dtuuri
Final Approach
Somebody please tell me why that shouldn't be the end of it for civilian fighter pilot wannabes. Of course, if it's a controlled field and you aren't too embarrassed to do one in your Mooney, ask for it.
dtuuri
Overhead Approaches
- Thread starter Cpt_Kirk
- Start date
dtuuri
Dr. O
Pattern Altitude
Well, it will be interesting when you panic a student in the pattern in a C150 by suddenly appearing in front of him from above and he crashes.
I suspect your interview with the legal staff from OK City will be a hoot.
Followed by your deposition with lawyer for the next of kin.
"So Mr. Pilot what was your angle of bank as you DIVED into the pattern from above?"
The whole point of my comments is be very sure when you do a maneuver like that, that everyone in the ATA is on board with what you are doing.
Yeah, I do them at times just for fun - if I am the only one in the pattern.
I suspect your interview with the legal staff from OK City will be a hoot.
Followed by your deposition with lawyer for the next of kin.
"So Mr. Pilot what was your angle of bank as you DIVED into the pattern from above?"
The whole point of my comments is be very sure when you do a maneuver like that, that everyone in the ATA is on board with what you are doing.
Yeah, I do them at times just for fun - if I am the only one in the pattern.
35 AoA
Pattern Altitude
As I said, situationally dependent. Also, we do them all the time as a standard procedure, so there is a lot of familiarity there. I'd caution the folks just going out there to try it out because they think it looks cool.
A lot of assumptions here...
Gucci Pilot
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2014
- Messages
- 2,066
- Display Name
Display name:
Gucci Pilot
I like them because they keep me at a higher altitude and faster speed longer(in case of an engine failure), great way to recover as a formation, and just plain fun. We do them all the time in the KC-10. Usually the overhead altitude is higher than the rectangle patter altitude. Would I do one at a busy uncontrolled airport? Probably not because most of the other pilots in the pattern probably have no clue what I am doing/talking about so I think it is best to be predictable. I ask for them at towered airports all the time. Every one I have been to knew what I wanted and was familiar with the procedure.
petrolero
Pattern Altitude
Flying over midfield is common and not dangerous in the least if you have your eyes open. You're just saying words unless you explain what, exactly, you think is "stupid" about flying over midfield.
I suspect just about every student has been taught to fly over mid field, check the sock and the runway condition, blah blah, then decide which end they want to land on. This is the way it is done when the pilot arrives at an uncontrolled field with no prior wind information. If you're entering on a 45 that implies you already have wind info and know which side you're landing on. It also presupposes you're entering the pattern on the pattern side which may not be the case.
I did exactly this just last week at Leadville, CO when their ASOS wasn't reporting and their Unicom didn't answer. Not gonna land with a tailwind at 10,000 feet. I flew over midfield, perpendicular to the runway and then did a 270 to the downwind. nbd.
At Centennial Airport they often have people fly over the patter 500 feet above pattern alt and enter the pattern that way when they are entering from the wrong side.
As far as the overhead maneuver, I've never needed it. Once my gear is down my airplane is a 182 - with all the brick ****house qualities associated with it.
dtuuri
Final Approach
I've explained it often here. The bottom line is the limitation of your eyesight (see the Morris study). Having your eyes "open" is not enough, you must merge slowly with other traffic. You also must not assume all traffic is accounted for via the radio or that all aircraft are approaching the same runway you are. Traffic rules can only make sense if the airport, that is the whole enchilada, is the subject of the left turn rule as you approach it. Picking a favorite spot, such as the numbers of your favorite runway to circle around, spoils the rule, since a like-minded pilot heading for the opposite runway would meet you head-on over the middle.
dtuuri
Last edited:
Let'sgoflying!
Touchdown! Greaser!
south of.
AcroGimp
Cleared for Takeoff
Contrary to what some appear to believe, there is actually an extremely well developed and standardized set of rules and training available through the 17 signatory groups that make up the Formation and Safety Team (FAST), which are supported by FAA.
The FAST Formation Pilot's Knowledge Guide (and for me the Red Star Pilot's Association Formation Manual) provide specific training and performance requirements to earn Wingman, Lead and Instructor credentials, recognized by the FAA, that is well regulated and has such an outstanding safety record that the regulators allow us to self-certify/self-police.
The characterization of the overhead and by relation formation flying as 'hot dogging in the pattern' by 'fighter pilot wannabe's' suggests a considerable lack of experience/understanding of this type of flying, in particular the underlying training involved, what it takes to safely accomplish it, and why we do it. It also suggests a complete lack of understanding of warbird type operations.
I've only been involved with this kind of flying for about 18 months but I am constantly amazed at the level of professionalism and dedication to safety that I have experienced when flying with FAST members from Red Star Pilot's Association, EAA Warbirds of America, the Classic Jet Aircraft Association and the T-34 Association in particular.
I frankly find some of the comments insulting they are so poorly informed.
'Gimp
The FAST Formation Pilot's Knowledge Guide (and for me the Red Star Pilot's Association Formation Manual) provide specific training and performance requirements to earn Wingman, Lead and Instructor credentials, recognized by the FAA, that is well regulated and has such an outstanding safety record that the regulators allow us to self-certify/self-police.
The characterization of the overhead and by relation formation flying as 'hot dogging in the pattern' by 'fighter pilot wannabe's' suggests a considerable lack of experience/understanding of this type of flying, in particular the underlying training involved, what it takes to safely accomplish it, and why we do it. It also suggests a complete lack of understanding of warbird type operations.
I've only been involved with this kind of flying for about 18 months but I am constantly amazed at the level of professionalism and dedication to safety that I have experienced when flying with FAST members from Red Star Pilot's Association, EAA Warbirds of America, the Classic Jet Aircraft Association and the T-34 Association in particular.
I frankly find some of the comments insulting they are so poorly informed.
'Gimp
dtuuri
Final Approach
I don't care if you want to fly formation, so get off your high horse. I think your post shows that safety demands rules. Busting up the pattern at an uncontrolled field without some advance authorization is probably not in accordance with your rules I suspect. Airport management is responsible for the pattern rules, ultimately, so you need to coordinate. Radio broadcasts don't cut it.
dtuuri
Seanaldinho
Pattern Altitude
What about those of you who don't want to fly formation and your horse? Pot, kettle.
When I fly a glider, I do an overhead. I can stay clean as long as possible and then break and be on the ground as quick as possible and everyone at the glider port knows whats going on. I was taught overhead approaches from day one from 3 CFIs all of which were retired military pilots. When Im in a single, I do them occasionally. If I'm flying straight in, I will typically call "upwind" "midfield crosswind" and "downwind" because everyone knows what those words mean and its essentially a normal pattern and I only do it at very slow airports. I don't go out of my way to do them in singles even though it is my preferred method.
dtuuri
Final Approach
Sounds like it's all about "you". "I do this." "I do that." "I was taught."
At a glider port, if everybody agrees with the pattern and follows it, no problem. We aren't talking about gliders.
dtuuri
Seanaldinho
Pattern Altitude
I also spoke about when in a single.
"I" also don't like to speak for others and can only give my own opinion.
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
Only person riding a high horse on this issue is you.
You clearly have an axe to grind.
35 AoA
Pattern Altitude
It truly is not some overly complicated procedure. It is just another type of pattern entry......one that pretty much anyone flying in the military, or anyone who ever has, routinely does. By the fact that a brand new military student pilot with a whopping 20 hours can safely do it in a T-34 or T-6, I'd venture to say that the rest of aviation can safely do it too. This is starting to tread into the same water as complaints about visual straight ins somehow being "hard" or "dangerous"
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
But, but, think if the CHILDREN!!!!!
AcroGimp
Cleared for Takeoff
Glad I'm not the only one feeling that way.
I am fine if someone chooses not to expand their flying into formation, or aerobatics or, dun dun dun, formation aerobatics for example
- not everyone's cup of tea, just like some guys have zero interest in picking up the Instrument Rating, or Tailwheel, or Commercial.But the Overhead is actually fairly standard, I have yet to encounter a controller who isn't familiar (part of the Pilot/Controller Glossary), and have actually only heard one pilot announce a lack of familiarity, when he was alerted by the tower controller to me being on the overhead just last weekend. Just because somebody does not fly it themselves doesn't mean it is unusual.
We do fly the overhead when recovering to uncontrolled airfields, separation and communication is on flight lead (with wingmen calling 'right/left base, gear down and locked' individually at the 90 - haven't seen an issue yet.
When you are recovering mass formations (I have been a part of 12 to as many as 70+ aircraft formations), the overhead is the only way to quickly and safely recover that many aircraft. Tower controllers expect it when formations are involved and it is extremely rare that they are unable to accommodate here in SoCal.
'Gimp
dtuuri
Final Approach
For those of you who don't know dtuuri...does this look like a man who can be communicated with?
Ha ha!
Proof you annoy even your own relatives!dtuuri
dtuuri
Final Approach
This place was getting as dull as a Republican convention without Donald Trump. I explained my objections clearly. Instead of arguing against them, I got accused of being anti-formation flying, anti-glider flying and saying the maneuver is dangerously difficult to perform. I'm surprised nobody claimed I said it would give 'em a hernia. For the record, I think any monkey could learn how and some have.
In case anyone actually wants to stay on point, here's my reasoning again:
When military ops call for it, AFAIK, air traffic controllers are involved and/or civilian aircraft are restricted.
dtuuri
Last edited:
Some claim it is (including one of the boardies who is no longer with us). It's actually the standard in every country OTHER than the US. Frankly, C'Ron's argument was fairly spurious. Mostly he was saying people weren't expecting joins at that point so you've lost half of your see-and-avoid. I point out that most people in the pattern are too dunderhead focused (or else we wouldn't be having the straight in discussion in another thread) on that once they're in the pattern there ground track is sacred to look for others approaching.
My biggest issue is people who want to play military wannabees who show up at uncontrolled, civilian fields and throw out military jargon for their position reports rather than talking plainly.
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
You mean like an airliner who says he's bingo fuel?
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,239
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
What military jargon would a pilot use when showing up to a non towered civilian field?
Jay Honeck
Touchdown! Greaser!
There are two different approaches being tossed around indiscriminately in this thread:
1. Crossing midfield to enter the downwind leg.
2. Overhead breaks.
These are not the same thing, yet posters are responding as if they are. So let's clear this up.
1. Crossing the airport midfield to enter the downwind leg is the second most common approach to land. It is done everywhere, every day, and is IMHO a safer and better approach than flying all the way around the airport environment in order to enter from a 45. It involves the gradual mixing of traffic at like speeds.
2. Overhead breaks are a military style approach to land, useful for scrubbing off excess speed. It involves entering the airport environment at higher than common speeds, commonly above pattern altitude, and scrubbing off the excess speed in a hard right or left turn into the downwind. As such, it involves mixing traffic of (often greatly) different speeds.
#1 is normal. #2 is abnormal. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
1. Crossing midfield to enter the downwind leg.
2. Overhead breaks.
These are not the same thing, yet posters are responding as if they are. So let's clear this up.
1. Crossing the airport midfield to enter the downwind leg is the second most common approach to land. It is done everywhere, every day, and is IMHO a safer and better approach than flying all the way around the airport environment in order to enter from a 45. It involves the gradual mixing of traffic at like speeds.
2. Overhead breaks are a military style approach to land, useful for scrubbing off excess speed. It involves entering the airport environment at higher than common speeds, commonly above pattern altitude, and scrubbing off the excess speed in a hard right or left turn into the downwind. As such, it involves mixing traffic of (often greatly) different speeds.
#1 is normal. #2 is abnormal. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
You can argue whether or not "initial" and "break" are military jargon, but bottom line, very few pilots will know WTF you're talking about or what your intentions are when you say that as you approach/fly your overhead pattern. Just say you're X miles out for an overhead upwind and circle to land. Most pilots will understand that. "Initial" and "break" will only cause confusion.
petrolero
Pattern Altitude
See and avoid applies just as much to any other operation as it does to this.
Flying over the field at 500 feet above TPA is done all the time and is not dangerous.
If a person arrives with no wind info, he has to look at the wind indicator on the ground. If I'm already on the 45 to downwind, I won't get within a mile of the airport and the sock or airplane is harder to see from there. Plus I may end up flying the pattern in the wrong direction and that actually IS hazardous when left and right traffic patterns are done on the same side of the runway as they are in many places.
So if I am flying the wrong direction because I guessed the wrong wind direction then I have to do a 225 degree teardrop to reverse course and that leaves me exposed to aircraft entering on a 45 to downwind.
Flying over midfield perpendicular to the runway, 500 feet higher than TPA, crossing over the downwind course, then doing a 225 deg teardrop to enter a normal 45 to the correct downwind, as I described above, is reasonable and prudent and people do it all the time.
Perhaps we aren't thinking of the same maneuvers, but what I am referring to is what I described, not what others may be talking about.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,239
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
Initial and break are both terms in the AIM (5-4-27).
petrolero
Pattern Altitude
Still, the overhead is not taught. No one ever taught it to me. Thus those are terms related to a procedure that I am not familiar with. If you used them at an uncontrolled field where I was in the pattern I'd have to ask you to clarify where you're going to be and what you're planning.
It may be in AIM but so is the microwave landing system which I don't use either.
Military origin. Not sure what you're advocating, but lots of overhead breakers love to waive the AIM around as if it changes the fact that 99% of pilots don't know and never will know WTF it means. Students are not taught this. I'm advocating that pilots use some simple common sense if they expect actual communication to happen when they hit the PTT.
Jay Honeck
Touchdown! Greaser!
This thread has me pondering something that is common amongst new pilots: A reticence to fly the pattern that works best in a given situation.
Here's a recent example.
Flying into LBX a few weeks ago, we were coming in from the Southwest for a right downwind entry to Rwy 17. This was proper, since it is right hand traffic to Rwy 17 at this airport.
Another aircraft was coming in from the North, about the same distance out. With ADS-B traffic, I could clearly see the situation developing, and it was obvious that we would be arriving at the same time.
After his 5 mile out announcement, I told him where I was (again), and suggested that a straight in approach by him ahead of me would make our spacing work best. He was lined up perfectly, and it would save him from having to swing wide to the West in order to come in behind me.
This apparently confused him. He sounded a bit flustered on the radio, and instead broke off his approach to the East. I landed normally. He taxied in ten minutes later.
No harm, no foul -- but this inability to flex as a situation develops can be problematic. The fellow turned out to be a low time pilot who was simply inexperienced. IMHO, he did the right thing by bugging out and getting his head together, and 500 hours from now I suspect he will look back and chuckle.
On another note, this brings up why NORDO traffic can be so disruptive. It is not uncommon for guys in the pattern to work out these kinds of spacing issues between themselves -- something that is obviously not possible if you have a guy entering the pattern unannounced.
IMHO, the key is to be flexible.
Here's a recent example.
Flying into LBX a few weeks ago, we were coming in from the Southwest for a right downwind entry to Rwy 17. This was proper, since it is right hand traffic to Rwy 17 at this airport.
Another aircraft was coming in from the North, about the same distance out. With ADS-B traffic, I could clearly see the situation developing, and it was obvious that we would be arriving at the same time.
After his 5 mile out announcement, I told him where I was (again), and suggested that a straight in approach by him ahead of me would make our spacing work best. He was lined up perfectly, and it would save him from having to swing wide to the West in order to come in behind me.
This apparently confused him. He sounded a bit flustered on the radio, and instead broke off his approach to the East. I landed normally. He taxied in ten minutes later.
No harm, no foul -- but this inability to flex as a situation develops can be problematic. The fellow turned out to be a low time pilot who was simply inexperienced. IMHO, he did the right thing by bugging out and getting his head together, and 500 hours from now I suspect he will look back and chuckle.
On another note, this brings up why NORDO traffic can be so disruptive. It is not uncommon for guys in the pattern to work out these kinds of spacing issues between themselves -- something that is obviously not possible if you have a guy entering the pattern unannounced.
IMHO, the key is to be flexible.
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,239
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
I'm not advocating anything. Just saying the verbiage used is out of the AIM. All the "military jargon" is the communication that's internal in a military flight. You're not going to hear that over CTAF.
If 99 % of the pilots don't know what an overhead is, I'd say maybe they need to read the AIM more than expecting their CFI to spoon feed everything to them.
If 99 % of the pilots don't know what an overhead is, I'd say maybe they need to read the AIM more than expecting their CFI to spoon feed everything to them.
I wish the world was different in lots of ways.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
Flying to the center of the airport above pattern altitude, checking the sock, and then entering to appropriate down wind, is the preferred method in Canada for non towered airports.
There is only a uncontrolled airport when the pilots refuse to take control
Or
Didn't you realize you were the control?
NON Towered is the proper term.
There is only a uncontrolled airport when the pilots refuse to take control
Or
Didn't you realize you were the control?
NON Towered is the proper term.
petrolero
Pattern Altitude
I'm not advocating anything. Just saying the verbiage used is out of the AIM. All the "military jargon" is the communication that's internal in a military flight. You're not going to hear that over CTAF.
If 99 % of the pilots don't know what an overhead is, I'd say maybe they need to read the AIM more than expecting their CFI to spoon feed everything to them.
We don't use it and it is not common at all.
It's the same reason that announcing "123FU JIDOG inbound for the RNAV 35R" isn't done when VFR practice approach to an uncontrolled field - and possibly not when IFR either if you suspect VFR traffic in the pattern under the cloud deck. That's available in AIM also but anyone not familiar with IFR ops and that particular procedure won't know WTF you're talking about. So instead you say "5 mile final, straight in, 35R, planning a go-around" (or whatever) when you're at an uncontrolled field. Everyone knows what that means.
Are you dumbing it down? Some would say yes, but I would say no, you're just not overcomplicating your position report and intentions.
Last edited:
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
Out of curiousity, for those advocating starting an O/B by flying upwind 500' above TPA and then starting the break, how do you reconcile this:
If you start the break over the runway 500' above TPA, you are descending into the downwind leg.
If you start the break over the runway 500' above TPA, you are descending into the downwind leg.
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
As far as entering the pattern by crossing over at midfield at TPA, I don't have a problem with that.....as long as you follow the FAA's recommendation of
IOW, you don't cut off folks who are already in the pattern.
IOW, you don't cut off folks who are already in the pattern.
35 AoA
Pattern Altitude
Is that (quote that doesn't show up in this reply) in the AIM?
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
I quoted from the Airplane Flying Handbook FAA-h-8083-3a
But you aren't the one I'm worried about. I don't see you guys trying to mix it up in the pattern at uncontrolled fields.