Overhead Break

[Groundpounder]

Wrong. It does actually serve a purpose in the civilian world... I do it all the time whether I'm flying my RV, a T-28, T-6, Beech 18, whatever... it's useful and it works. But, I personally don't use the military lingo on the radio because many (most?) others in the pattern don't understand it. And no, I'm not an ex-military fighter pilot.


Your opinion. But, selfish and dangerous?? Nope.

So why do you do an overhead break vs a normal pattern entry?

 

[Tarheelpilot]

So why do you do an overhead break vs a normal pattern entry?

An overhead break is nothing more spectacular than entering the pattern on the upwind. Is entering on the upwind abnormal?

How would you prefer to enter the pattern if you were on an extend final but could not do the straight in because of traffic?

 

[jbDC9]

So why do you do an overhead break vs a normal pattern entry?

Because it can be a huge timesaver depending on your inbound direction, and it just works.

An overhead break is nothing more spectacular than entering the pattern on the upwind. Is entering on the upwind abnormal?

How would you prefer to enter the pattern if you were on an extend final but could not do the straight in because of traffic?

Exactly. It’s just an upwind entry followed by a (hopefully) tight oval-ish pattern.

 

[iamtheari]

I think that it's pretty clear what people are doing wrong when they fly the overhead break in GA planes. They are using the radio. If you just turn that thing off, nobody will complain about your confusing terminology.

 

[Groundpounder]

An overhead break is nothing more spectacular than entering the pattern on the upwind. Is entering on the upwind abnormal?

How would you prefer to enter the pattern if you were on an extend final but could not do the straight in because of traffic?

I donno, but screaming into the pattern at max cruise and doing a 90* bank into the downwind in front of other airplanes already on the downwind probably isn't the right choice

Because it can be a huge timesaver depending on your inbound direction, and it just works.


Exactly. It’s just an upwind entry followed by a (hopefully) tight oval-ish pattern.

So saving time (which equals money) isn't being selfish?

 

[nauga]

I think that it's pretty clear what people are doing wrong when they fly the overhead break in GA planes. They are using the radio. If you just turn that thing off, nobody will complain about your confusing terminology.

Bonus points if you refer to it as a 'ziplip recovery'.

Nauga,
quietly

 

[dtuuri]

§91.303 Aerobatic flight.
No person may operate an aircraft in aerobatic flight—

...

(e) Below an altitude of 1,500 feet above the surface; or

...

For the purposes of this section, aerobatic flight means an intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitude, an abnormal attitude, or abnormal acceleration, not necessary for normal flight.​

Just sayin'...

 

[Tarheelpilot]

I donno, but screaming into the pattern at max cruise and doing a 90* bank into the downwind in front of other airplanes already on the downwind probably isn't the right choice



So saving time (which equals money) isn't being selfish?

So what part of the overhead break says anything about max cruise to a 90 bank. Pretty sure that bank angle requires parachutes and some specific authorizations to be executed in a low level environment at an airport. The behaviors you are describing are not required to enter a pattern from the overhead and most likely violate more than one regulation.

I guess I’m just confused now. What makes you think the overhead requires a 90 bank. Have you ever read the AIM to actually know what’s in it regarding the maneuver? Sounds like you’re upset about the wrong things to me.

 

[Salty]

I have no dog in this fight whatsoever, no opinion at all. But I am curious. Exactly what does overhead break do that you can't do just coming straight in? I mean, you have to slow down either way. Other than poor planning, why would you need to do this in the first place?

 

[RoscoeT]

§91.303 Aerobatic flight.
No person may operate an aircraft in aerobatic flight—

...

(e) Below an altitude of 1,500 feet above the surface; or

...

For the purposes of this section, aerobatic flight means an intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitude, an abnormal attitude, or abnormal acceleration, not necessary for normal flight.​

Just sayin'...

And this has to do with what exactly?

 

[jbDC9]

I donno, but screaming into the pattern at max cruise and doing a 90* bank into the downwind in front of other airplanes already on the downwind probably isn't the right choice

A guy doing it like that is indeed a selfish asshat; the better way to do it is to set spacing from the upwind before turning onto the downwind. It’s been discussed on this forum a thousand times...

So saving time (which equals money) isn't being selfish?

Dude. Really, that’s all you got?

 

[RoscoeT]

I have no dog in this fight whatsoever, no opinion at all. But I am curious. Exactly what does overhead break do that you can't do just coming straight in? I mean, you have to slow down either way. Other than poor planning, why would you need to do this in the first place?

The overhead pattern uses a turn to slow down rather than pulling power and waiting. But there is no NEED for it in peacetime. But it's not dangerous or inconsiderate if done properly either.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

I have no dog in this fight whatsoever, no opinion at all. But I am curious. Exactly what does overhead break do that you can't do just coming straight in? I mean, you have to slow down either way. Other than poor planning, why would you need to do this in the first place?

The only times I find the upwind to be useful is when my inbound track is on final and there is to much traffic to allow a straight in so I use the pattern to mesh with established traffic. I thought that was the reason traffic patterns existed. Your statement makes about as much sense to me as saying someone entering on an extended down wind just sucks at planning.

 

[Groundpounder]

So what part of the overhead break says anything about max cruise to a 90 bank. Pretty sure that bank angle requires parachutes and some specific authorizations to be executed in a low level environment at an airport. The behaviors you are describing are not required to enter a pattern from the overhead and most likely violate more than one regulation.

I guess I’m just confused now. What makes you think the overhead requires a 90 bank. Have you ever read the AIM to actually know what’s in it regarding the maneuver? Sounds like you’re upset about the wrong things to me.

Fast forward to 5:26 on this one

 

[dtuuri]

5−4−27. Overhead Approach Maneuver
a. ... Overhead maneuver patterns are developed at airports where aircraft have an operational need to conduct the maneuver.​

Can someone name an uncontrolled civilian airport where the manager has "developed" (and, I would expect, "disseminated" operating information for pilots) an overhead approach maneuver? What was the operational need?

 

[Salty]

The only times I find the upwind to be useful is when my inbound track is on final and there is to much traffic to allow a straight in so I use the pattern to mesh with established traffic. I thought that was the reason traffic patterns existed. Your statement makes about as much sense to me as saying someone entering on an extended down wind just sucks at planning.

I never said anybody sucks at anything, but thanks for the cup of sunshine.

I've never had problems adjusting spacing on final without doing a break, so I'm not convinced that alone is good justification for it, but I guess it's another tool in the toolbox for occasional use. I still think there are better ways to deal with spacing in the downwind than executing a break.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

I fly out of a non towered airport.

Depends on where the initial turn starts...if it starts at the threshold, then that is different from overflying the runway like an upwind leg. As long as landing traffic announces position with respect to downwind, base, final, etc. we at least know where to look.

If you cannot do a straight in landing due to traffic, do you still do an overhead break or announce your position and follow the traffic pattern ?

What makes you think the overhead doesn’t follow the traffic pattern? It’s not some kind of secret handshake arrival. The overhead should always mesh with traffic at the airport. Just like any other standard pattern entry.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

Fast forward to 5:26 on this one

That’s nice. We are not in the military and their procedures have no bearing on this discussion.

 

[jbDC9]

Posting a video of an F/A-18 arrival... whatever. It’s not relevant here.

 

[Bellanca_Pilot]

Man, some real sour pusses here! That’s a cool video. Thanks for sharing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tarheelpilot]

Other than poor planning, why would you need to do this in the first place?

I never said anybody sucks at anything.

You did not use the word sucks. I can agree with that but it sure sounds like you have the position that any upwind pattern entry is the result of poor planning. I don’t think it’s much of a stretch to say you accused an upwind pattern entry pilot of sucking at planning.

 

[Salty]

You did not use the word sucks. I can agree with that but it sure sounds like you have the position that any upwind pattern entry is the result of poor planning. I don’t think it’s much of a stretch to say you accused an upwind pattern entry pilot of sucking at planning.

I had the position that I did not know why you would need to do this in the first place, so I asked the question. Sheesh.

 

[Groundpounder]

That’s nice. We are not in the military and their procedures have no bearing on this discussion.

I edited to replace that with a video of RV's doing what I described.

I guess my whole argument is why? The overhead looks cool and fun, but there seem to be way too many downsides to make it a prudent thing to do.

 

[iamtheari]

I guess my whole argument is why? The overhead looks cool and fun, but there seem to be way too many downsides to make it a prudent thing to do.

I can offer two reasons for the overhead in planes that do not really need the deceleration it offers (a Hornet slowing from 400 to 200 arguably needs it, a B-52 arguably does not, and that's before we even get anywhere near light GA):

1. It's a safe and efficient way to break up a formation that has arrived together and get them on the ground quickly
2. Single-ship practice for #1 so it will actually be safe when executed in formation

That being said, I don't know if there are good alternatives for a formation arrival to safely and efficiently get from echelon at 1500 AGL to parked on the ramp. So reason #1 could be less important than it seems to me. And if reason #1 goes away, then so does #2.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

I edited to replace that with a video of RV's doing what I described.

I guess my whole argument is why? The overhead looks cool and fun, but there seem to be way too many downsides to make it a prudent thing to do.

I am boarding a flight so I don’t have time to look at the video but if they are doing 90 degree banks, interfering with or cutting off traffic they are not flying an overhead pattern they are being aassholes and breaking regulations.


That’s why I asked you if you were actually familiar with an overhead pattern entry because it sounds like you have observed people behaving badly and assumed they were flying the entry correctly when they in fact were not.

I watch the video when I can but I suspect it’s just well documented bad behavior.

 

[Bellanca_Pilot]

Now you people are calling other pilots *******s? I’m
Gone! Thanks for ruining a good forum for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dtuuri]

So, if an F18 needs to do a "break" in order to slow down (

), why does it keep the power up all the way to downwind?

 

[Salty]

So, if an F18 needs to do a "break" in order to slow down (

), why does it keep the power up all the way to downwind?

That's essentially what I'm asking. Why not just slow down by pulling back the throttle and land straight in. Even with a formation the guy in the rear reduces throttle first and viola, spacing.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

Now you people are calling other pilots *******s? I’m
Gone! Thanks for ruining a good forum for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just calling a spade a spade dude. Anyone doing unauthorized aerobatic procedures in a traffic pattern and causing traffic conflicts in the process has earned the title in my opinion.

 

[Bill]

Whatever someone does when nobody else is in the pattern is their business, I just don't care. But, when others are in the pattern, one should operate in that pattern as others would expect. Yup, it's really that simple.

 

[nauga]

So, if an F18 needs to do a "break" in order to slow down, why does it keep the power up all the way to downwind?

Hard to tell where the power is set over the environmental control system whine
Basing an argument on how all overheads are done on a single unannotated, undocumented video is risky at best.

Nauga,
keeping it cool

 

[Pugs]

Man, some real sour pusses here! That’s a cool video. Thanks for sharing.

Yep. I have always thought of aviation as an "ever learning" activity but it's funny how many pilots on this thread are set in their ways and are not willing to expand their skill, support others doing so or even crack open (even virtually) a book they should be familiar with. I guess it's really true that some never learn or practice once they meet the ACS once.

 

[dtuuri]

Hard to tell where the power is set over the environmental control system whine

I excluded the whine in my analysis. YMMV.

 

[Rgbeard]

So why do you do an overhead break vs a normal pattern entry?

Post #15 is my reason.

 

[hindsight2020]

You can tell in the Spruce Goose video those RV dudes have USAF form mannerisms. The hand signals and turning rejoin mechanisms are USAF-flavored appropriations, not Navy.

--break break--

So, if an F18 needs to do a "break" in order to slow down (

), why does it keep the power up all the way to downwind?

I know the video is of a hornet but I'll address the USAF reasons. The use of power during the break is situational. Normally in a multi-ship arrival the lead needs to roll out on downwind at a progressively faster speed than the trailing aircraft, in order to not create a bottleneck at the perch (since dash one configures and slows down first, and everybody configures generally in the same geographic position). If taken to the logical conclusion, would lead to dash-4 to perch excessively late to preserve spacing, or if perching on time, not have sufficient spacing for alternate side runway landing ops behind dash-3. That's why lead whips it around in MIL through 50-75% of the break to preserve spacing. In delta or "wingless" planforms, it also preserves turn rate, since the high alpha cost is high. (Ask me how I know on the former )

That's essentially what I'm asking. Why not just slow down by pulling back the throttle and land straight in. Even with a formation the guy in the rear reduces throttle first and viola, spacing.

What you're describing is called VMC drag in the USAF side. It has opportunity costs like everything else, but that is in the context of category D/E tacair planes with speeds that require a separation that would make a 4-ship conga line evidently long, well beyond the confines of a nominal class D airspace. In that context, 100% the overhead is a tighter, faster execution of recovery, which is why it's favored on this side of the fence.

For the piddly spam cans we're talking about, you could VMC-drag a 4 ship with little problem, given the separation exigencies of category A aircraft are inconsequential (relatively speaking).

 

[danhagan]

Exactly what does overhead break do that you can't do just coming straight in? I mean, you have to slow down either way. Other than poor planning, why would you need to do this in the first place?

To use your wing to cover the normal downwind and scare the beejeezus out of the nordo Cub you didn't know was on base when you started the maneuver with no chance of spotting through that wing in a continuous bank

What makes you think the overhead doesn’t follow the traffic pattern? It’s not some kind of secret handshake arrival. The overhead should always mesh with traffic at the airport. Just like any other standard pattern entry.

My field normally has 2 students minimum and a transient in the pattern, all while the jump plane is diving in from above ... last weekend there were 14 in and near the pattern ... haven't seen it like that around here in YEARS ... don't thinky the overhead is going to work

 

[Juliet Hotel]

I have no dog in this fight whatsoever, no opinion at all. But I am curious. Exactly what does overhead break do that you can't do just coming straight in? I mean, you have to slow down either way. Other than poor planning, why would you need to do this in the first place?

This. You're getting down to pattern altitude an flying to the numbers. Then you do a tight turn while descending to the runway presumably while bleeding speed. How is that faster than getting down to pattern altitude, arriving on a relatively short final and then descending to the runway?

When I flew jumpers, time was money. Once the jumpers were out, the goal was to get on the ground ASAP. If you weren't on the ground while there were still canopies in the air, you were wasting time. If I happened to be descending off the approach end of the runway and then flew to the numbers and did an overhead break instead of flying a drop from the sky straight in, my boss would've ripped me a new butt hole.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

To use your wing to cover the normal downwind and scare the beejeezus out of the nordo Cub you didn't know was on base when you started the maneuver with no chance of spotting through that wing in a continuous bank



My field normally has 2 students minimum and a transient in the pattern, all while the jump plane is diving in from above ... last weekend there were 14 in and near the pattern ... haven't seen it like that around here in YEARS ... don't thinky the overhead is going to work

then don’t use it... I never intended to convey the silly idea that the overhead always works. It’s no different than any other pattern entry. Each situation is different and it’s up to the PIC to select the safest most efficient way to mesh with traffic.

 

[Boone]

So, if an F18 needs to do a "break" in order to slow down (

), why does it keep the power up all the way to downwind?

It sounds to me like he started reducing power 90° through the turn. He also seemed to come in relatively slow. That looked like something less than 350kts but it’s hard to tell. If you come in slow and go straight to idle, it messes up the habit patterns and the abeam distance. You’ll be at gear speed well before 180°, it slows down the turn and probably screws up interval for everyone else. My goal was usually to hit gear speed approaching 180° of turn, unless I broke late w/o an interval.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

This. You're getting down to pattern altitude an flying to the numbers. Then you do a tight turn while descending to the runway presumably while bleeding speed. How is that faster than getting down to pattern altitude, arriving on a relatively short final and then descending to the runway?

When I flew jumpers, time was money. Once the jumpers were out, the goal was to get on the ground ASAP. If you weren't on the ground while there were still canopies in the air, you were wasting time. If I happened to be descending off the approach end of the runway and then flew to the numbers and did an overhead break instead of flying a drop from the sky straight in, my boss would've ripped me a new butt hole.

Sounds like you worked for a real turd. I never encountered that kind of non sense hauling jumpers.