Pattern Madness

[Av8er]

DhitIt or Ed?

The overhead seems to be a large problem for GA pilots to become familiar with. I grew up next to an airforce base and would watch Airguard F-100'S and later F-4's come in with overhead breaks as a kid. It was obvious then, when 8 years old, why they used the break and is a wonder to me now why others do not or refuse to understand it.

When in a group or when entering the pattern one ship near runway heading, in fast and slow planes, there is no more efficient way to land. Breaking up a group, getting/keeping proper spacing, maintaining speed with others in a group, keeping visual with the plane in front of you as a group, seeing what is in the pattern before entering, using turns to bleed/control speed/spacing, seeing the runway environment on close downwind, minimum communications with tower and CTAF, not having a large group go out and mix it up in the 45, etc.

Why is the overhead procedure not brought up in flight training and why do pilots not familiarize themselves, but complain, when they hear something on the radio they are unfamiliar with?

The overhead is not going away. They are routinely used at controlled and uncontrolled airports with warbird and military traffic. Your job as a pilot is to become familiar with everything unfamiliar you encounter as a pilot.

THAT BEING SAID. There is no excuse for a flight forcing there way into the pattern and from my experience it is not the norm. My experience is that many GA pilots complain when there is absolutely no conflict, another airplane anywhere even close to their position and with anything they feel unfamiliar with.

Remember, your job as a pilot is risk management. Education is an important part of minimizing the risks.

George, RV8, second post

 

[EdFred]

So let's say there are 4 planes in the pattern already. 2 on downwind, one on base, and one just turning crosswind. All are closed traffic, all have been making pattern calls. Your OH break of 6 does what exactly except barge your way into the pattern?

Enter the upwind, stagger your crosswinds. OH just puts you in the way. Yeah, I know, upwind entry isn't as cool.

Also, why would I fly the break when solo vs a straight in? It's purely a showoff move.

 

[Tom-D]

I suppose you could say the same thing about all light GA recreational flying, including what you do. But for those I know who do formation flying, it's a chance to hone their aviation skills with a highly challenging form of flying demanding study, training, and discipline, and which gives them great satisfaction. YMMV.

We all do what we do for our own reasons, My reason both for the wrench bending and the flying, is money, to support my restoration projects that I do for self satisfaction.

You are right about GA being a recreational activity for about 90% of the pilots doing it. That is why the public opinion of aviation is so important. So doing anything that diminishes that opinion seems counter productive.

Just imagine, how the news media would handle any aircraft accident involving 5-7 aircraft.

 

[BellyUpFish]

So let's say there are 4 planes in the pattern already. 2 on downwind, one on base, and one just turning crosswind. All are closed traffic, all have been making pattern calls. Your OH break of 6 does what exactly except barge your way into the pattern?

You do know, the break could be executed as to follow the 2nd guy on downwind, thus sequencing into the pattern with no issues, no barging, no catastrophe.

Also, why would I fly the break when solo vs a straight in? It's purely a showoff move.

I think it's pretty obvious YOU wouldn't fly the break solo or in a 6 ship, but the reason some fly the break solo is to simply practice the maneuver.

I personally don't fly the break too terribly often solo, I will every now and then and did one yesterday just in honor of this thread. Pattern was empty and there was no huge crowd on the ramp, so I guess it was a major fail in the show off category, but I enjoyed it.

You are right about GA being a recreational activity for about 90% of the pilots doing it. That is why the public opinion of aviation is so important. So doing anything that diminishes that opinion seems counter productive.

Well so far, the opponents of the OB are saying it's showing off. Most non-pilots I know (the public) think the OB looks cool. Wouldn't that bolster the public opinion?

Just imagine, how the news media would handle any aircraft accident involving 5-7 aircraft.

Now what are the odds, seriously? If you cram 5 to 7 aircraft into the same spot there was more going wrong than an overhead break and your suggestion that 5 - 7 aircraft would wind up in a pile only seems to promote the idea that most people do not understand the OB at all.

I can understand people being a little "antsy" about a 6 ship coming into pattern with 5 guys already beating up the numbers. That's a pretty active little environment.

A 6 ship coming into an airport with 1 or 2 or 0 planes in the pattern is a non-event.

I'm guessing all the anti-overhead break crowd are staunch opponents of airshows as well? I'm willing to bet dollars to donuts that airshows with CLOSED patterns have killed more individuals than OB's into "busy" ga fields..

 

[Tom-D]

Well so far, the opponents of the OB are saying it's showing off. Most non-pilots I know (the public) think the OB looks cool. Wouldn't that bolster the public opinion?

they come to the airshow for the same reason they go to the races.


Now what are the odds, seriously? If you cram 5 to 7 aircraft into the same spot there was more going wrong than an overhead break and your suggestion that 5 - 7 aircraft would wind up in a pile only seems to promote the idea that most people do not understand the OB at all.

Do you understand what section take off and landings are ?

I can understand people being a little "antsy" about a 6 ship coming into pattern with 5 guys already beating up the numbers. That's a pretty active little environment.

A 6 ship coming into an airport with 1 or 2 or 0 planes in the pattern is a non-event.

I'm guessing all the anti-overhead break crowd are staunch opponents of airshows as well? I'm willing to bet dollars to donuts that airshows with CLOSED patterns have killed more individuals than OB's into "busy" ga fields..

Air shows promote aviation 5-7 guys practicing formation flying doesn't, specialty if the mess it up.

 

[RoscoeT]

Why feed the fire and announce "overhead break" to the whole world, most of whom will have no idea what you mean. Why not just say "overhead upwind entry, for a left crosswind to the downwind"? I think everybody will understand that and not get freaked out. Use good judgment, and it's practically no different from a normal upwind-crosswind-downwind entry. The "break" will just put the upwind on the runway centerline and will happen faster, which is a good thing as long as you don't run into somebody already on downwind, or cut off somebody on base or final.

 

[BellyUpFish]

they come to the airshow for the same reason they go to the races.

I don't think that's true at all. Sure, some come for the carnage, but I would think they are in the vast majority.

People know most of the time the drivers walk away from race crashes. They don't walk away from plane crashes.

Do you understand what section take off and landings are?

So we've moved beyond discussing the overhead break to including section take off's and landings, huh?

Just curious:

When was the last fatality involving non-airshow section take offs or landings?

When was the last fatality involving airshow section take offs or landings?

When was the last fatality involving an over head break into a GA airport?

It's your life, and you've already stated alone and straight and level is fine for you, so I'm not sure why you post and I continue to reply, when it's obviously something that's not for you.

I understand "it could be dangerous." So is that first flight after an annual/condition inspection. I guess those should be ceased immediately as well. I'd be willing to bet the number of fatalities due to MX after such inspections is higher than those involving 6 ship formations arriving into non-towered airports.

Air shows promote aviation 5-7 guys practicing formation flying doesn't, specialty if the mess it up.

How can an airshow promote aviation? People only come for the crashes. (I have no idea why this is in italics, I can't get it to quit.)

 

[poadeleted20]

Ron, a quick question.
You say that a properly executed formation break doesn't hammer the pattern, and you eluded to multiple ships rounding in the pattern and landing simultaneously. In order to keep the time down and not overwhelm the pattern, it seems that multiple ships would be landing at the same time. Is that how it is done, or am I not understanding? Would multiple ships be on the runway simultaneously?

Yes, they would, typically with about 500-foot spacing. And yes, this is FAA-legal since they're operating by agreement between the pilots involved.

 

[poadeleted20]

I will say it again, arriving formation with an OH is nothing more that showboating. If you don't want straight ins, then arrive upwind and stagger the crosswind turns.

That's exactly what the overhead break is.

 

[poadeleted20]

Why feed the fire and announce "overhead break" to the whole world, most of whom will have no idea what you mean. Why not just say "overhead upwind entry, for a left crosswind to the downwind"?

As I said a couple of hundred posts ago, that's just what I do when leading a formation into a nontowered civilian airport for exactly the reason you stated.

 

[EdFred]

That's exactly what the overhead break is.

So descending into the pattern on a straight in downwind is not OK, but descending into the downwind off crosswind is? I'm saying arrive upwind at TPA, not above it, and descending into it.

 

[Aztec Driver]

Yes, they would, typically with about 500-foot spacing. And yes, this is FAA-legal since they're operating by agreement between the pilots involved.

Wow. That is something. Everybody had better be on their game, I guess. I am not sure I would ever consider myself good enough to hold airspeed that close on landing to have that little spacing between aircraft. Watching military jets do that is quite amazing, though.

 

[Aztec Driver]

So descending into the pattern on a straight in downwind is not OK, but descending into the downwind off crosswind is? I'm saying arrive upwind at TPA, not above it, and descending into it.

Ii believe Ron stated before that he would arrive at TPA if leading a formation.

 

[EdFred]

Ii believe Ron stated before that he would arrive at TPA if leading a formation.

OK, but the other guys are saying they come in from *above* the pattern.

 

[steingar]

This thread is really depressing. I was an active participant in the one on the Red Board, and it was as bad or even worse.

The FAA regards homebuilt aircraft as dangerous. Some increase in crash incidence is expected, but the experimental fleet has on the order of 6 times as many crashes as the certificated fleet. When the experimental community was just a small part of the game, it didn't matter so much. Now that it's a third of the fleet, the FAA seems to be paying some attention.

Van himself was threatened in plain language by an official of the FAA. The gist of it was simple, we can fix what the FAA sees as a problem, or they will fix it for us. You can imagine the FAA's solution I think. I can, and I don't like it.

The response from the experimental community, at least what I've seen, is outright and angry denial that a problem even exists, such as we see in this thread.

This will not end well.

 

[poadeleted20]

So descending into the pattern on a straight in downwind is not OK, but descending into the downwind off crosswind is? I'm saying arrive upwind at TPA, not above it, and descending into it.

The overhead is supposed to be flown at the appropriate TPA with a level break to the downwind. No descent until passing the abeam position. At least, that's what it says in the Navy, Air Force, FAST and FFI manuals. The idea of flying the upwind leg 500 above TPA and doing a diving turn into the downwind is not to my knowledge part of any of those groups' procedures.

 

[poadeleted20]

Wow. That is something. Everybody had better be on their game, I guess.

You got that right. In the Grumman formation world, we won't consider letting anyone start working with us without at least 200 hours, and a CP is preferred (because of its focus on precision stick-and-rudder flying). And we have (as politely as we can) told folks who've tried it with us that they need to go back and work on their basic skills before we'll fly with them again.

 

[shenanigans]

Van himself was threatened in plain language by an official of the FAA. The gist of it was simple, we can fix what the FAA sees as a problem, or they will fix it for us. You can imagine the FAA's solution I think. I can, and I don't like it.

I think Dr. Bruce mentioned that as well. It has me curious. Is there any more information out there about this?

 

[kgruber]

This sounds like you folks are talking about the RV squadron at AWO,, I'm starting to believe that attitude comes in a RV kit.

I have seen their amateurish routine several times, and they always arrive and depart in some hazardous manner.

I love the way they swagger off their airplanes like they are Tom Cruise or somebody. Except they are all fat, stumbling, and balding. They call themselves some fancy dan name that makes me to NEVER want an RV, just in case I'd be mistaken for one of them.

 

[poadeleted20]

I have seen their amateurish routine several times, and they always arrive and depart in some hazardous manner.

Sometimes the "hazard" is purely in the eye of the beholder. One time at Millville NJ, after we landed, some guy drove up in an official airport vehicle, identified himself as the assistant airport operations manager, and started ripping us for violating the FAR's by having more than one plane on the runway at a time. After I tried to ascertain what regulation he thought was being violated (he couldn't quote one), he said he was going to report us to the FSDO. I told him that if he wanted to report us, he could just tell the FAA Inspector who was flying in the #2 position. Then he told us that formation flying was illegal in the state of New Jersey. We rolled our eyes, got back in our planes, formed up, and left, and we don't go to MIV any more, taking our lunch and fuel business to other airports (like Chester County, MQS -- great food at The Flying Machine) where the airport operators both are friendlier and know the rules better.

Or maybe it's just that Pennsylvania doesn't have that law.

 

[EdFred]

The overhead is supposed to be flown at the appropriate TPA with a level break to the downwind. No descent until passing the abeam position. At least, that's what it says in the Navy, Air Force, FAST and FFI manuals. The idea of flying the upwind leg 500 above TPA and doing a diving turn into the downwind is not to my knowledge part of any of those groups' procedures.

That procedure as described I agree with completely, however the RVers are not doing it that way:

A proper overhead break is flown at 1,500'AGL to keep our of the way of those flying the pattern at 1,000'AGL to prevent collisions.

...an appropriate break is 1500ft agl.

THIS is bad juju.

 

[poadeleted20]

That procedure as described I agree with completely, however the RVers are not doing it that way:

I suspect that if Stu (Sturdy) McCurdy (aka Falcon 1) catches them diving into the downwing from 500 above, he'll rip their FFI cards in an instant (assuming they have them). He didn't get to be a fighter squadron commander and, later, numbered Air Force DCS/Ops by tolerating that sort thing.

That said, while many RV'ers have FFI cards, I'm sure there are also some independent cowboys doing dumb things in formation in RV's, too. Perhaps unfortunately, the FAA doesn't require a formation card or even a single minute of formation training to fly formation outside waivered airspace (essentially, at air shows) -- just the agreement of the PIC's involved (see 91.111(b )). Maybe if they did, a lot of the stupid stuff would stop and those who don't understand formation flying would be less negatively impressed by the formation flying they see.

 

[EdFred]

I suspect that if Stu (Sturdy) McCurdy (aka Falcon 1) catches them diving into the downwing from 500 above, he'll rip their FFI cards in an instant (assuming they have them). He didn't get to be a fighter squadron commander and, later, numbered Air Force DCS/Ops by tolerating that sort thing.

That said, while many RV'ers have FFI cards, I'm sure there are also some independent cowboys doing dumb things in formation in RV's, too. Perhaps unfortunately, the FAA doesn't require a formation card or even a single minute of formation training to fly formation outside waivered airspace (essentially, at air shows) -- just the agreement of the PIC's involved (see 91.111(b )). Maybe if they did, a lot of the stupid stuff would stop and those who don't understand formation flying would be less negatively impressed by the formation flying they see.

In a long roundabout way, you and I are in agreement. I probably missed you saying it shouldn't be done from 1500 earlier in the thread and had you in the same camp as the RV guys posting here.

 

[BellyUpFish]

G

THIS is bad juju.

It's not just RVers EdFred. Apparently there is some disagreement somewhere.

We fly the pattern 500' high in the 121 environment.

Naval Air Station at New Orleans has a PUBLISHED overhead break pattern altitude of 1500' with normal TPA at 1000'.

Link: http://www.airnav.com/airport/KNBG

I'll add I don't hold an FFI card. I was taught formation by two military military instructors, on a former Squadron Commander - my uncle and father.

 

[EdFred]

It's not just RVers EdFred. Apparently there is some disagreement somewhere.

We fly the pattern 500' high in the 121 environment.

Naval Air Station at New Orleans has a PUBLISHED overhead break pattern altitude of 1500' with normal TPA at 1000'.

Link: http://www.airnav.com/airport/KNBG

That's at a TOWERED MILITARY airfield.

And the published 1500 TPAs are for jet traffic, not RV traffic, do you also do overhead hi-G breaks when flying 121 too?

 

[poadeleted20]

In a long roundabout way, you and I are in agreement.

:wink2:

I probably missed you saying it shouldn't be done from 1500 earlier in the thread and had you in the same camp as the RV guys.

Please don't tar all RV formation flyers with the same brush. I've worked with some of the FFI-certified RV formation people, and they are highly professional and very safe/smart about what they do. As I said, the root problem is the lack of FAA regulation and the consequent formation activity by untrained idiots, not the type of aircraft those idiots fly. I'm sure there are folks in other types doing that sort of silly stuff, too. I saw a lot of that type of foolishness in the Grumman community 15 years ago, but thanks to former USAF Lead-In Fighter Training IP Gregg Wilson and the FFI-approved program he developed, we got everyone inside the tent, and I'm pretty proud to be part of that group today.

 

[EdFred]

:wink2:
Please don't tar all RV formation flyers with the same brush.

Edited my previous post to un-tar.

 

[BellyUpFish]

do you also do overhead hi-G breaks when flying 121 too?

All the time..

If 1500AGL' is incorrect, I'll change. It's that simple.

 

[poadeleted20]

I'll add I don't hold an FFI card. I was taught formation by two military military instructors, on a former Squadron Commander - my uncle and father.

And they taught you to fly the break 500 above TPA, diving to TPA during the break turn to downwind? I spent almost 15 years in tactical jets in both the Navy and USAF including five different operational squadrons and three replacement training squadrons, and never learned a diving break -- level break at the appropriate TPA only. At civilian airports, that appropriate TPA is as published in the A/FD, or if not published, a recommended 1000 AGL for light planes or 1500 AGL for heavy/jet aircraft (see AIM Section 4-3-3 and AC 90-66A paragraph 8c).

c. It is recommended that airplanes observe a

1000-foot above ground level (AGL) traffic pattern
altitude. Large and turbine-powered airplanes should
enter the traffic pattern at an altitude of 1,500
feet AGL or 500 feet above the established pattern​

altitude.

 

[EdFred]

Really, high G maneuvers while flying 121? Oooooooooooooooooooookay.

 

[BellyUpFish]

Really, high G maneuvers while flying 121? Oooooooooooooooooooookay.

Sarcasm fail, I guess. Obviously we don't do overhead breaks or high G anything in the 121 world.

 

[BellyUpFish]

And they taught you to fly the break 500 above TPA, diving to TPA during the break turn to downwind? I spent almost 15 years in tactical jets in both the Navy and USAF including five different operational squadrons and three replacement training squadrons, and never learned a diving break -- level break at the appropriate TPA only.

No, they didn't. 500+ was something the local civvy guys used and it seemed to make sense to me, so that's what I've been doing.

Like I said, if that's not SOP, I'll change.

I've been waiting for a form clinic to be held near me as I'd like to get a card, but the ones I've seen don't deal in dissimilar aircraft.

 

[steingar]

I think Dr. Bruce mentioned that as well. It has me curious. Is there any more information out there about this?

Read it and weep.

 

[poadeleted20]

No, they didn't. 500+ was something the local civvy guys used and it seemed to make sense to me, so that's what I've been doing.

Now y'all see my concern about the lack of FAA-published formation standards and procedures, or regs requiring adherence to those put out by folks like FAST and FFI.

Like I said, if that's not SOP, I'll change.

If this thread gets you to do that, it's been worth the effort.

I've been waiting for a form clinic to be held near me as I'd like to get a card, but the ones I've seen don't deal in dissimilar aircraft.

What do you fly? Maybe you're talking to the wrong group.

That said, dissimilar formation is way trickier than similar types. One of the scariest formation rides I was ever on involved a Navy A-7E leading a USAF/ANG RF-4C -- I learned a lot, starting with never to be part of that combination again -- performance was too dissimilar. Sometimes you can mix and match, like some flying I've done with an RV and a Grumman Tiger, but the flight lead must be fully aware of the capabilities and limitations of each and operate accordingly, while the wingmen must figure out what the alignment points are on the unfamiliar plane they're following. Even mixing a taildragging Yankee in a formation with stock tricycle gear Yankees can create issues. Best to learn in similar types, and leave the dissimilar until you've got the basics down pat.

 

[steingar]

Again, part of the problem. The whole experimental/amateur built movement is under threat, and all you guys can worry about is how to do an overhead break.

I'm not looking forward to the days when I tell my younger relatives how we used to have these cool airplanes that could do all this amazing stuff. That day isn't too far off, and GA will suffer greatly when it comes.

 

[BellyUpFish]

I've got an RV-6.

 

[poadeleted20]

I'm not looking forward to the days when I tell my younger relatives how we used to have these cool airplanes that could do all this amazing stuff. That day isn't too far off, and GA will suffer greatly when it comes.

If it does, then all I can do is quote Waldo Pepper's old squadron commander in the movie "The Great Waldo Pepper": "Ya done it to yourselves, buddy boy." Even Van agrees in the above-linked page that the safety concerns are real, and it's up to the E-AB community to clean up their own act before the FAA cleans it up for them.

 

[poadeleted20]

I've got an RV-6.

Seems to me there are a lot of RV formation clinics. What's the problem finding one? And where are you? We could probably fit an RV-6 into a Grumman clinic if that's what it takes, and we run them periodically in the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, Great Lakes, and California.

 

[BellyUpFish]

Seems to me there are a lot of RV formation clinics. What's the problem finding one? And where are you? We could probably fit an RV-6 into a Grumman clinic if that's what it takes, and we run them periodically in the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, Great Lakes, and California.

Finding one quasi-near me while I'm off. Supposed to be one coming up in Georgia, but nothing definite.

 

[steingar]

If it does, then all I can do is quote Waldo Pepper's old squadron commander in the movie "The Great Waldo Pepper": "Ya done it to yourselves, buddy boy." Even Van agrees in the above-linked page that the safety concerns are real, and it's up to the E-AB community to clean up their own act before the FAA cleans it up for them.

I agree completely. The E/AB community is going to wreck it for everyone. All they can do is angrily deny that any sort of problems exist. With these sort of egos in the field, I doubt anyone can change the behaviors that make these aircraft so crash prone. The FAA will therefore do so in a regulatory fashion, and I think we'll all suffer afterwards.