Wide Patterns!

[fehdxl]

When I taught people to fly gliders in Illinois in the 90's, I told them there were at least nine 'runways' on the 2600' x 200' grass runway we were preparing to land on. Left/center/right and first/second/third of the length. Sometimes, as luck would have it, there were gliders on each side waiting for a tow, and the glider landing in front of us stopped in the middle. No big deal. Close the spoilers, coast over the top, and land on the second (or third) part of the runway. Of course a go-around wasn't an option.

Another technique was to land 30*-45* off of normal runway heading...cut the strong cross-runway-winds way down. Ground roll in that strong of a wind was just a couple hundred feet at most.

Anyway, just food for thought.

-Jim

[tadsargent]

Below is a link from the FAA regarding the traffic pattern altitude and distances from the runway. A turbine aircraft needs more space than most of us but that would be the exception. Ag Aircraft are allowed non standard patterns. 1/2 to 1 mile is the max for distances from the pattern to be considered "IN"

Enjoy

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...edia/sep06.pdf

Tad Sargent
"Stripes" 7A

[roadrunner20]

Originally Posted by Kahuna

The entire first post is exactly why the "Initial" overhead break is better. As a flight or solo.

I've heard the "overhead break" referenced several times.
Would you define the manuever.
I've always tried to enter the non-towered pattern on the 45 but find myself always bleeding off altitude prior to entering the pattern and sequencing...

[DeltaRomeo]

Originally Posted by DanLandry

I've heard the "overhead break" referenced several times.
Would you define the manuever....snip

You can view it online at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnZx9p8CmdU (about 50 seconds into the clip).

It's the quickest (and I think safest) way to get planes down. If the pattern is full I don't do it, of course, but it's my preferred arrival method.

b,
d

[roadrunner20]

Originally Posted by DeltaRomeo

You can view it online at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnZx9p8CmdU (about 50 seconds into the clip).

It's the quickest (and I think safest) way to get planes down. If the pattern is full I don't do it, of course, but it's my preferred arrival method.

b,
d

OK, if I understand correctly, your saying the overhead break...

Pattern entry 1000 AGL on the upwind over the runway.
60* break 180 to downwind over the numbers
~45* 180 to final

[sprucemoose]

Originally Posted by DanLandry

Pattern entry 1000 AGL on the upwind over the runway.
60* break 180 to downwind over the numbers
~45* 180 to final

You pretty much got it. Couple little things...
60* AND 2G on the break to keep it nice and tight.
The 180 to final starts sooner than the 45*, more like 10-20*. If you are a wingman, begin turn/ descent where your lead did. And do not descend prior to starting the turn.

Other than that, you got it. Try it, it's fun, even more fun with friends.

[Ironflight]

Originally Posted by sprucemoose

Other than that, you got it. Try it, it's fun, even more fun with friends.

Not to be a kill-joy, but since this is the SAFETY forum, I know it's been said, but I'd like to re-emphasise....

While you and your friends are having fun, remember that the traffic pattern is not about YOU. It's about setting up a predictable flow of traffic so that everyone around the field knows where everyone else is. If you are absolutely certain that there is no other traffic, then use whatever makes you comfortable. An overhead break is a great way to set yourself up for landing, and to recover a formation of aircraft, no question....but fitting it in to a standard pattern, with people doing touch and goes, sometimes (admittedly very occasionally) without radios, and not educated in the meaning of the term "initial point" - well, is it worth it to put other people at risk just so you can enjoy it?

The overhead pattern is fun, and adds little risk to you - but it increase risk to others, and that's why I personally won't use it in an uncontrolled environment when there is the possibility of traffic. I have said this before, because it is not obvious - it works extremely well in a military environment because the military has controlled fields - they have a Tower to make sure that the airspace is orderly, and to sequence airplanes in the area.

Practice these types of arrivals at empty fields, or ones with towers, but to make it your standard arrival at a strange airport puts other people at risk without their consent, and I can't hold with that. The topic of this thread was basically about people not being where we expect them to be in the vicinity of the airport, and it doesn't make any objective difference if that is too wide, to high, to low, to close....or dropping into the downwind in the middle of the field.

I don't expect to change the world, or even a little piece of it, but I do hope that I give folks that are untrained or inexperienced in this stuff something to think about. And that is all I ask - think about it.

Peace and respect,

Paul

[DanH]

An overhead is fun, it does work, and it generates at least as many complaints as the wide pattern people. <g>

Seriously, you get a good look at the downwind on the inbound, but once you start the 60* 180, you can no longer see anything you missed. The downwind path with which you are merging is under your belly and becomes more so as the turn progresses.

A four-ship fan break tends to make the problem worse. The leader gets a look at the downwind, but wingmen have a "division of attention" problem as well as a visual problem that gets worse with age. They're trying to maintain station (close eye focus) and glance at the downwind (far eye focus) if they are diligent. With a potential audience below, they tend to devote all their attention to maintaining the perfect formation. Ok, the leader starts his break. The second guy tends to watch him in order to time his own break, the third does the same, etc. Nobody is even looking at the downwind.

We've already had one near miss, a FSDO visit, and a student who quit. Our airport pilot community is divided, with radical believers on both ends. The war ebbs and flares. Right now the war has started again, because the overhead guys chose to make a fan-break arrival into a nearby regional fly-in, right in the middle of the Saturday AM rush, and with total disregard for the published arrival procedure. No temporary FAA tower, so you can do whatever you want, right?

If your home-base pilots are comfortable with overheads, well, be careful and have fun. There are problems with overheads, and for sure it might not be a good idea to use one on arrival to a strange airport.

[allbee]

Overhead break,

I think I goofed when I said that I like this. Well I don't. I've never used it and I don't think I ever will. There is a set of biplanes at my field that use this and every time they do, they disrupt the hole system. I don't care if they are in formation, it stinks. We have a tower and every time, flight of... comes in, the people that are set up for the small runway get pushed aside for these jokers. I think this is just a means for a show off landing.

Now the procedure that I indorse when things get busy is the wind sock check. That's where you orbit above the field in a 360, generally 1000ft above TPA. Last year I went into an area for the very first time. I started to just fly in like I do at home at one of my regularly visited fields and then said, wait a minute, what am I doing. I turned around and got my bearings and went up to 1000 ft above tpa and flew right over the field and did 360's checking for traffic and putting things together for the proper runway to land on. Once I figured out what was going on I than dropped down into the downwind and landed.

[ajay]

Originally Posted by DanLandry

OK, if I understand correctly, your saying the overhead break...

Pattern entry 1000 AGL on the upwind over the runway.
60* break 180 to downwind over the numbers
~45* 180 to final

Since safety was brought up, what about using this for an emergency engine out procedure. Probably wouldn't want the steep bank turns, but the idea of flying upwind 1000' over a potential landing spot to get a good look sounds like a reasonable approach. If you are higher and need to bleed atltitude, you could use this as your spiral down procedure? What do you guys think?

ajay