everyone can land straight in. If I am flying a pattern, and I hear "flight of 6, 3 mile final all landing in tow" I can extend, and be #7 to land. I'm of the mind set of the less time in the airport environment the less time for something to go wrong. I will fly a straight in 95% of the time, and adjust as necessary for anyone else already there. Doing the OH thing just keeps you in the AE longer.

 

[EdFred]

Fair enough. For its mission profile the RV seris are fine aircraft, hence their large numbers. For lots of missions they just wont do.

Oh, I'd love an RV-3 or 4, and my sole reason for getting it would be to fly aero somewhere away from the airport.

 

[Ken Kopp]

John -

Good question actually. The reason is pretty simple really. If you are in a division (4 aircraft, 2 sections of 2) and decide to break-up outside the pattern some distance away from the airport what you've created now is 4 individual aircraft all at the same basic location all headed to the same location at the same time responsible for figuring out how to sequence themselves in with their flight AND whatever traffic may be in the pattern. For those in the pattern having 4 (or more) airplanes suddenly converging on them at the same time each making his/her own calls and possibly in an unorganized fashion adds a lot of randomness. The whole point of formation is being standardized and predictable within the flight for an efficient recovery and for any other aircraft around. Wouldn't you rather hear the flight lead call "xxx traffic, flight of 4 RVs, 10 miles south inbound for the OH rwy 36" than, "xxx traffic, RV8, 10 miles south, inbound for RWY 36" repeated 4 times in quick succession by each individual aircraft. At least with the formation you know they are all together - you see one, you see them all.

But sometimes in formation the OB isn't the smartest way if the pattern is really busy or the flight is coming from the wrong direction. Most flight leads are not going to circle around the field to position themselves at the initial point just to do the OB. If the field is clobbered the flight lead may signal to fall into trail position (which is like a long congo line) and then enter the 45 for the downwind. The flight isn't really dissolved until on DW just like the OB. Either works and is mostly dependent upon location of the flight relative to the most favorable runway in use or the level of other traffic. I'll maneuver a flight +- 90 degrees for the OB if I can determine far enough out what the preferred runway is but won't do it 180 degrees out - it isn't efficient.

The flight lead is responsible for making all calls for the formation and properly sequencing into the pattern. They are in tight with each other and so take up very little airspace. once over the runway at or above pattern altitude (depending on aircraft type) the flight lead will determine interval with all other aircraft and signal for the break when it is safe. At this point each airplane turns downwind in sequence (usually when the airplane prior to them is beyond a 45 deg angle from their wingtip). They maintain visual sight of the airplane in front and therefore minimize any air-to-air conflicts. Once they initiate the break each plane is responsible to avoid other traffic which may be around and then fly a downwind, base and final like any other plane. A good flight lead will ensure the break signal ensures all of his flight elements can execute the maneuver without traffic conflicts - just like a good CFI will set a good example (both in and out of the plane) and teach his students to not be complacent nor afraid to use the radio.


Does this help?

YES THE OB is FUN and COOL and...

wait for it



wait for it




TOTALLY LEGAL! YAY

 

[BellyUpFish]

But the only reason for the OH break is to show off.

I'm of the mind set of the less time in the airport environment the less time for something to go wrong. I

I've never thought of the OB as showing off, especially coming into a dead airport. Who is the recipient of the show? When we come back from flying, often in a 4 ship, we will break. There is no one on the ground to view our feat of aeronautical prowess, it's just fun to do.

I also don't fear the AE nor see it as explicitly dangerous, you're right though, the more you loiter there, the more chances of oopsies.

Different strokes it sounds like.

I'll break all day long if the AE allows it. It's fun.

 

[Panew]

Oh, I'd love an RV-3 or 4, and my sole reason for getting it would be to fly aero somewhere away from the airport.

The closet RV lover is out.

Can the OP paint you with the same brushstroke as the "other" RVer?

 

[EdFred]

TOTALLY LEGAL! YAY

Lots of legal things aren't necessarily safe. And lots of safe things aren't necessarily legal.

 

[EdFred]

I see my motorcycle analogy was soundly ignored.

 

[BellyUpFish]

I see my motorcycle analogy was soundly ignored.

It was a bit wordy. I stopped reading after I looked over the list. Seems like you started off strong though.

 

[EdFred]

It was a bit wordy. I stopped reading after I looked over the list. Seems like you started off strong though.

No one ever accused RV'ers of having a long attention span.

 

[BellyUpFish]

No one ever accused RV'ers of having a long attention span.

Mine is shorter than most.


(insert "that's what she said joke" here)

 

[Troska]

Really?

I see the EAB crowd saying "here is a way to have an airplane if you:

Want to do your own maintenance
Want a newer plane but can't afford new certified prices
Want to enjoy all the panel options that aren't available for certified
Want a plane that hits certain performance parameters
etc."

With anything in life, there are tradeoffs. Can my Sonex haul as much as your comanche? Can your comanche fly aerobatics?

Who really cares? We all fly what best fits our INDIVIDUAL desires for different priorities, based on what we can afford.

This strident bitching from each side starts sound like ideological political crap, with the same lovely result.

FWIW - I don't care if someone does an overhead break, just let me know what you are doing in plain english. Otherwise you are the same as Mr. IFR who announces they are at XYZAB fix on the GPS bumbleturd approach when I am towing gliders on a bluebird day.

Tim

Well, the E-A/B crowd always seems to tout themselves as the end-all-be-all and anyone else is insane for flying certified. I can't fit my dog in an RV3/4/6/7 safely, and he flies with me more often than not. Maybe an 8, but I don't like tandem seating. That leaves me with the RV-10 as pretty much my only legitimate E-A/B option. And those are waaaaaaaaaaaaay out of my price range. I can go through $100k of maintenance on the Comanche before I hit the break even point of buying an RV-10.

 

[jstro]

John -

[snip of reasons for doing OH break]

Does this help?

Yes, that was a great explanation, thanks. I've only seen the OH break done at my local towered field, once by a team of jets and another time by some WWII warbirds based nearby. Very cool to see both times.

 

[EdFred]

Really?

I see the EAB crowd saying "here is a way to have an airplane if you:

Want to do your own maintenance
Want a newer plane but can't afford new certified prices
Want to enjoy all the panel options that aren't available for certified
Want a plane that hits certain performance parameters
etc."

With anything in life, there are tradeoffs. Can my Sonex haul as much as your comanche? Can your comanche fly aerobatics?

Who really cares? We all fly what best fits our INDIVIDUAL desires for different priorities, based on what we can afford.

This strident bitching from each side starts sound like ideological political crap, with the same lovely result.

FWIW - I don't care if someone does an overhead break, just let me know what you are doing in plain english. Otherwise you are the same as Mr. IFR who announces they are at XYZAB fix on the GPS bumbleturd approach when I am towing gliders on a bluebird day.

Tim

I've just seen a higher % of E-A/B people say in not so many words that I'm an idiot for flying certified, but I haven't seen near that number of certified owners say the opposite. Yeah, there is *almost* an E-A/B for every SE mission, but the "it's cheaper, it's cheaper, it's cheaper" chant is not as true as much as they wish it to be. If it was so cheap, I should be able to buy 2 equivalent experimentals for the price of my Comanche.

 

[Henning]

I've just seen a higher % of E-A/B people say in not so many words that I'm an idiot for flying certified, but I haven't seen near that number of certified owners say the opposite. Yeah, there is *almost* an E-A/B for every SE mission, but the "it's cheaper, it's cheaper, it's cheaper" chant is not as true as much as they wish it to be. If it was so cheap, I should be able to buy 2 equivalent experimentals for the price of my Comanche.

But at this point if you wanted to build the equivalent to your Comanche, it would cost around $350k and you make it out of plastic.

 

[EdFred]

But at this point if you wanted to build the equivalent to your Comanche, it would cost around $350k and you make it out of plastic.

Nah, I know some guys in the aluminum business. I would go rivetless though.

 

[Anthony]

Nah, I know some guys in the aluminum business. I would go rivetless though.

Hmmm. Just like a Grumman.

 

[BellyUpFish]

I'm posting this while in the overhead break!!

 

[EdFred]

Hmmm. Just like a Grumman.

But my wings would last forever.

 

[rottydaddy]

It's not the airplanes, it's the pilots.

The most ****ed-off I ever got at another pilot in the pattern, it was a Bonanza pilot. But I never let that bias me against Bo pilots in general (although it wasn't easy, LOL). I know a Deb pilot who has perfect pattern manners. And the only friend of mine who owns an RV is one of the most conservative, conscientious pilots I know... he knows he can have plenty of fun with that little hot rod without doing anything stupid.

As for the OH break, or midfield crosswind entry: again, it's the pilots. They either do it with respect for the pattern or they don't, regardless of make or model. The other day at 47N I watched a light twin (Seneca? can't remember) announce midfield entry, came exactly midfield at TPA, gear coming down; made a perfect downwind turn at 1/2 mile from the runway; dirtied it up a bit more, turned base closer than any of the 172-flying students I see at the flight school, and put it down smoothly right on the numbers (the wind was light, BTW). It was a thing of beauty, and it didn't disrupt the (light) traffic flow in the least. I could see him from the runway the whole time, which is unusual there, to say the least. And I've never seen a twin make an approach that good there, ever. Usually they do okay there, without acting like they own the place, but there have been exceptions.


Meanwhile, most of the annoying but not scary stuff I've seen in the pattern has been in a variety of "typical" light singles; either newbies or complacent locals, as far as I can tell. We get a lot of visitors for the cheap fuel, so I see all types operating there. Put a good, conscientious pilot in something like an RV, and they won't fly stupid. They'll be tempted, of course, but they won't do it. Put a very green or very complacent pilot in any flying machine, and they will make trouble sooner or later.

 

[Aztec Driver]

You know, it seems to me that anyone who doesn't fly twins is an incompetent arrogant egotistical swine incapable of flying a "real airplane."

 

[Rndmtrvlr]

OOOOOHHHH!!! OVERhead break! All this time I thought you guys were talking about a "head" break! I couldn't see what the controversy was all about.

 

[dmccormack]

FishBelly is really hung up on this, isn't he?

Polemics are fun for a bit, but now it's merely tedious.

How's this for plain English?

Are Overhead breaks "legal?" Usually.

Are Overhead breaks "smart?" It depends. When the pattern is congested with a mix of skills, speeds, and types, a straight-in may not be safe, either. Sometimes it's better to just fly out a bit, visually assess positions, and join gracefully, on a 45 or perhaps midfield. The AIM is advisory, but good sense, graciousness, patience, and cooperation saves a whole lot of regulation reading.

My initial post should not have mentioned Overhead breaks as that maneuver was not the cause of this particular near-miss.

However I mentioned overhead breaks because there seems to be a connection between pilots who feel fine doing impromptu, mid-field aerobatics, or unfamiliar maneuvers in the pattern without coordinating with -- or at least considering -- others.

This is not merely an RV issue, but my encounter was with an RV so I posted about that encounter. I wonder if all the VAF folks would have run over here to defend Champ drivers if that had been the offending party?

I agree with those who say it's the same practicing approaches on a VFR day -- usually we're turned over far enough out to use common phrases everyone can understand, not just IR pilots.

When I do power-off 180s I announce, "Local traffic, Chief 1234, abeam the numbers, practicing power-off landing, will be turning continuous 180 to landing, Local traffic" even with no one in the pattern. I'll usually avoid this sort of practice when the pattern is busy just to be considerate.

I've read the response thread over at the VAF board, and, as expected, about 1 third are reasoned calls for civility and decorum, a third are bandwagon, and a third are inciters.

Too bad. I might have had a distorted view of RV owner-pilots before. That distorted view may be more correct than I ever imagined.

Sorry to those third who are like the rest of us -- interested in fostering all of aviation -- but there seems to be a core of rabid types who aren't doing your cause much good.


FWIW, I tried to establish radio contact with the RV -- Surprise! No response.