EvilEagle
Pattern Altitude
When Drew Brees got a ride with us, the WG/CC took that one. Figures...
Left Break?
- Thread starter alland
- Start date
gismo
Touchdown! Greaser!
Depends on what you mean by "finished".Now Ron you know no thread is finished just because the question gets answered.
gismo
Touchdown! Greaser!
While I really like Tom Clancy (or at least his books), IME it's often less work to get folks to believe fiction than fact.
gismo
Touchdown! Greaser!
Well, to be fair, Henning didn't say what year this took place. Maybe he was still in high school and lied about his age on his PPL checkride. No computer checking back then ya know.
3393RP
En-Route
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2012
- Messages
- 4,266
- Display Name
Display name:
3393RP
The maneuver is an overhead approach, described in the AIM as follows:
It is normally used when a formation wishes to arrive together and split up for individual landings in the pattern. Essentially, the formation arrives at the "initial" point about 3 miles from the runway on the extended centerline flying upwind. The tower specifies which way they turn. As they reach the break point (usually over the approach end numbers), the aircraft "peel off," one at a time turning 180 degrees into the downwind, with 2-3 second intervals between planes. They end up in trail on downwind with about 500-1000 foot spacing, and then turn base in sequence to maintain that spacing to individual touchdowns.
The maneuver was invented by the military (which pretty much invented formation flying), and is rarely used by civilians other than when flying formation. If you want to make an upwind entry as a single aircraft, it makes more sense just to ask for that. Why anyone would want to ask for an overhead approach in a single C-150 is beyond me, but you never can tell -- maybe practicing to be a flight lead?
I grew up in Albuquerque, lived just yards from the north boundary of Kirtland AFB. I can't tell you how many times I ran to the side of the house so I could see the formation breaks of the Century Series fighters that flew past.
There weren't many buildings on the base back then, I could also see B-58s on landing rollout trailing their parachutes.
Ron's description of the break maneuver brought back good memories of a little kid that has loved flying from the beginning...carry on.
bbchien
Touchdown! Greaser!
I'm not going to argue with someone who dances on the head of a pin. Call it whatever you wish.
Insisting that you can protect the student fro m your antics is totally specious. Answer/address dagger flight six and that accident or sthu. I'm done with the likes of you.
I'm completely unaware of the details regarding this "dagger flight 6" you speak of. But lemme gues...A gaggle of RVs makes a radio call saying they are "x-mile initial" and proceeds into the pattern expecting everyone else to either know what the hell they're talking about, where they are...or to just get the hell out of the way while they fly their formation overhead pattern. Meanwhile, flight lead is not paying a high level attention to radio calls and/or using HIS eyeballs to look for other traffic as he's too busy being an awesome lead. And then somebody in the RV gaggle hits a Cozy already in the pattern somwhere on downwind, base, or final? Is that about right?
I know your feathers are all bunched up, but I still don't understand how a single pilot diligently listening AND looking, while saying they are "overhead upwind for 360 to land" is dangerous, or something a student would have "no idea" what it means, or is any any riskier than all the other pattern clusterf*ckishness that often happens when pilots fly the numerous other entries per the "common playbook". Once again, an overhead is very close to a normal upwind, mid-field x-wind, downwind, base-to-final series of calls...it just happens slightly faster, depending on how fast and tight you are.
And I never said I could or would somehow "protect" everyone in the pattern. You twisted what I said for your own purposes. I basically said I would not hit someone turning x-wind that I had in sight as I started the 360. I've never heard of a mid-air accident in the pattern involving an airplane in visual contact with the other.
Why don't you quit doing the gorilla chest-beat and educate us about all the pattern mid-airs that have occurred as a result of single ship overhead patterns. I imagine you may have a little trouble with that.
Last edited:
I believe it was this incident... Not a Cozy,,, It was a Velocity..
http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/AccidentReports/gxydw3qxlswdwtforqanpy551/D01082013120000.pdf
Wow, Bruce C...I was way off. For all your vitriol about this accident, I expected something totally different. The above link provides an incomplete understanding, though. Maybe this has been discussed and beaten to death ad infinitum elsewhere, but to me, it's not clear if the Velocity had the RVs in sight or not. Did he not see the (4) airplanes in front if him as he approached his landing from a straight-in final? Did the RV guys "cut" in front of him on his straight-in too closely? At what point on very short final to touchdown did the Veloclity NOT notice (3) remaining airplanes on the runway in front of him? He was not exactly landing a big radial engine taildragger. I've never sat in a Velocity, but I would imagine it has pretty dern good forward visibility throughout the whole landing process.
Did the Velocity pilot continue with his tightly-spaced landing expecting the RVs would have cleared by the time he was well-established on his landing roll? He obviously saw an RV on the runway at some point...hence his off runway excursion. Unless you are privvy to details not described here, I still don't understand exactly what the RV guys did wrong, or why the overhead pattern was the culprit. Did they cut in front of the Velocity, while the Velocity continued on his straight-in final approach with aloof "tunnel vision" focus on the end of the runway? Did he not notice the runway ahead of him until he was rolling out and about to hit an RV? Absent further information, I can't imagine completing an approach to landing to the point of rollout without noticing (3) airplanes remaining on the runway...whether they "cut" in front of me on final or not. But maybe I'm missing something. A mid air (or a landing on top of another) would be a lot more understandable than this ground incident.
Last edited:
I said... "I believe" this was the incident..... The good Doc might be referring to another fiasco....
35 AoA
Pattern Altitude
FWIW our CAG and DCAG fly with us quite regularly. Single seat jets, so they are full up as O-6's. No restriction on combat. Maybe the AF does things differently, I do not know. We also have Admirals that still fly, though it seems like it is always in family model jets, and I can't imagine that they fly more than just barely enough to maintain legal annual mins.
oldShar
Cleared for Takeoff
poadeleted21
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2011
- Messages
- 12,332
If you can land a U-2, you have my permission to do an OB.
bbchien
Touchdown! Greaser!
Your claim was that you could protect the other guy. I think not. But if you have no trouble with having no part of "keeping your brother" (even a weaker brother), I can see your point of view.
Clearly the Velocity guy did NOT understand what the RVs were doing.
"oh well. Not my problem, sez dagger flight"
ayuh.
SteveinIndy
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2008
- Messages
- 522
- Location
- Under the pattern at KIND
- Display Name
Display name:
SteveinIndy
When I was in the AF (circa 2002-2003), one of my coworkers (a nurse) was the daughter of the Chief of Staff. I recall this coming up although I don't recall exactly why. She stated he still drew flight pay and was "required" (her word, not mine) to maintain his flying status. I am not sure how correct this is but it is what I was told.
It was some what current at the time of that B-52 accelerated stall debacle at Fairchild. The PIC was the colonel who was the wing safety or compliance officer. He was also notorious for violating standards as he saw fit and ended up more or less decapitating the leadership structure of a squadron in a single colossal blunder. Tony Kern gives a very detailed post-mortem of the events leading to that in his book Darker Shades of Blue which honestly should be on every pilot's required reading list.
Perhaps things changed after that but what is in the regulations and what actually happens in the "real world" of the Air Force (at least in the units I had any interaction with) were often so disparate as to have seemingly little connection.
No dude...I already addressed your misconstrued statement above. You either cannot read thoroughly, or you choose to deliberately be dishonest. Either way, no point in me trying to communicate with you since you are not receptive to it.
That would explain a problem in the air, NOT someone (Velocity) continuing an approach, landing, and rollout with airplanes in front of them and on the runway. If you smashed into a fuel truck that was parked on the runway while you continued on short final, touchdown, and rollout - would you say, "well hell, I did NOT understand what the truck was doing there?" All the while you were flying an airplane you can see perfectly well out of. No, I don't buy the idea of the poor hapless Velocity pilot...at least in the way the accident ACTUALLY unfolded. I would have more sympathy for him if he was involved in a midair. I wouldn't land on a grass runway inhabited by grazing deer either...and those are less obvious than three airplanes on the runway.
Last edited:
bbchien
Touchdown! Greaser!
....just as I predicted. Now just substitute "poor hapless student pilot".....
Please stay outta my airspace. Oh wait! maybe that has to do with my spending as much time as possible in the flight levels....
denverpilot
Tied Down
You have tailored boxers? I never saw a need.
Now just substitute "poor hapless student pilot".....
My ability to make visual contact with the runway in front of me during the landing process has not changed since I was a student pilot. I was also perfectly adept at going around as a student pilot. I even did that a number of times.
