Poll: Overhead Breaks - good or bad

[az_gila]

I read the two "authorizing links" and I read it as IFR traffic. This bit is a key - "...Controllers may authorize an overhead maneuver and issue the following to arriving aircraft..."

The links also use the term "without a functioning control tower" which I read as the time when a tower is non-operational. The AIM uses the term "non-towered" airport for the section describing the "standard" 45 entry pattern. Different terminology for differnt airports.

Could someone provide a definite FAA definition that says the OB pattern is OK at a non-towered airport?

I just don't see it in the two links provided.

[N8RV]

Originally Posted by RV8R999

I just want to know how many folks like it and how many don't. Your reasons are your own but for me knowing is helpful.

If 1,000,000 people vote good and 1 person votes bad - I'd say we can leave the topic alone.

If 1 person votes good (me) and 1,000,000 vote bad - I'd say we have issues and can dissect later. I first want to find out if we have issues of significant scale to warrant more in depth discussion. Not perfect but simple.

Thanks for voting

Ken, I understand what you're asking. However, given the heat generated over the topic lately, I am sure that you can also understand why some are saying that it's a simple question without a simple answer.

OH approaches are great sometimes, not so great at others. Take DR's airport, 52F, for example. There are a lot of RVs there, a lot of formation flying done, a lot of RV visitors and the local flight schools even teach the approach. If you were to poll the pilots based there -- even those who never do OH approaches -- you might find that they don't have a problem with it at all.

Ask pilots at other airports (like the most vocal detractors on the other forums), and you already know what kind of response you'll get. It's not a good-or-bad issue, IMO, and whether I personally like watching or doing OH approaches is of no consequence.

To make you happy, I'll vote. But you'll have to tell me how you want me to vote. I personally like OH approaches, but I dislike the backlash from other pilots. So, how do I vote, good or bad?

[Dgamble]

I view overhead breaks exactly the way I view IFR practice approaches on VFR days: you are doing something that is not universally understood by every pilot. Doing it is safe and legal, but is incumbent upon those doing it to communicate to others that may not be quite as knowledgeable in language they can be expected to understand.

If you're announcing yourself as "procedure turn inbound" to an uncontrolled field on a VFR day, there is every chance that you will be just as well understood as if you had chattered it like a chipmunk. This failure to understand specialized lingo is not the fault of the VFR pilot, it is a failure on the part of the "IFR" pilot to recognize the situation for what it is and communicate appropriately.

Back before I was IFR rated and started flying an RV, I had no more idea of what an overhead break was than I did of what a procedure turn was. All I wanted to know in those cases was where you were in relation to the airport and where/when I should look for you. I don't now, and I didn't then, think it was my responsibility to learn the other pilot's language.

Basic VFR terminology is the lingua franca of VFR flying days, in my opinion. If you're going to do something that is somewhat out of the ordinary for the typical pilot, spell it out in terms they will understand.

[David-aviator]

Well, there are 2 ways to do the overhead approach.

One is in controlled airspace with a control tower authorizing the maneuver. That's a no brainer - it is good - facilitates traffic flow and is routine at some airports. Do not do it without tower concurrence. Locally, if you call in with an RV call sign, they sometimes ask if you want an overhead break.

The other is at uncontrolled airspace - like Class G. All FAR 91.126 says is all turns must be made to the left unless otherwise specified by light signals or other ground visual markings indicating turns should be to the right. It does not mention traffic pattern, just make all turns left (standard) or right (non-standard). Make the approach in accordance with FAR 91.126.

The overhead break is not illegal. No where in the FAR's is it prohibited. In fact it is an approach and landing procedure used for many years. It has history. But that has to be taken with a bit of common sense because an over head break that screws up normal traffic as outlined in the AIM could be a violation of other FAR's concerning reckless flight. But it could also be argued the complaining guy screwed up the over head approach so there you are, legal limbo.

I like the over head approach because of where it came from. It is a fast, efficient way to get lots of airplanes on the deck using minimum airspace.

If you can do a steep turn and maintain altitude within +/_ 50', you are qualified.

At an uncontrolled airport, make sure everyone in the area knows what's going on, and if need be, give way to the student just learning to fly in a Cessna on a down wind cross-county leg. We were all there once and need to cut these new pilots a bit of slack, or anyone else flying like a new pilot. That's a lot easier than having to respond to a formal complaint. All it takes is a bit of common sense.

P.S. I did not vote because I have a policy, which I tell telephone solicitors, I don't do surveys unless I get paid $100. They go away real quick and do not call back.

[Capflyer]

Originally Posted by az_gila

Could someone provide a definite FAA definition that says the OB pattern is OK at a non-towered airport?

Is there mention in the AIM or FARs about doing low approaches on a practice instrument approach? According to the FARs you are supposed to land. I dare say you will not find anyone disagreeing that doing a low approach on a practice instrument approach is bad. The AIM is not the FARs, just an explanation and good practices. Just because something is omitted from the AIM or FARs does not render it unacceptable.

Finding this discussion rather ridiculous. I'm not going to bother voting. Neither side of the issue will convince the other side. Now about which or if what primer to use.......

[RV8R999]

Don - vote "yes"

thx!

[N8RV]

Originally Posted by RV8R999

Don - vote "yes"

thx!

Way to screw up your own poll, Ken -- "yes" is not a choice!

I voted "good".

[RV8R999]

intentional I assure you...but thanks!

[Skybond]

In my opinion OB it's very safe if it is properly executed. It's hard to believe that some RV guys are opposed to it, i would expect that from some spam-can flyer but i guess some never change . It is the best and most efficient way to bring a flight in to an airport.

[rvatornate]

Originally Posted by Mel

How do you communicate with the unseen NORDO traffic?

??? The same way I do when I come in on the 45.