heard Saturday..."Hey buddie, what the F.....k is an overhead break?"

Inverted said:
Overhead breaks and carrier breaks are completely different. Judging by this thread I will not go into details on the 2 as it will be wasted.
Click to expand...

I'm interested in the difference. I don't have a dog in this fight/thread. I'm just the curious type.

Send me a private message if you prefer.
 
EdFred said:
I don't think I've ever seen a jet fly a pattern - always a straight in.
Click to expand...
You need to get out more.

Or just come to PHX. You'll see big jets flying patterns all day long.
 
Last edited:
Everskyward said:
Speaking of paint jobs, is this a wannabe?

attachment.php


I think it's cute. If I had an airplane I would paint it the way I wanted to paint it and wouldn't care what anyone else had to say about it. :D
Click to expand...
I wonder if he is going to repaint it into the new United/Continental livery?
 
Everskyward said:
Speaking of paint jobs, is this a wannabe?

attachment.php


I think it's cute. If I had an airplane I would paint it the way I wanted to paint it and wouldn't care what anyone else had to say about it. :D
Click to expand...

Meh, I would've painted it in Piedmont Airline livery if I was going for an airline livery TBH.
 
Inverted said:
And which are you familiar with? FAST? Military?


OVERHEAD MANEUVER- A series of predetermined maneuvers prescribed for aircraft (often in formation) for entry into the visual flight rules (VFR) traffic pattern and to proceed to a landing. An overhead maneuver is not an instrument flight rules (IFR) approach procedure. An aircraft executing an overhead maneuver is considered VFR and the IFR flight plan is cancelled when the aircraft reaches the "initial point" on the initial approach portion of the maneuver. The pattern usually specifies the following:
a. The radio contact required of the pilot.
b. The speed to be maintained.
c. An initial approach 3 to 5 miles in length.
d. An elliptical pattern consisting of two 180 degree turns.
e. A break point at which the first 180 degree turn is started.
f. The direction of turns.
g. Altitude (at least 500 feet above the conventional pattern).
h. A "Roll-out" on final approach not less than 1/4 mile from the landing threshold and not less than 300 feet above the ground.
Click to expand...


You forgot the part where it's supposed to finish up an IFR flight, and has to be requested from ATC.

5-4-27. Overhead Approach Maneuver

a. Pilots operating in accordance with an IFR flight plan in Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC) may request ATC authorization for an overhead maneuver. An overhead maneuver is not an instrument approach procedure. Overhead maneuver patterns are developed at airports where aircraft have an operational need to conduct the maneuver. An aircraft conducting an overhead maneuver is considered to be VFR and the IFR flight plan is cancelled when the aircraft reaches the initial point on the initial approach portion of the maneuver. (See FIG 5-4-30.) The existence of a standard overhead maneuver pattern does not eliminate the possible requirement for an aircraft to conform to conventional rectangular patterns if an overhead maneuver cannot be approved. Aircraft operating to an airport without a functioning control tower must initiate cancellation of an IFR flight plan prior to executing the overhead maneuver. Cancellation of the IFR flight plan must be accomplished after crossing the landing threshold on the initial portion of the maneuver or after landing. Controllers may authorize an overhead maneuver and issue the following to arriving aircraft:
Click to expand...
 
Oh boy, again! OK. I'l repeat my little things, and add something new...

The new bit is in the back seat of high-bypass turbine powered tube I saw a standard traffic pattern at my local municipal drone, so yet jets do sometimes fly patterns. Upon remarking to the pilot about the honest to Odin (though somewhat enlarged) traffic pattern, he said "yeah, jets fly just like regular airplanes".

The FAA regards Ex/Ab aircraft as having an unacceptably high rate of accidents, especially fatal accidents. If the Ex/Ab community doesn't drive down the rate of fatal accidents, the FAA will do it for them.

Anyone should feel free to paint their airplane project however they like. After putting in such amazing effort a bit of self expression does not seem out of place. I think most military schemes look absurd on homebuilts, but everyone is entitled to their opinion. Besides, I drive a car without a trunk.

If someone wants to do overhead breaks to landing just like they did in the military, please feel free to do so, preferably somewhere far from me. To be honest, I can't recall ever seeing anyone ever try such a thing. I've seen plenty of other bone headed things that could ruin one's day, some of which were even in the AIM.
 
dmccormack said:
Same here -- only heard a jet fly pattern once (it was a Falcon at KFWQ and he was either being funny or had no idea where he was ((downwind after base?))

The other 100+ times were straight in.
Click to expand...


'cept for entering from a crosswind instead of the "45", looks like a pretty standard pattern to me. :wink2:

Personally, I never enter from the "45" for any runway at ONZ. Depending on how one attempts to do it, it would be unsafe and / or illegal in many cases (In all cases for me).
 
EdFred said:
You forgot the part where it's supposed to finish up an IFR flight, and has to be requested from ATC.
Click to expand...
What's your point Ed? Yes it's true that if you are leading an IFR formation flight you need to request the overhead break if you want to land the formation that way. But if you're not on an IFR clearance and flying into an untowered field there's no such requirement.
 
Well it only makes reference to it for IFR flight whlist vmc. The AIM also says where the planes have an operational NEED. There is zero operational need for a bugsmasher to be doing it.
 
EdFred said:
Well it only makes reference to it for IFR flight whlist vmc. The AIM also says where the planes have an operational NEED. There is zero operational need for a bugsmasher to be doing it.
Click to expand...

Do you do all your flying based on word for word verbiage from the AIM?
 
BellyUpFish said:
Do you do all your flying based on word for word verbiage from the AIM?
Click to expand...

Nope, but one when wants to quote FAA procedure for something, and leave out pertinent information, I will point it out. I will always maintain that like aircraft should never descend into pattern altitude while in the pattern. Whether jets from 2000 to 1500 or props from 1500 to 1000. (Or other applicable TPAs) As I said before jets and their 1500' TPA isn't an issue because you are wider and longer on downwind and base so you are never going to come down on top of a prop flying a proper pattern. But the overhead break from 500' above in a bugsmasher at a non-towered field is just asking for trouble.

Today, I had the opportunity to do one, instead I just did a straight in. Crazy, i know. A straight in - no chance to show off.
 
Last edited:
EdFred said:
I will always maintain that like aircraft should never descend into pattern altitude while in the pattern. Whether jets from 2000 to 1500 or props from 1500 to 1000. (Or other applicable TPAs) As I said before jets and their 1500' TPA isn't an issue because you are wider and longer on downwind and base so you are never going to come down on top of a prop flying a proper pattern. But the overhead break from 500' above in a bugsmasher at a non-towered field is just asking for trouble.
Click to expand...

Now it's "like aircraft." This is a new revelation for you. So how do we separate turbo-props from the jets and the bug smashers? I can fly the pattern in a Citation at the exact same speed I can fly the pattern in say, an Mu2 and an RV6. So, what's the issue now? I guess we need the AIM to give us pattern entry airspeeds as well.

So, you're saying, as long as you fly a wide and fast pattern, it's ok to fly an overhead break at 500' high?

How does speed equate to an aircraft not descending on top of another airplane on final? :confused:

What about a jet who enters the pattern 500' via the crosswind at a non-towered airfield. Is this just asking for trouble as well?

I think it boils down to a basic misunderstanding of what is happening in an overhead break.


EdFred said:
Today, I had the opportunity to do one, instead I just did a straight in. Crazy, i know. A straight in - no chance to show off.
Click to expand...

Why does it always have to boil down to showing off.

Is a pilot who does aerobatics showing off?

Could it be possible that pilots doing the overhead break, may actually be doing them because they are enjoyable?

Maybe you need to get out of your station wagon and drive a sports car. You might like it.
 
BellyUpFish said:
Maybe you need to get out of your station wagon and drive a sports car. You might like it.
Click to expand...

Hah!

I hope that I am never so old that I end up driving a Corvette.

Got stuck behind a Geezer in one the other day (again). The only time he stepped on the gas was when I had a chance to pass and he had to close the gap to prevent it.

The worst ones are the guys that wear the driving gloves and "the hat" (you know what kind). Plod along at 10 under so everyone gets a chance to "admire" their p.o.s. - and when they get to a railroad grade crossing...

Some day there will be a big pile of fiberglass dust from the rear end of a Corvette on my route home. And you will know why.
 
ScottM said:
One is that Bonanzas always have the right away in the traffic pattern. Especially if flown by a doctor.


Well if we are going to keep engaging in unflattering stereotypes for RV pilots we might as well not leave out the other unflattering stereotypical pilots! Right?
\


:D
Click to expand...

You mean like Cirrus pilots doing the "Overhead Pull" approach?:rolleyes:
 
Inverted said:
Whats the difference between entering on the base, final as you say, verses on the 45?
Click to expand...
The 45 isn't part of the pattern. It's a recommended entry to the pattern.

I'm not a big fan of the 45, because, yes, it invites converging traffic, some of it descending, but at least that's expected out there wherever it is the 45 is supposed to begin. :D

Not so in the pattern.

Descending into the pattern (crosswind, downwind, base, final, upwind) is bad because the chances of you descending onto (or into the path of) an aircraft you can't see (who also can't see you) improve astronomically.

The Bonanza pilot I mentioned in the "Pattern Madness" thread did just that, and it cheesed me off because I doubt he saw me, even though I'd responded to his initial call- up (which gave an inaccurate position, BTW) by mentioning that I was halfway through the downwind leg. I didn't see him until I was about to turn base (came out of my high-wing blind spot)... he was diving onto the base leg with everything hanging out, from who knows what altitude.
He had not announced he'd be doing this, nor was I expecting him to be so close already, based on his initial callup. He appeared right in front of me, not so close that I had to maneuver away, but way closer than would be considered sensible without prior arrangement. Had I been going a little faster, or had been in the midst of my turn to base, eyeballing the runway, I would probably not be sitting here typing this. Quite a surprise, and not a pleasant one.
He probably thought it was pretty slick flying, but I think it was one of the dumbest pilot tricks I've ever seen.
 
Last edited:
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
'cept for entering from a crosswind instead of the "45", looks like a pretty standard pattern to me. :wink2:
Click to expand...
Having spent 2 years sitting off NAS Boca Chica watching everything in the US inventory doing pattern work from King Airs (U21?) to C5As, I have seen thousands of overhead breaks performed, and that didn't represent anything I saw performed there. The coolest were the F-14s because they'd come smoking in with the wings back, crank up about 85* and you'd watch the wings go forward as they were in the turn. The really good guys would keep a constant radius to the turn. Anyway, they come in straight at the runway, not past the numbers the first would break and followed in rapid succession by the rest and all would have their turn started before the end of the runway and end up on a downwind. Lead man is flying a short downwind because of where he started and flips to a normal base final turn. The last man is basically flying a standard pattern with the only difference being he entered over the approach end of the runway. The F-14s individual flights if not on the ILS would typically do a tight break turn about midfield and roll out the wings. Most of those guys do that maneuver because they need to scrub a lot of energy.
 
rpadula said:
Hey buddie, WTF is an overhead pull?
Click to expand...

I'm not "buddie" but I'm guessing that the 'overhead pull' is where the cirrus driver pops the chute.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Hah!

I hope that I am never so old that I end up driving a Corvette.

Got stuck behind a Geezer in one the other day (again). The only time he stepped on the gas was when I had a chance to pass and he had to close the gap to prevent it.

The worst ones are the guys that wear the driving gloves and "the hat" (you know what kind). Plod along at 10 under so everyone gets a chance to "admire" their p.o.s. - and when they get to a railroad grade crossing...

Some day there will be a big pile of fiberglass dust from the rear end of a Corvette on my route home. And you will know why.
Click to expand...

Vette's are over-rated. Unless you're talking Z06, but even then, eh...
 
Ron Levy said:
BTW, if anyone has any questions about formation flying, and what it takes to be a safe, effective flight lead, feel free to PM or email me, or start a new thread on that. The "yammer level" in this one makes it unreadable for me.
Click to expand...

Sad news on the last Alask midair, a couple flying dissimilar aircraft, C207 & C208. Took of from separate airports, in flight meet up, to go to the destination together. She landed on the tundra with the 207 about a mile from the smoking hole mad by the 208.

Very sad, any idea on the level of formation truing by either?
I would venture none. :mad2:
 
EdFred said:
You forgot the part where it's supposed to finish up an IFR flight, and has to be requested from ATC.
Click to expand...

If referenced on an IFR flight sure, for formation flying it is completely separate.

But you dispelled the talk that an overhead break maneuver is in the AIM.
 
EdFred said:
Well it only makes reference to it for IFR flight whlist vmc. The AIM also says where the planes have an operational NEED. There is zero operational need for a bugsmasher to be doing it.
Click to expand...

There is no need YOU can see for an overhead break. If you are doing formation, how else do you want a formation group to enter the pattern to land?
 
Inverted said:
There is no need YOU can see for an overhead break. If you are doing formation, how else do you want a formation group to enter the pattern to land?
Click to expand...
Line up a mile in tril, enter at the FAA recommended 45, and follow your fellow aviators to the ground. I don't care if you're a flight of 2 or 20, if you disrupt a pattern, YOU are in the wrong.
 
rottydaddy said:
The 45 isn't part of the pattern. It's a recommended entry to the pattern.

I'm not a big fan of the 45, because, yes, it invites converging traffic, some of it descending, but at least that's expected out there wherever it is the 45 is supposed to begin. :D

Not so in the pattern.

Descending into the pattern (crosswind, downwind, base, final, upwind) is bad because the chances of you descending onto (or into the path of) an aircraft you can't see (who also can't see you) improve astronomically.
Click to expand...

Key word, It is RECOMMENDED. Meaning I can enter however the hell I want, because the FAA has found it legal and safe to do so.

I feel like most of you are so black and white. Like everyones patterns are so predictable that you shouldn't have to look for traffic if you are where you are supposed to be. This is simply not the case. People fly wide patterns(I hate that), narrow patterns, as well as off altitude for various reasons. I add 200' to my patterns because if I lose an engine in the Pitts in the pattern it will be the difference between a beer after the ordeal, or a smoking hole with a dead pilot.

To you it might seem like I am sloppy pilot doing things I shouldn't be doing, and hot dogging. When in reality its because you have no idea whats going on.

The yahoo's in Bonanzas doing this stuff is one thing, and I am not defending them. But to the ignorant statements about people doing real formation, and performing formation maneuvers. And doing things FOR A REASON that are a little out of your norm, is not wrong.

If you saw a guy doing legal aerobatics during your flight and you had to change course, would you think he/she was a dangerous jack ass that has no regard for anyone around them?
 
Inverted said:
If you saw a guy doing legal aerobatics during your flight and you had to change course, would you think he/she was a dangerous jack ass that has no regard for anyone around them?
Click to expand...

Are these aerobatics performed over a non-towered field during a VFR Saturday?

If so, I'd say yes, he's a hazard.
 
silver-eagle said:
Line up a mile in tril, enter at the FAA recommended 45, and follow your fellow aviators to the ground. I don't care if you're a flight of 2 or 20, if you disrupt a pattern, YOU are in the wrong.
Click to expand...

LOL I love it. Get over it, if the pilot doesn't do the recommended 45 entry, they are not illegal. YOU are in the wrong for thinking so.
 
dmccormack said:
Are these aerobatics performed over a non-towered field during a VFR Saturday?

If so, I'd say yes, he's a hazard.
Click to expand...

How about if the airport is NOTAM'd to have an aerobatic box? Because it disrupts your precious 45 entry he is in the wrong right?
 
dmccormack said:
Must the formation remain formed through pattern entry?
Click to expand...

Yes, because guess what, that is a maneuver that must be performed and demonstrated to be certified by every formation sanctioning body I have seen.

Do you still practice stalls every once in a while? To be proficient right? Well guess what, formation pilots, although completely insane, also want to stay proficient.
 
Inverted said:
Yes, because guess what, that is a maneuver that must be performed and demonstrated to be certified by every formation sanctioning body I have seen.

Do you still practice stalls every once in a while? To be proficient right? Well guess what, formation pilots, although completely insane, also want to stay proficient.
Click to expand...


I do lots of things to stay proficient, including power-idle 180 spot landings.

I usually do those early, before the pattern gets busy. Even so, I make sure the pattern is clear before commencing the maneuver.

It's common courtesy, but apparently it's not all that common. :no:
 
This is like watching a train wreck . . . I don't want to see it, but I just can't look away! Somebody help me!!!

I only found this board a couple of months ago, and (thanks to a few on BOTH ends of this spectrum) it has gone from interesting to engaging to entertaining to tiresome to embarrassing.

I think I'll sign off and go hang out at the airport.
 
Last edited:
Inverted said:
I feel like most of you are so black and white. Like everyones patterns are so predictable that you shouldn't have to look for traffic if you are where you are supposed to be. This is simply not the case. People fly wide patterns(I hate that), narrow patterns, as well as off altitude for various reasons.
Click to expand...

Here's the deal:

If you fly different than me (or different than how I think you should fly), you're an idiot.

It is the flying corollary to George Carlin's bit about driving. According to George (RIP), anyone who drives slower than you is a moron, anyone who drives faster is an idiot.

That's the distillation of this thread and two or three others just like it.
 
Inverted said:
If you saw a guy doing legal aerobatics during your flight and you had to change course, would you think he/she was a dangerous jack ass that has no regard for anyone around them?
Click to expand...
A few years back, I was flying along, minding my own business, when a flight of four Stearmans passed by ~500-1000 feet overhead. When they were directly overhead, they broke into sudden aerobatics, and I stuffed the nose down to get out of there in a hurry. It was the Red Baron team getting some practice in.

Legal? Yep. Wish they'd looked around a bit before starting their routine, though. I figure downward vis in a Stearman probably isn't too good, and having the pilots concentrating on formation doesn't help. Still....

Ron Wanttaja
 
Inverted said:
LOL I love it. Get over it, if the pilot doesn't do the recommended 45 entry, they are not illegal. YOU are in the wrong for thinking so.
Click to expand...
Get over yourself. You asked how to do it. If you think blasting into the middle of the pattern is acceptable, keep doing it. Seems to me, cutting in line was never acceptable behavior, but feel free to jump ahead of the rest of us.
The key item in all of the FAA literature is safety. IF YOU, YEAH YOU, disrupt the flow of the CURRENT PATTERN, that is, in very small words, breaks into the middle creating a situation that jeopardizes safety, YOU are in the wrong. I don't care if it is a straight in, cross wind, or downwind entry. THAT is the point of this whole 1000+ post discussion. If you're the only ones flying in, then you get to pick the arrival or as I like to say, dealer's choice. If you're "fitting in" and can't do it safely with a break, then don't do it.
You're on an IR approach and call inbound at some fix on a VOR-A. Don't you think it would be nice to let the guys in the pattern know where you are and what you're doing. "Cessna 1234, VOR-A, circle to land 6" tells the aircraft in the pattern nothing. More to the point, when you actually get there, you're as out of shape to the pattern as the guys doing, simultniously, an overhead break and the one doing the straight in.
So fly safe. If you have aircraft in the pattern, figure out where they re AND FIT IN like the FAA says you should do. That's all any of us want.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top