What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Traffic Pattern Entry

What Type Pattern Entry Are You Using?

  • 45 Degree to the Downwind

    Votes: 221 76.7%
  • Mid-Field Crosswind

    Votes: 78 27.1%
  • Straight-In

    Votes: 25 8.7%
  • Overhead Break

    Votes: 38 13.2%
  • Base Entry

    Votes: 29 10.1%
  • Other - Please Describe

    Votes: 22 7.6%

  • Total voters
    288

apkp777

Well Known Member
Having spent most of my flight time at towered airports and now seeing myself going to more and more non-towered, I am taking the time to review and rethink my non-towered airport operations.

Of course the AIM gives guidance for traffic pattern entry and it lists the 45 degree to the downwind and a straight in approach. AOPA has their ASF briefing that includes the mid-field crosswind. http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/sa08.pdf

I know some guys do an "overhead break".

I am curious (not condemning) what you all are doing for pattern entry and why? Also, what are the pros and cons to some of these entries that maybe I (or someone else) have not considered as it applies to safety.
 
FAA's position

Tony,

This is a hot button for me, two or three miles from the airport and you are NOT in the pattern.

The FAA does define a pattern. Go to page 5 of this FAA FISDO Plane Talk document.

For more discussion on the topic, check out this thread.

Better yet, I'll include the text:
FAA Plane Talk said:
HOW TO GET IN THE PATTERN

Beginning in spring through the fall, I fly to quite a few fly-ins and flight breakfasts. What is most noticeable is all the different ways pilots enter the traffic pattern at non-controlled fields.

One such memorable occasion was at a flight breakfast in Iowa. This airport had left traffic and everybody was landing to the north. The traffic pattern was full of aircraft of varying performance and one poor soul was entering the pattern from the east and trying to enter on a right base. He continued to make 360 degree turns for spacing with the traffic that was flying the correct left pattern, only to find himself head on with traffic on a left base. He continued with his 360s and I think my kids and I were already eating our flapjacks before he made it to final.

We all know that §91.103 states that, “Each pilot in command shall, before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that flight.” This information should include the traffic pattern altitude and direction. You can find this information in the Airport Facility Directory (AFD). The absence of this information means that the traffic pattern is left turns and the traffic pattern altitude for light aircraft is 1,000 feet above ground level (AGL), or for large aircraft, over 12,500 pounds, or for turbine aircraft 1,500 feet AGL. The Sectional Chart should also show an “RP” for right pattern if the traffic pattern is right turns. Additionally, §91.126 spells out the direction of turns for a non-controlled airport which states, “Each pilot of an airplane must make all turns of that airplane to the left unless the airport displays approved light signals or visual markings indicating that turns should be made to the right, in which case the pilot must make all turns to the right.”

So how should we enter the pattern? Let me preface this next statement with: There are exceptions. This article is geared towards airplanes, not other kinds of aircraft, and at noncontrolled airports. The goal is to enter the pattern in a safe and orderly fashion that gives everyone a better chance to avoid a midair collision.

The Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) only recommends one way to enter the pattern. The AIM only recommends a 45 degree entry to the downwind leg of the pattern. It does not recommend a long straight-in entry to final, entry on crosswind, or an entry on base leg.

If you are approaching the airport from the opposite side of the downwind leg, you can fly over the field above pattern altitude, which would be at least 1,000 feet above pattern altitude. The reason for 1,000 feet is that the pattern altitude for large aircraft is already 500 feet above pattern altitude for light aircraft. Also, by entering this way, you can look at the windsock and, if any, the traffic pattern indicator. Be sure to fly far enough away from the traffic pattern before descending to the traffic pattern altitude and turn for your 45 degree entry to the downwind leg. For collision avoidance, you want to enter the pattern at pattern altitude and not be descending while in the pattern. Since the FAA’s Airplane Flying Handbook states to fly your downwind leg one-half to one mile from the runway, depending on aircraft performance, you should be able to consider yourself out of the pattern when you are more than a mile from the runway, even better two to three miles out.

If you are approaching the airport from the downwind side, you can fly just wide enough to enter the 45 degree entry leg. Most Global Positioning Systems (GPS) have an Omni Bearing Selector mode (OBS), like a VOR, that you can set your course on a 45 degree line to the Airport Reference Point, center of the field, to give you a pictorial display of the 45 degree leg.

What are the legal aspects of a traffic pattern entry at a noncontrolled airport? We have already discussed §91.126, about flying left turns in an airplane at a non-controlled airport. You may be thinking, if I fly a long straight-in final, I’m not making any turns, so that should be legal. This is legal but not necessarily safe, and definitely not courteous if other planes are in the pattern. It is possible that §91.13, careless or reckless, could enter the equation for a pilot that enters on a long straight-in final or any other non-recommended pattern entry if a near midair collision or collision occurred. The FAA is required to investigate any complaints that come to their attention.

Now, for the previously mentioned exceptions. We should use common sense with this topic as well as in everything else we do. There are airports in this country, most notably in the mountains, which cannot possibly allow a normal traffic pattern. A lot of them are one way runways or are so close to a mountain that you have to be quite inventive in getting in and out of them.

Another exception happened to me not too long ago. I was flying into an airport where the downwind leg would put me over the town. The weather was legal VFR, but the ceiling was low enough that if I were to maintain legal cloud clearances, it would have forced me to fly too low over the town for minimum safe altitude. I entered the pattern on a left base avoiding the town.

Airspace can also encroach upon traffic patterns either above you or to the side. Agricultural aircraft also are exempted, under certain conditions, by §137.45 allowing a pilot to deviate from a normal traffic pattern.

Several sources were used for this article. The Federal Aviation Regulations and the AIM were the primary sources, plus three Advisory Circulars, 90-42F, 90-48C, and 90-66A, all pertaining to traffic patterns or collision avoidance. The FAA’s Airplane Flying Handbook is also a good source to review from time to time.

Do your best to enter your patterns on a 45 degree to a downwind and avoid entering it any other way if possible. Most of all, use common sense, be courteous, be legal, and keep your eyes out of the cockpit and look for traffic.

Dan Petersen, ASI
 
Last edited:
I was flying in the vicintiy of our local aerodrome the other day and a T-34 pilot was working the field and calling out "high key" and "low key" instead of standard pattern terminology.

How many GA pilots would have a clue as to where he was located and what he intended to do?

He sure did sound military, though. ;)
 
45 to the downwind.

Overhead breaks are a pet peeve and a good way screw up a perfectly organized traffic pattern or to cause problems for someone trying to get setup to enter it.

I always enter 45 to downwind, unless I need to cross the field to reach the pattern. Then I cross midfield (traffic pattern altitude) and after crossing mid-field, I angle at a 45 to reach the downwind.

Neither are sexy, but they're safe.
 
Last edited:
Depends on the airport

I use the mid field cross wind because our pattern for the airport is tucked between the "surface to 8000 ft" of a class B (2 miles to the east) and a Class D (3 miles west). For the north/south runway there is not room to enter on a 45 down wind when coming from the opposite direction. (I have a thing about doing straight ins as I think they are dangerous as we have lots of "no radio" traffic and they screw up the pattern).
At airports in the wide open I try to do the 45 to down wind.
 
As far as the pattern goes, I always try to make a 45 to the downwind. If I'm entering from the upwind side I always fly over at 500 above TPA and 270 degree descending turn into the downwind. Now that is fun in the RV. :) Not to mention safe, and recommended in the AIM.

While we're on it, there's really no such thing as an uncontrolled airport -- they are non-towered. Likewise when people call class E airspace "uncontrolled". The only uncontrolled airspace (practically speaking) in this country is class G airspace.
 
I like the upwind because it gives me options. I can turn crosswind at the numbers, mid-field, departure end, or past. That allows me the most flexibility to mesh with existing traffic.

BTW, high-key/low-key...just think of circling near the approach end of the runway with the engine at idle to simulate a failure.

Just another viewpoint.

-Jim
 
Definately 45 on the downwind when practical. Since my commute home brings me into the upwind pattern most of the time, I usually either enter it with a 45 degree angle (announcing, of course) or stay wide and enter the cross-wind pattern. Some neighbors use the mid-field, 270 approach but I suspect it causes a flurry of attention at Ellington (the adjacent controlled space) when they do.
 
My overhead approach is to do a teardrop turn that lets me descend 1000 feet into the pattern and back on the 45 to downwind. I feel that a 270 into the downwind is pushing it a bit. Besides, it gives me a few more seconds flight time; that's a good thing, right?:D I'm not adverse to doing non-standard pattern entries as long as I can err on the side of caution. But to me, more important than the pattern entry itself is the need to communicate. If you tell me what your intentions are, I can usually find you and adjust my pattern if/as necessary. But I just hate the 'strong, silent type'. My first encounter with the breed was when my IP took me to a non-towered airport to do a few touch and goes while I was working toward my PVT. With the instructor aboard, you can bet I was making all the radio calls. We were both looking for traffic, too; it was not a quiet field. So just before I called my base, imagine my surprise when a twin appeared on my wingtip, inside my pattern. He proceeded to turn base, without a word, so I extended (and made the radio call). My instructor was livid and immediately checked the frequency (I had it correct). I can't imagine that the twin never spotted me and I have no idea why he wasn't on the radio unless he screwed up the frequency. But I took from that the absolute necessity to talk - there's no way I'd have seen him coming up behind me and his relative speed (twin vs. C-152) probably had him out of sight at the time I turned downwind, assuming he wasn't on the 45 behind me, but a position report would have made me aware of him - and to take nothing for granted in the vicinity of an airport. I've even had an aircraft at a towered airport (KOAK) in visual contact suddenly turn toward me (well, I had THEM in sight). And this after ATC had just given both of us traffic info. So I really like hearing where everyone is; that way I can see and avoid.
 
A lot depends on the airport and the direction one is coming from.

The STANDARD entry for the preferred runway (24) at the airport that I am based (KCCB) at is a cross-wind over the departure end of the runway (or over the numbers of RWY 6). We are in a cut out of a Class Charlie airspace and there is a college off the departure end of the runway. The cross-wind over the departure end is a modified mid-field crossing. Of course if coming from the south west up the flood control channel in the 1/2 mile space between Charlie and Delta Airspace, you would then be on the 45 to downwind and use that.

If course is straight in to the runway in use, I will use the 360 Overhead Approach.
 
Ah, the high emotion of anti-break rhetoric! I believe there was already a thread (many threads?) devoted to this impassioned subject...

:D

I have used every sort of traffic pattern entry including some not named here at uncontrolled field, always with the appropriate calls (although to be politically correct, we don't call "overhead break" any more but rather use "flying final at pattern altitude" and "will be turning crosswind to a tight downwind").

However, alternate entries should be used in conjunction with common sense and good judgment (e.g. only use when you are certain the pattern is empty). Those folks unable to constrain themselves by exercising both of those qualities should use rote rules each and every time.
 
Power: 45 angle to downwind or as requested by ATC.

Glider: Initial point (IP), about 1000 AGL about where you'd turn from crosswind to downwind on a wide pattern. We fly a wider pattern than most power traffic.

TODR
 
Great responses. I actually thought this thread would be "up in flames" by now.

There's no doubt that most of us understand the obvious, "see and avoid", "make your intentions clear", "don't disrupt the standard flow of traffic", etc.

(wait while I put on my fire suit)
Okay that said, I have to make an honest confession that really made be start thinking about all this. I recently was approaching a local airport during a relatively busy fly-in. I was about 7 miles North behind another aircraft who was on final for 18. Another had announced that he was 10 miles west and inbound for left downwind 26. He was in a cessna and did not want to use the turf (RW18). I did some quick math realized that me and the cessna would be more or less at the down wind point at the same time if I did a mid-field crosswind, which was my initial plan. I could have done a mid field over fly at +500 then right descending turn to put me on the 45 for the downwind, but I was already at pattern altitude and would have needed to climb and then maneuver to the south. So I decided that I would just make straight in for 18.

Okay, no problem except the airplane that had landed on 18 in front of me was still back taxiing by the time I was short final and the Cessna had announced he was on left downwind 26 (18 is grass and 26 paved). Because there was a plane on downwind a go around would have been a bad idea, of course landing with another plane back taxiing toward me also a bad idea. A low pass was really the right decision? However, the plane back taxing, being heads-up, realized I was in a pickle and said he would pull over and stop and go ahead and land. I told him I would land left and land short. Which I did. There was no real danger and we were never closer than a thousand feet. But in my mind I have replayed the episode a hundred times. I really felt like a smuck and did apologize the the back taxiing aircraft.

The bi-plane, RC collision made me again realize that radio calls and a good mental map of all the approaching and departing traffic is essential to safe airport ops. However, impatience and "get-there-itis" also, equally important.
 
....
(wait while I put on my fire suit).....

Okay, no problem except the airplane that had landed on 18 in front of me was still back taxiing by the time I was short final and the Cessna had announced he was on left downwind 26 (18 is grass and 26 paved). Because there was a plane on downwind a go around would have been a bad idea, of course landing with another plane back taxiing toward me also a bad idea. A low pass was really the right decision? However, the plane back taxing, being heads-up, realized I was in a pickle and said he would pull over and stop and go ahead and land. I told him I would land left and land short. Which I did. There was no real danger and we were never closer than a thousand feet. But in my mind I have replayed the episode a hundred times. I really felt like a smuck and did apologize the the back taxiing aircraft.


no flaming, but i don't understand why a go-around would be unsafe because of a plane on downwind? you overfly the runway, turn crosswind when safe because of any traffic on downwind, then fly the normal pattern?

edit- it was because he was on the other runway downwind, correct?
 
Last edited:
no flaming, but i don't understand why a go-around would be unsafe because of a plane on downwind? you overfly the runway, turn crosswind when safe because of any traffic on downwind, then fly the normal pattern?

edit- it was because he was on the other runway downwind, correct?

I didn't have a visual on him and figured if I went around I would be climbing into the left downwind of the intersecting runway. Or at least flying under it. All in all, I just feel like I should have come in behind the Cessna on downwind with the 45 entry.
 
My decision (from short final position) would probably have been to go around, turning right and flying "directly over" 26 until I had the downwind traffic in sight.
I don't like landing on a runway against taxiing traffic.
 
My decision (from short final position) would probably have been to go around, turning right and flying "directly over" 26 until I had the downwind traffic in sight.
I don't like landing on a runway against taxiing traffic.

Yes, in hind sight that would have worked. I don't want to exaggerate the circumstance and the way it played out was really actually very safe. Just lends to the whole idea that the procedures for pattern entry are designed to minimize conflicts, still you have to think quickly and solve hazards. Especially in busy patterns. When you do something goofy you really set yourself up for getting into trouble. In my example, I just really goofed and was fortunate that the plane on the grass was willing to help me out without any hesitation.

Looking at the results so far of the poll, clearly most are doing the 45 entry to downwind and the mid-field crosswind. Of course, traffic volume will often dictate what we do. Those that do the overhead break, do you find that you have time to scan the down wind leg enough before your turn? Seems like it puts you in a steep bank with the possibility of another plane coming under you.
 
Off Key

As a low time pilot only flying a couple of years, I try to keep it to 45 degree to downwind entries. I was originally taught midfield entries from the upwind side but my PP examiner made a huge issue of that in the checkride and I now only use that when there is no traffic in the pattern.

I try to not get peeved at anyone else who botches my plans with atypical pattern manuvers as I have been the boob a few times myself--especially when I was having radio problems that I didn't know about. If I see you and see a conflict coming, I will gladly get out of your way. If you tell where you are and what you intend in language I can understand, I will gladly do the same.

In my few hours of aviation (about 160) I have never heard the terms "low key" or "high key" until this thread and would have no idea where you were or what you were doing. I still wouldn't but at least now I would suspect you might be in the traffic pattern with me and know to ask. Previously I might have thought it odd that you were commenting on your singing voice on the CTAF.

Better to be understood than to sound cool.
 
My airport -KSGS -- sits under the Class B, abuts a Class D and the surface of the Class B is just up the road. You can't do a 45 degree entry to Rwy 34 because of the Class B so everyone has to do a midfield crosswind entry.

The warbird boys do an overhead break and I love watching 'em and all but sometimes it feels like they think there's nobody else on the field.
 
When there's aircraft in the pattern, I do a 45 entry to downwind. I know there's traffic because I can hear them. Otherwise, I prefer to do an overhead break.
I do the 45 with traffic because I believe some pilots don't know the 360 overhead approach.
 
I have to be honest. I don't know really what an"overhead break" really is. I believe it's and upwind approach with a descending power off high G turn to bleed off energy. Is that about right? What is the "initial"?, "Low Key", "High Key"? I understand "key" positions for Commercial power off 180 maneuver, I don't think it's the same. Could someone do us "newbies" a favor and take a minute and define this for us?
 
When there's aircraft in the pattern, I do a 45 entry to downwind. I know there's traffic because I can hear them...
I think Mel's point is that not everyone has or uses a radio. This is legal.

I have had very bad experiences with aircraft with a radio but not using it. The worst experience was when I was taxiing and was in fear that I would be run over by a large turboprop aircraft that did not even have the radio turned on.
 
In Navy primary flight training (T-34C) the term High Key was a point during a powered off approach (engine failure) of about 2500 ft AGL just about over the intended touchdown zone (or the numbers) once we reached the High Key we'd start a left (usually) circling descent to a wide 180 position which was usually about 1200-1500 ft AGL with the runway (or field) just under the left wingtip. This position is the "Low Key" at which point we are just continuing the circle around to land using the gear, flaps and slips (or S-turns) to control glidesslope. Nothing too complicated. It is dumb however for anyone outside of the military training areas (not sure if AF uses those terms) to use High-Key and Low-Key calls since the only person likely to know where that is, is the person saying it.
 
I have to be honest. I don't know really what an"overhead break" really is. I believe it's and upwind approach with a descending power off high G turn to bleed off energy. Is that about right? What is the "initial"?, "Low Key", "High Key"? I understand "key" positions for Commercial power off 180 maneuver, I don't think it's the same. Could someone do us "newbies" a favor and take a minute and define this for us?

From the Pilot/Controller Glossary at the back of the FAR/AIM:

OVERHEAD MANEUVER- A series of predetermined maneuvers prescribed for aircraft (often in formation) for entry into the visual flight rules (VFR) traffic pattern and to proceed to a landing. An overhead maneuver is not an instrument flight rules (IFR) approach procedure. An aircraft executing an overhead maneuver is considered VFR and the IFR flight plan is cancelled when the aircraft reaches the "initial point" on the initial approach portion of the maneuver. The pattern usually specifies the following:

a. The radio contact required of the pilot.

b. The speed to be maintained.

c. An initial approach 3 to 5 miles in length.

d. An elliptical pattern consisting of two 180 degree turns.

e. A break point at which the first 180 degree turn is started.

f. The direction of turns.

g. Altitude (at least 500 feet above the conventional pattern).

h. A "Roll-out" on final approach not less than 1/4 mile from the landing threshold and not less than 300 feet above the ground.

******************************************************

The overhead maneuver is well known to military pilots and although it is well defined and a legal maneuver for civilian pilots as well, it is not well known to many civilian pilots. Therefore, I will gladly take the time to explain the maneuver to anyone in the pattern that questions me. Also, I will discontinue the maneuver if I feel that anyone in the pattern is uncomfortable with it or doesn't understand what I am doing. I would hope that anyone is unsure of the maneuver would take a few moments to read the FAA description and learn it.

As for "hi key" and "low key", I cannot find a reference to these terms outside of military publications. They are handy reference points for those doing similated engine out patterns. High key being on runway heading, above the numbers at high altitude. (Altitude depends on type of airplane and glide ratio. It was something like 7000 feet AGL in the F-105 if I remember correctly.) Low key is abeam the numbers, ready to turn base, not necessarily at pattern altitude. Probably much higher.

I would not be useing these terms (hi/low key) or practicing engine out patterns unless I had the pattern all to myself. It can be very disrupting unless everyone is familiar with them.

On the other hand, the overhead pattern fits in nicely with conventional traffic. I can get a 12-ship formation on the ground in less than three minutes useing an overhead pattern. If all 12 airplanes flew separate entries to the 45-degree to downwind we could tie up the pattern until Christmas!
 
I checked "other" because I use all of these entries at one time or another. Depends on the situation. I usually prefer the mid-field crosswing to a downwind at unfamiliar fields because it gives me a chance to take a good look at the airport. But, traffic in the pattern might make that a poor choice. All of these entries are "legal", but it takes good situational awareness to choose the right one on any given day.
 
I think you have...

From the Pilot/Controller Glossary at the back of the FAR/AIM:

..................

The overhead maneuver is well known to military pilots and although it is well defined and a legal maneuver for civilian pilots as well, it is not well known to many civilian pilots. Therefore, I will gladly take the time to explain the maneuver to anyone in the pattern that questions me.
....

...extrapolated the AIM a little too far...:)

You have quoted from a section only applicable to pilots talking to a control tower.

The "well defined" bit you mention is only for Class D (and higher) areas per the AIM.

That section has nothing to do with patterns at an uncontrolled airport, so expecting pilots to be aware of this terminology outside of a Class D area is a far stretch, no matter how quickly you can get your 12 planes down...
 
Thanks VAC and RON, for helping understand the Overhead maneuver. I am sure we all understand discretion is used when doing it. Flying an RV is just so amazing. The performance (even my timid RV9) is such that you really can take advantage of maneuvers that demonstrate their flight envelop. I have have been telling some of the people I have given rides to that they can just "point and shoot". At the same time, it does take a real heads up attitude in the pattern to sequence yourself with generally slower aircraft.

From looking at the results of the poll so far, it appears that though we all do "all of the above" occasionally, the straight in and base entry is less desirable. Clearly for good reason.
 
Size matters

Also this thread could lead to a discussion of pattern size.

What could be worse than getting behind in a bomber size pattern that seems to be favored now.

Read Dave Hirshmans' article on stabilized approaches and see if this fits your way of flying.

Just stirring the pot.
 
How do you know there is no traffic in the pattern?

Well I of course never truly know 100% absolutely but will make that conclusion if I hear no one, see no one, AND it is an airports that I know from prior knowledge almost never has any usage by other pilots at those times that I am there. At my home airport, I take the opposite approach. Although untowered, it is so busy that If I can't hear or see anyone, I just get more anxious about what I am missing.

The airport I flew to today officially gets 23 aircraft operations a week. I doubt it. My presence there was so unusual that the local yokel popped out of the woods on his 4 wheeler to see what was up. The weeds coming up through the cracks were 18 inches high on the centerline. The windsock was mostly a frame with a few tatters dangling off the small end. Yep, I was very alone. I hope I killed some of their weeds. Made radio calls and looked around but also felt free to take my time and cross mid field from downwind and fly the full circumference of the field to get a good look at it, the trees in the approaches, and the wind tell tales.
 
...extrapolated the AIM a little too far...:)

You have quoted from a section only applicable to pilots talking to a control tower.

The "well defined" bit you mention is only for Class D (and higher) areas per the AIM.

That section has nothing to do with patterns at an uncontrolled airport, so expecting pilots to be aware of this terminology outside of a Class D area is a far stretch, no matter how quickly you can get your 12 planes down...

OK. Refer to AIM 5-4-26 which describes the overhead maneuver and depicts it in Figure 5-4-27. Most of the verbage refers to overhead patterns at controlled airports. Regarding uncontrolled airports, it only states that "Aircraft operating to an airport without a functioning control tower must initiate cancellation of an IFR flight plan prior to executing the overhead maneuver."

It also states that "Overheat maneuver patterns are developed at airports where aircraft have an operational need to conduct the maneuver." Obviously, military bases have a "need" due to fighter and formation arrivals. Towered civilian airports often allow overhead patterns to facilitate arrival of civilian formations. If they don't allow the maneuver they will tell you. Uncontrolled airports don't specify the pattern to be used because they are "uncontrolled". The rectangular traffic pattern described in AIM Figure 4-3-2 is RECOMMENDED. Unless specifically prohibited by NOTAM, I see nothing in the FAR's or AIM to suggest that an overhead pattern at an uncontrolled airport is not permitted. As I said before, I will glady state my intentions to any pilot in the pattern that does not understand what an overhead pattern is. As a matter of safety I will exit the pattern (fly straight through on intitial) if I perceive any conflict with other traffic. Also, as a matter of safety, I prefer to use the overhead pattern when arriving in formation as this affords me the opportunity to get a large number of aircraft on the ground quickly without conflicting with aircraft in a rectangular landing pattern.
 
From the Pilot/Controller Glossary at the back of the FAR/AIM:

OVERHEAD MANEUVER- A series of predetermined maneuvers prescribed for aircraft (often in formation) for entry into the visual flight rules (VFR) traffic pattern and to proceed to a landing. An overhead maneuver is not an instrument flight rules (IFR) approach procedure. An aircraft executing an overhead maneuver is considered VFR and the IFR flight plan is cancelled when the aircraft reaches the "initial point" on the initial approach portion of the maneuver. The pattern usually specifies the following:

a. The radio contact required of the pilot.

b. The speed to be maintained.

c. An initial approach 3 to 5 miles in length.

d. An elliptical pattern consisting of two 180 degree turns.

e. A break point at which the first 180 degree turn is started.

f. The direction of turns.

g. Altitude (at least 500 feet above the conventional pattern).

h. A "Roll-out" on final approach not less than 1/4 mile from the landing threshold and not less than 300 feet above the ground.

******************************************************

The overhead maneuver is well known to military pilots and although it is well defined and a legal maneuver for civilian pilots as well, it is not well known to many civilian pilots. Therefore, I will gladly take the time to explain the maneuver to anyone in the pattern that questions me. Also, I will discontinue the maneuver if I feel that anyone in the pattern is uncomfortable with it or doesn't understand what I am doing. I would hope that anyone is unsure of the maneuver would take a few moments to read the FAA description and learn it.

As for "hi key" and "low key", I cannot find a reference to these terms outside of military publications. They are handy reference points for those doing similated engine out patterns. High key being on runway heading, above the numbers at high altitude. (Altitude depends on type of airplane and glide ratio. It was something like 7000 feet AGL in the F-105 if I remember correctly.) Low key is abeam the numbers, ready to turn base, not necessarily at pattern altitude. Probably much higher.

I would not be useing these terms (hi/low key) or practicing engine out patterns unless I had the pattern all to myself. It can be very disrupting unless everyone is familiar with them.

On the other hand, the overhead pattern fits in nicely with conventional traffic. I can get a 12-ship formation on the ground in less than three minutes useing an overhead pattern. If all 12 airplanes flew separate entries to the 45-degree to downwind we could tie up the pattern until Christmas!

Excellent descriptions. Yes, "High Key" and "Low Key" should not be used in civillian-speak because they simply are unknown. Better to use plain English such as the following
- "N1234 over the numbers for runway 02 at 2500', simulated engine-out approach, left 360 to land" and
- "N1234, Left base at 1500', simulated engine out, tight pattern"

That way, everyone knows exactly where you are and what the *#)@ you are doing.

:D
 
You are extrapolating again...

OK. Refer to AIM 5-4-26 which describes the overhead maneuver and depicts it in Figure 5-4-27. Most of the verbage refers to overhead patterns at controlled airports. Regarding uncontrolled airports, it only states that "Aircraft operating to an airport without a functioning control tower must initiate cancellation of an IFR flight plan prior to executing the overhead maneuver."

It also states that "Overheat maneuver patterns are developed at airports where aircraft have an operational need to conduct the maneuver." ......

The section you refer to in the AIM is only for termination of IFR flights, not for general use into uncontrolled airports. ATC controllers are involved in the section you quote...

The big advantage of the "standard" AIM mentioned square pattern is that airplanes are in expected areas - the overhead maneuver could be regarded as "cutting someone off in the pattern" if other traffic is no-radio or unseen.

A swivel head is required at all uncontrolled (and non-military) fields, but having planes in expected locations and paths just makes it easier...

And yes, I do like watching the F-16s do overhead breaks at Tucson International - but it's been a developed procedure and the control tower is speaking to them, even if I can't hear it on my civilian VHF channels...
 
Thank you, Gill!

...extrapolated the AIM a little too far...

You have quoted from a section only applicable to pilots talking to a control tower.

The "well defined" bit you mention is only for Class D (and higher) areas per the AIM.

AND

The section you refer to in the AIM is only for termination of IFR flights, not for general use into uncontrolled airports. ATC controllers are involved in the section you quote...

Gil, I appreciate you keeping things honest. the only thing worse than an authority who can not cite data is an authority who mis-represents the data they cite. Wish you could as effectively keep our politicians honest!
 
OK

Let's flip this around.

Where does is say if I cancel IFR going into an uncontrolled airport that I can't do an overhead. I don't believe that's out of context. IFR is IFR.

This is getting so typical of everything today.

If it ain't in the book it must mean you can't do it.

I like the way the NAVY does it. If it's not in the book then you can do it.

Overheads are a very safe and efficient way to terminate a flight at any airport.
 
The section you refer to in the AIM is only for termination of IFR flights, not for general use into uncontrolled airports. ATC controllers are involved in the section you quote...

The big advantage of the "standard" AIM mentioned square pattern is that airplanes are in expected areas - the overhead maneuver could be regarded as "cutting someone off in the pattern" if other traffic is no-radio or unseen.

A swivel head is required at all uncontrolled (and non-military) fields, but having planes in expected locations and paths just makes it easier...

And yes, I do like watching the F-16s do overhead breaks at Tucson International - but it's been a developed procedure and the control tower is speaking to them, even if I can't hear it on my civilian VHF channels...

1. Once you terminate an IFR clearance (squawk 1200, contact XXX on CTAF frequency) controllers are NOT involved. You are on your own at an uncontrolled airport. The choice of pattern entry is up to you. Yes, the rectangular pattern is RECOMMENDED. The overhead pattern is not prohibited and it is up to the PIC to safely terminated the flight in VFR conditions.

2. Agreed, having planes in expected locations and paths makes it easier...
If more pilots were aware of the overhead pattern as described in the AIM they would know where to expect to see planes in that pattern. For those that are not familiar with the overhead, I am happy to describe it for them and if they appear to be uncomfortable or confused I am always ready to exit the pattern and re-enter when they are on the ground.

3. Not hearing the F-16's in Tucson's overhead pattern is like dealing with no-radio aircraft at an uncontrolled airport. Fortunately, the overhead pattern provides a superb vantage point to see and avoid traffic in the airport area.

I think we have beat this subject to death and I, for one am satisfied to agree that we don't agree and leave it at that. If we ever meet at an uncontrolled airport, you can be assured that I will give you every consideration to insure that we are both safely separated.
 
Personally, I really don't care what type of entry another aircraft uses. Whether I am at a towered or non-towered airport, I take a personal responsibility to see and avoid and don't expect that anyone at the airport, whether a controller or pilot sees me or anyone else. It's eyes outside the plane, head on a swivel.

Clearly the overhead break can be argued that it is non-standard and foreign to many (including me). However, I have yet to experience anyone doing one that interfered with me. From what I do know about it, I don't see that it is particularly risky. I have had people not using a radio on the other hand that have nearly run me over.

Seems like at an non-towered airport you could make the radio call, "2500 upwind for a mid-field descending left turn to final" Not knowing what an overhead break is, I'd have no trouble understanding that.
 
OK .....

I usually do the 45 in... however I have been building this RV for 6 years as of May 2010 and should fly by year end. Rest assured I will be busting out an overhead at Wesiser EYQ if no one is in the pattern....

And any RVs will be welcome to join in..... :D
 
Why the 45 sucks...

When you choose to enter the pattern on a 45 to downwind, you have essentially given up your ability to vary the position where you enter the downwind.

Conversely, when you enter crosswind, if you encounter conflicting traffic, you can turn upwind and sort things out by waiting to turn onto downwind until you can safely establish an appropriate interval behind the airplane ahead of you. At some point you may have driven so far upwind that you choose to exit and try to re-enter the pattern gracefully. Entering upwind (call it a Break or Overhead if you prefer) is functionally the same as entering crosswind, and gives you the same spacing advantages.

On a busy day, trying to feed aircraft in on the 45 will result in: 1. A line of airplanes on the 45 doing all kinds of abnormal spacing maneuvers, including little 360's, and still winding up flying parallel courses with poor spacing on the downwind, and 2. Lack of suitable spacing will result in extending the downwind to the point that everyone is flying straight-in approaches.

As the military learned long ago, if you want all the airplanes to start their turns to base and final at the appropriate point in the pattern, you have to provide a way to establish interval by varying the point where a turn is made to enter the downwind leg.
 
As the military learned long ago, if you want all the airplanes to start their turns to base and final at the appropriate point in the pattern, you have to provide a way to establish interval by varying the point where a turn is made to enter the downwind leg.

Robert, I like the way you think! Here's a pilot I choose to fly behind in the pattern!
 
Depends... I shoot for a standard 45 to downwind, but I'll do a midfield cross or an overhead if it works out better. I DO NOT like straight in approaches at non towered airports because I feel they do not give anyone adequate time to figure out what is going on and react to spacing. I don't like the base entry either, for the same reasons.
 
O.K., just read the entire thread, and one thing I did not see was any references to WHY these various patterns have evolved.

Bottom line is safety-----

Here is how it was explained to me many years ago, by an old military pilot turned CFI.

The overhead break is from the military world, heavy loaded aircraft that glide like a brick. Engines tend to quit with greater regularity when the power is pulled back at the end of a flight. It is tight to the runway, so you can get there if a flame out happens.

The 45 entry is a hold over from days when most planes had high wings, as you made the turn, it gave you a good, clear look into the direction where other planes would be coming from in downwind.

I have used all except the break, as conditions and needs determined/allowed. My preferred is the 45.
 
Last edited:
Mike S. I was taught the same thing about 45 entry from my original flight instructor.

It's clear that the 45 entry is the preferred method for us RV guys. However, when making the right turn from the 45 to the downwind our upwind wing does mask the downwind. Clearly we have a good view of things prior to the turn, but is there another entry that would prevent that? Perhaps a straight-in downwind?

The left mid-field crosswind also leaves a bit to be desired as the upwind wing also masks the downwind.
 
Overhead

The overhead break is from the military world, heavy loaded aircraft that glide like a brick. Engines tend to quit with greater regularity when the power is pulled back at the end of a flight. It is tight to the runway, so you can get there if a flame out happens.

That may be true for the flight lead, but Dash-4 will be turning to the downwind miles upwind of the airfield or ship, so that notion does not hold much solace for the other members of the formation.

The reason a Carrier pilot enters the ship's pattern on the upwind is to allow him/her to establish interval with the aircraft in front of them, pure and simple. If the timing of the Break is correct, an aircraft will cross the Ramp as the next one in line has turned off the downwind onto the approach turn in order to show up at the Ramp 30 seconds later. The ONLY practical way to establish a suitable landing interval is by varying the point at which you enter the downwind, whether at a field or ship, military or civilian, and this is not possible when using a 45 entry.
 
That may be true for the flight lead, but Dash-4 will be turning to the downwind miles upwind of the airfield or ship, so that notion does not hold much solace for the other members of the formation.
Perhaps if you are coming down initial at 300kts and using a 5 second break. In RVs we typically use 130KIAS on initial and 2 second break intervals. That means that -4 will break 2,633 feet further down field than lead, or about halfway down a typical runway, if lead breaks at the numbers. Still plenty close in case of engine failure.
 
When you choose to enter the pattern on a 45 to downwind, you have essentially given up your ability to vary the position where you enter the downwind.

My initial take on reading that was "so what?" - not trying to be a smart *** but I was taught that one of the reasons for using a standard pattern was for the purpose of putting incoming aircraft in a known position so other aircraft can more easily spot them. Spacing should be sorted out before you get to the downwind turn. It should not be necessary to do abnormal maneuvers in the pattern itself.

But let's say that despite all good intentions there is a spacing problem. Then the solution would be to the following aircraft to extend downwind. If I understand your crosswind-to-upwind idea, it could easily have you traveling upwind over the approach end of the runway at pattern altitude. Let's hope no hotshot pilot with an RV (those things climb like crazy:)) takes off while you are maneuvering upwind; he'll be faster than pattern speed and climbing right through there. Even if you are careful to stay sidestepped from the runway, what if he turns? And how will you see airport traffic as you are flying away from the normal pattern?
 
Extending the Downwind Is A Bad Solution

Spacing should be sorted out before you get to the downwind turn. It should not be necessary to do abnormal maneuvers in the pattern itself.


As you are coming down your 45 line to midfield, you see two aircraft on downwind ahead of you, and as you get closer, you see an additional two aircraft off to your left, also already established on downwind. Two more aircraft have taken off and are proceeding upwind waiting for their opportunity to stay in the pattern and turn crosswind as soon as a spot on the downwind opens up. I assume that all six of these "already established in the pattern" aircraft have priority over you. Please explain what kind of "sorting out" maneuver you will perform that does not completely screw up the downwind spacing and/or create a hazardous multi-lane downwind?

But let's say that despite all good intentions there is a spacing problem. Then the solution would be to the following aircraft to extend downwind. If I understand your crosswind-to-upwind idea, it could easily have you traveling upwind over the approach end of the runway at pattern altitude.


I assume you mean 'departure end', and yes you will be traveling upwind pretty much like you would be if you had taken off and are waiting for an opportunity to turn crosswind and stay in the pattern. If you really meant 'approach end', the upwind entry should be stepped slightly to the right to get good visibility of the traffic on final and base leg segments (as well as straight-ins) on the way in.

Let's hope no hotshot pilot with an RV (those things climb like crazy:)) takes off while you are maneuvering upwind; he'll be faster than pattern speed and climbing right through there. Even if you are careful to stay sidestepped from the runway, what if he turns?


Entering upwind or midfield crosswind gives you the best view of aircraft taking off and waiting to take off. One more thing to keep track of. In a busy pattern, a departing aircraft should courteously make a right turnout away from the pattern as soon as practicable.

And how will you see airport traffic as you are flying away from the normal pattern?

If you are forced to extend upwind, it is because you ARE continuing to to look at traffic already established in the pattern, namely those on a downwind stretched out upwind of the field, or those waiting to turn crosswind.
 
Sorry, Robert, I did mean 'departure end' and the pre-coffee fingers put in what they felt like. If there are six aircraft already in the pattern at an uncontrolled airport, I will leave the 45 and re-enter it when the sixth has passed. I will not enter the pattern itself. If all six are inexplicably doing pattern work, I will request that someone hold or leave the pattern to give me a chance to make my landing. Six is too many in the pattern at an uncontrolled airport for my comfort level.

I won't argue with you about whether pilots will depart straight out or not or visibility issues; I just disagree and will never turn upwind at TPA for spacing.
 
Back
Top