- Joined
- Jun 13, 2008
- Messages
- 7,947
- Location
- Marietta, GA
- Display Name
Display name:
Drake the Outlaw
A few years back... ...and I stuffed the nose down to get out of there in a hurry.
Ron Wanttaja
Pffft...
A few years back... ...and I stuffed the nose down to get out of there in a hurry.
Ron Wanttaja
That's all any of us want.
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?
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.
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.
Where did I ever advocate the overhead break? I didn't. Quit trying to paint me into a corner I'm not even close to standing in.
Maybe you just have reading comprehension issues if you aren't purposely trying to distort my position.
This is like an Energizer battery commercial.
I already said, with jets being faster, the 500' is a non-issue. Their patterns are wider (not going to descend onto the piston fleet on downwind. Their patterns are longer (not going to descend onto the piston fleet on base) By the time they get to final, they are going to be below TPA for the piston fleet - that's why the 500+' for jets is not an issue. (Of course if you have some idiot in a 152 flying jet sized patterns, well, go ahead and take him out because that dumb-ass shouldn't be in the air to begin with)
As far as flying your RV-6 at that sort of pattern speed - no.
There is a difference between descending in the pattern and descending into the pattern.How is descending into the normal traffic pattern not good? Whats the difference between entering on the base, final as you say, verses on the 45? You are descending all the same. It seems like most of you see this as black and white. Just because somebody doesn't enter a non controlled traffic pattern on the 45 doesn't mean their wrong. Just because the winds favor runway 7 doesn't mean its wrong to land 25, or 14/32 etc.
The traffic pattern is one of the most dangerous places to be flying, period. Especially at an uncontrolled airport.
Where the hell is the BEATING A DEAD HORSE emoticon? Holy cow, ENOUGH ALREADY....!!!!!!!!!!
We've heard it, we've discussed it and we've beaten it to FREAKING DEATH!
ENOUGH ALREADY
So I ask, if I fly my RV6 at TPA +500 at 160kts is this ok?
That's a FACT jack.Here's the deal:
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.
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
Do you need to fly at 160 knots that close to the airport?
This is like an Energizer battery commercial.
I'll 2nd that.Vote to merge with the other thread so we can get it to +1000 quicker!
I'll 2nd that.
Any opposed?
All in favor, signify with Aye
Actually, on second thought can we delete both threads? The only thing I've learned is that some guys like the OB and will do it no matter what anyone thinks and some don't like it at all and don't want anyone to do it. I tihnk that about sums it up.
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.
This is like watching a train wreck . . . I don't want to see it, but I just can't look away! Somebody help me!!!
Who needs treadmill threads when we can debate overhead breaks???
Like I said, the key to an arrival is fitting in. A straight in, cross wind, 45, or direct to downwind are all acceptable forms as long as you're safe in doing so. You don't use your approach to muscle your way to the front of the line no more than you use your altitude.What if use the equally legal and AIM provided for "Straight in" entry?
All in favor, signify with Aye
Actually, on second thought can we delete both threads? The only thing I've learned is that some guys like the OB and will do it no matter what anyone thinks and some don't like it at all and don't want anyone to do it. I tihnk that about sums it up.
...this term is in the AIM.
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?
I am not so tired of life to have read all of this thread but has anyone mentioned 'flights' of RVs clogging up CTAF with their air-to-air 'chats'? Detailing where they are, what they are going to do and how much like fighter jocks they are? Drives me nuts!
I am not so tired of life to have read all of this thread but has anyone mentioned 'flights' of RVs clogging up CTAF with their air-to-air 'chats'? Detailing where they are, what they are going to do and how much like fighter jocks they are? Drives me nuts!
Come to the northeast. With all the freqs available, there are only a few assigned to unicoms. When flying you get to hear the self-announcements of a dozen different airports at once. Chatter between aircraft wouldn't clog the freq ... it's already clogged.
On the way up to Michigan we were on the local frequencies a lot, and they were just jammed. It was so welcome to hear. For the last couple years they've been so quiet. I was starting to worry I was going to see GA go out of the world for all intensive purposes. Still might.
I'm not type rated. Plus, I don't think I've ever seen a jet fly a pattern - always a straight in.
The F-16's, T-37's and T-45's I see going into Alliance do overhead breaks all the time, into downwind, base, final... they rarely do straight in landings. And they come into the overhead FAST.
What has annoyed me more then the "overhead break" lately are these airline hotshots coming on CTAF frequencies saying they're inbound any traficc in the area please advise and then DON'T say the airport they're landing at what so ever. I heard this three times last weekend. Each time I asked them to kindly inform me what airport they're landing at...as the CTAF covers hundreds of airports...Of course they never do.
I find it funny how you have to look at a post and then assume I'm attacking airline pilots. Pretty defensive aren't you?I love how these comments are directed towards a certain segment of the flying population, as if other segments of the population don't screw up.. I've never understood why there is such a rift between the "GA" guys and the "professional" guys.. It's really pretty silly..
I've seen 25,000 guys make mistakes. I've seen guys with <1 hour make mistakes and I've seen guys everywhere in between make mistakes.
There are those who have and those who will, in every segment of the aviation community.