What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Overhead Approach / Break

Don't bet your life on it...

The closest I came to a midair was in a class delta under a controllers (un)watchful eye. If you read the accident reports a surprisingly high percentage of midairs occur in class delta airspace (you would think its zero). And if you read the regs (here in the US anyways) controllers provide sequencing to runways not seperation services. Have a midair in a class delta and the accident report will most likely read the cause as the "pilots failure to see and avoid". Keep your eyes open and try to have a visualization where that plane should be. If you can't see it, ask the controller. That very likely saved my life as the plane that should have been lined up on the parallel runway was lined up for mine and literally just below me.

You should have heard the controllers voice as it raised a couple of notches...


The controllers will keep me safe, right?
 
We Can Work It Out........

Inyokern - uncontrolled, 3 intersecting runways - Friday around noon. I called 10 miles to the east; a Piper called taking 33 with a left turnout to the west; Skywest EMB 120 called taking 20 (downwind takeoff - those guys will takeoff and land downwind in a hurricane to save time and gas); a glider called inbound from the west.

I called intentions to enter the overhead for 33 instead of left downwind to avoid crossing the Skywest on 20 centerline - and the glider to the west of 33.

Piper called left turnout; Skywest called airborne; glider said he'd be overhead at 5K; I called 3 mile initial, broke and landed; glider then landed on 02. We used 3 different runways in less than 5 minutes.

If you communicate properly and cooperate, have proper SA, and be willing to immediately resort to Plan B if you don't have SA, you can work it out. Admittedly, different approach required if students / visitors in the pattern - but hey, this is Inyokern - and you really have to want to go to IYK to go to IYK.
 
The closest I came to a midair was in a class delta under a controllers (un)watchful eye. If you read the accident reports a surprisingly high percentage of midairs occur in class delta airspace (you would think its zero). And if you read the regs (here in the US anyways) controllers provide sequencing to runways not seperation services. Have a midair in a class delta and the accident report will most likely read the cause as the "pilots failure to see and avoid". Keep your eyes open and try to have a visualization where that plane should be. If you can't see it, ask the controller. That very likely saved my life as the plane that should have been lined up on the parallel runway was lined up for mine and literally just below me.

You should have heard the controllers voice as it raised a couple of notches...

we are only required to issue traffic to vfr aircraft not receiving radar services in the delta. and then provide the sequence to the runway. beyond that, you're on your own.

to aircraft receiving radar service we are required to separate you visually (IFR or VFR) or by means of vertical/longitudinal from other aircraft receiving radar services.

what this boils down to is you don't know who is or who isn't receiving radar services at the field and depending on the type of airspace surrounding the delta, the separation may be next to nil (primaries can't touch). so in a roundabout way you are correct. see and avoid is a very good practice.

we have a VERY busy stand-alone delta in our airspace and it's like the wild west compared to our delta (primary airport with radar sequencing of arrivals).
 
.....- but hey, this is Inyokern - and you really have to want to go to IYK to go to IYK.

...or that's how far you get when you start off in the southern Mojave desert and don't get enough thermals to get up the Owens Valley.

You land there even if you don't want to...:D
 
this has probably already been brought up, but doesn't the aircraft that is "lower" automatically have the right-of-way while landing at an uncontrolled field? sounds like an overhead automatically makes you number last every time :confused:

disclaimer: i havent flown in about 6 years so be gentle
 
sounds like an overhead automatically makes you number last every time :confused:

disclaimer: I haven't flown in about 6 years so be gentle

The "initial to an overhead break" is also a strait in approach executed at pattern altitude. So it's not altitude that makes it the least in priority. The guy that makes the 45 entry to the downwind has priority since he is using the "standard recommended approach".
Didn't hurt a bit, did it....:rolleyes:
 
The "initial to an overhead break" is also a strait in approach executed at pattern altitude.

Maybe not. Note item g. below from page PCG O-3 of the 2012 AIM:

OVERHEAD MANEUVER− A series of predeterminedmaneuvers 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 "initial to an overhead break" is also a strait in approach executed at pattern altitude. So it's not altitude that makes it the least in priority. The guy that makes the 45 entry to the downwind has priority since he is using the "standard recommended approach".
Didn't hurt a bit, did it....:rolleyes:

How do you figure?

In a left hand traffic pattern the plane at the initial has the right of way over the plane at the 45 since the overhead aircraft is to the other planes right - see part 91.113 Right Of Way.

In a right hand pattern it would be opposite.

There is no degree of standard in any of the approach methods and none are regulatory - yet right of way rules are. Period.
 
How do you figure?

In a left hand traffic pattern the plane at the initial has the right of way over the plane at the 45 since the overhead aircraft is to the other planes right - see part 91.113 Right Of Way.

In a right hand pattern it would be opposite.

There is no degree of standard in any of the approach methods and none are regulatory - yet right of way rules are. Period.

There is a degree of standard based on the "overhead pattern developed for an operational need" bit of the AIM.

At Tucson (TUS) I've been requested to do a downwind departure at under 700 ft AGL while F-16s were doing a overhead break above me.

I presume these altitudes were written into the "operational need" document that everyone seems to ignore in this discussion...:rolleyes:
 
I presume these altitudes were written into the "operational need" document that everyone seems to ignore in this discussion...:rolleyes:

Because this discussion isn't relevant. There isn't a regulation requiring an airport to list the overhead as an approved approach to an uncontrolled airport. This point is not arguable. The word standard can be used in many contexts. Procedurely the overhead is as standardized as any other listed in the AIM. From an operational context each airport is going to be different in which approach is most common and therefore deemed standard. In either case the PIC gets to determine the operational need and doesn't need anyone else's blessing to do so provided no regulations are violated.

The main discussion has always been about how to handle those pilots who do not understand the procedure and to ensure when the overhead is executed it is done safely and with consideration to others.

Because I also fly helicopters (funny DanH!)... Here is a picture:

25klr94.jpg
 
Last edited:
Well, if there is one good thing to come out of this revolving discussion - it's that everyone who has read it now knows exactly what a "3 mile initial" means.

Now, if we could only reach out to the rest of the "head in the sand, refuse to learn anything my instructor didn't teach" population, we'd all be better off.

BTW, On my very first downwind leg of my first solo I heard a call from a King Air pilot "...at the outer marker, inbound straight in..." to MY runway. I had NO idea where the outer marker was and didn't know if I had 5 minutes or 5 seconds to land so I departed the pattern and gave the guy time to land ahead of me.
 
The "initial to an overhead break" is also a strait in approach executed at pattern altitude. So it's not altitude that makes it the least in priority. The guy that makes the 45 entry to the downwind has priority since he is using the "standard recommended approach".
Didn't hurt a bit, did it....:rolleyes:

i can't speak for an uncontrolled field, but a "standard" overhead at a controlled field is +500 TPA.
 
Well, if there is one good thing to come out of this revolving discussion - it's that everyone who has read it now knows exactly what a "3 mile initial" means.

Now, if we could only reach out to the rest of the "head in the sand, refuse to learn anything my instructor didn't teach" population, we'd all be better off.

BTW, On my very first downwind leg of my first solo I heard a call from a King Air pilot "...at the outer marker, inbound straight in..." to MY runway. I had NO idea where the outer marker was and didn't know if I had 5 minutes or 5 seconds to land so I departed the pattern and gave the guy time to land ahead of me.

Excellent Airmanship
 
I still don't know where to look for someone who calls "3 mile initial" :eek: but will assume they are within 3 miles of the airport...somewhere.
 
A "three mile initial" would be three miles downwind at the designated overhead pattern altitude on runway centerline. Typically it would be about where someone would be when at three miles on final on a VFR straight in, at three miles on a GCA, or at three miles on an ILS or GPS. Typically on those you'd be at "around" 900' (at three miles) and not at pattern altitude, but otherwise you'd be very close to the same point visually.

The difference would be that while an aircraft flying an overhead approach would remain level at the initial altitude all the way to the "break point" (over the numbers, mid-field, at the departure end, etc as directed by the tower or as traffic on downwind dictates), those on a straight-in, GCA, ILS, GPS approach would descend all the way to the approach end of the runway.

It's pretty simple really and from the safety perspective, you can see any traffic in the pattern all the way to touchdown. It's my personal preference and is a better pattern in nearly every way in my opinion to the 45 degree downwind entry.
 
Overhead Pattern

Had some fun working on the overhead pattern, still needs work but more fun than the box pattern. I also like keeping it close to the runway. I thought I was flying a tight pattern until I flew with the Blackjack Sq., I decided to practice a bit.

Tower is very accommodating.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjJnmrVSYwk

Cheers
 
who are the subjects?

... Also liked the crop art off of the approach end of 33.

I'll bite: who are they?

The subjects look familiar, but I can't place 'em...

OBTW, nice to see how someone else looks working a break; thanks!
 
Seahawks

I'll bite: who are they?

The subjects look familiar, but I can't place 'em...

OBTW, nice to see how someone else looks working a break; thanks!

This place always has a corn maze but I have never noticed any art work. Big Seahawk fan get together a couple weeks ago, now I know why.

It looks to be a tribute to the Super Bowl win.

Cheers
 
Overhead Break & Other Landing Procedures Question

I heard about the overhead break and watched some F16s do this (in a very large circle) at Davis-Monthon in Tuscon. I also found some good videos and images for that. This is RV related to landing techniques for a rapid, safe, recovery of a group.

But . . . I went flying with an F-111 pilot in a T6 and after the early morning aerobatics (my first, and it was fantastic) he came in for what he called a "carrier landing". It was on a 9500 ft runway so it did not take much, but we lined up on downwind at 300ft AGL and 45deg on the left wing to the runway. He configured the flaps, gear, then pulled back the power did a (maybe 60deg) bank in a descending left turn at constant airspeed and then perfectly timed the roll out and touched down on the runway. This was 25 years ago and the airspeed is a little fuzzy but he performed this maneuver as smooth as spreading molasses on toast.

I have been searching for the details of this technique on the internet and can not find it. Can someone help by giving it a proper name?

Oh - in my search I found a training video for the F4U Corsair. Test yourself on when you can not retain the numbers provided. How many minutes did you last?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4aPk4fledU

Back on the topic - any understanding of this landing technique, its use advantages etc would be appreciated.

Moderator(s): I did not know which bucket to put this so I selected General - move as you see fit.
 
I just call it a short approach...
The tower approves it.... pull power, roll hard. Roll out just before touchdown.
Fun and safe.
 
. . . I went flying with an F-111 pilot in a T6 and after the early morning aerobatics (my first, and it was fantastic) he came in for what he called a "carrier landing". It was on a 9500 ft runway so it did not take much, but we lined up on downwind at 300ft AGL and 45deg on the left wing to the runway. He configured the flaps, gear, then pulled back the power did a (maybe 60deg) bank in a descending left turn at constant airspeed and then perfectly timed the roll out and touched down on the runway. This was 25 years ago and the airspeed is a little fuzzy but he performed this maneuver as smooth as spreading molasses on toast.

I have been searching for the details of this technique on the internet and can not find it. Can someone help by giving it a proper name?
Might try searching for "carrier break." A fun variation on the overhead approach.
 
I do it

I do a similar version when at small/private strips like my home base often. The RV is perfect for that type approach, and I dislike a long drug out pattern when I don't need it. The plane even feels better "loaded up" a little, but things happen quickly, so be careful!
 
Carrier break

The advantage of the carrier break is in allowing the quick break up of a formation flight into the landing pattern. For a single airplane it does not provide much advantage. Remember, at 60 degrees angle of bank your stall margins are reduced. An AOA gauge would be nice to see how close to stall you are during the break maneuver. I would suggest practicing your break at high altitudes so if you do stall, you have altitude to recover, before trying it at pattern altitude. There are a lot of subtleties in how much interval (seconds) you use between aircraft breaking and how many g's you pull in order to arrive on downwind with equal spacing and a workable time crossing the threshold between landing aircraft. Good luck with your learning the break maneuver. I would suggest a formation clinic to learn the proper and safe way to break up an echelon formation into a landing pattern. Safe flying.
 
If you are serious about learning how to fly "the break" and a Navy type approach, I suggest that you take a look at the Navy basic training flight manual, known as the FTI. It used to be available on line if you search "navy primary fti".

This is an excellent training document. The T-34 C performance is somewhat similar to an RV. The methods taught in this manual are excellent, particularly the emergency procedures.

The form guys use the T-34 form manual as the basis for their training.

Check it out, i'll try to find a link...... here you go http://www.cnatra.navy.mil/pubs/folder5/T34C/P-330_CH9.pdf

all 250 pages. Your tax dollars at work. The basis of this teaching method is flying by a set of standard procedures. This works particularly well to fly consistent approaches to landing and also for dealing with emergencies.

You can seriously improve your flying skills and safety margins by spending some time reading and embracing the concepts taught here. Carry on sailor!
 
Last edited:
Wow, this is more than I could have expected! Thanks, I looked for the "carrier break" and most are for turbine (jet) use, but the pattern was much the same. I guess Charlie used the lower (300ft agl) altitude to match the T-6 performance. It may not have been 60 deg bank, but it seemed pretty hefty to make the 180 and descend to touchdown. I do remember the airspeed was rock solid all the way to final transition to touch down.

I definitely will only pursue this after some flight time after first flight and not close to the ground.

That Navy document is very interesting, I have added it to my pilot soft library f along with the FAR-AIM.

Thanks to all who responded, this is an approach that is on my list to learn. It appears to save some time, and if there are low light conditions, then the runway is not so far away. It could also be used in emergency conditions if needed.

Also, it was a really fun end to a great experience.
 
Carrier break vs a normal overhead simply refers to the altitude. We use an 800' break and 600' pattern at the boat vice whatever patter altitude is. Procedures are the same, in a carrier break you're at 600' at the abeam vice 1k-1500' pattern altitude.

I just came back in for the break an hour ago in my -8. Over the numbers at 800'/170 kts... Roll to 60-70 deg, power to idle, level pull through 90 degrees of turn, then increase the bank and pull... This bleeds the energy fast, you can "squat the airplane" through the next 90 degrees of turn. This gives me about 100-110 knots at the 180... Keep the nose up, fly downwind to flap speed, dump full flaps, start your 180 to landing, maintain 75 kts in the power off descent (maybe a little power to shallow it out), roll final over the approach lights (or airport fence)... Land normal. Much faster than trying to slow at three miles and slow/configure. It's all energy management....
 
I have an old carrier pilot friend who has described this approach to me many times (he flew an F4F). In that type of airplane there is no forward visibility so they had to do a continuous turn until touchdown in order to see anything including the LSO. He also described how far the rudder was deflected during this power on approach. This exact approach would seem to have limited practical use in today's airplane. Maybe a Pitts could using something similar though.
 
Overhead Rocks

I have an old carrier pilot friend who has described this approach to me many times (he flew an F4F). In that type of airplane there is no forward visibility so they had to do a continuous turn until touchdown in order to see anything including the LSO. He also described how far the rudder was deflected during this power on approach. This exact approach would seem to have limited practical use in today's airplane. Maybe a Pitts could using something similar though.

You really need to learn more about the maneuver, it is not just for aircraft with difficult over the nose visibility. It is an efficient and practical way to work a pattern, that is why it is used at all military bases. At pilot training bases most of these planes come to initial as singles.

Here is a practical application; Sanford tower switched me from 09L to 09R problem was they wanted me to follow another aircraft which would have required me to make aggressive turns and slow to a very low speed. I asked tower for the overhead pattern as a better way to sequence with the traffic, they approved. I flew to to initial pitched out and landed with good spacing with the other aircraft, I maintained good energy, I was in a better position had I lost an engine and this also allowed additional traffic to sequence into the runway.

Every military pilot knows the value of the overhead pattern, I personally think it should be taught and used in the civilian world.

The pattern is getting more use due to the number of RVs flying, I know at my airport the tower has never denied me the overhead, I also work around those in the traditional pattern.


Stay Calm
and
Fly the Overhead
 
a good pilot is always learning????.

my first overhead break????.

a few years back when i was doing more formation flights me and my wingman were approaching our towered airport. this is a contract tower with controllers with military back ground. my wingman said ask for an overhead break. we were straight in for 12 and i knew what it was. ok, ' turbo flight would like overhead break 12'. tower, 'cleared angels one point five 12, report 1 mile initial. wholly molly, what did i get into. the gray matter started heating up. hmmm. ok tower guy you got me, explain.

the moral to the story, when you here something you don't understand, get it cleared up. nothing wrong with that. bad decision making leads to more bad decisions and so forth. be safe out there.
http://www.richard- seaman.com/Airc.../2007/Highlights/EchelonPass11oClockTom07.jpg
EchelonPass11oClockTom07.jpg
 
Last edited:
cleared angles 1.5 12, report 1 mile initial. wholly molly, what did i get into. the gray matter started heating up. hmmm. ok tower guy you got me, explain.

Cleared overhead pattern at 1500 feet, runway 12, report 1 mile from end of runway. (You should be at 1500 feet on runway centerline 1 mile out, maintain that altitude through the break.)
 
Some background behind

My understanding is that originally, the "overhead" pattern was intended to keep friendly aircraft relatively high and relatively fast (as compared to a more normal straight in approach) until within a secure perimeter around the airfield where they'd be safe from small arms fire.
From that perspective, staying 1500' over the field and fast, then ripping a high-G turn, dropping gear and flaps as limit speeds allow and basically circling directly back to the field to land makes total sense. Since military aircraft are exempt from remaining below 250kts below 10,000ft, they can approach the break at their "normal" pattern speeds of 300kts (T-38) or higher (350kts for the F-111) so they've got plenty of G available to bleed speed down and turn tight patterns.
 
...why the overhead pattern is what it is

(hit send early, sorry)
If military aircraft are in places where there's no airspeed limitation, the break becomes even more competitive and speedy! Another take on the tactical aspect of the pattern is to arrive in spread formation (say, 1000' apart), but at low altitude, maybe 500' and even higher (barely sub-Mach) speeds! Now you've got to pull up to gain pattern altitude, slow and dirty up before having to start the final turn. So much fun it should be illegal!
 
Back
Top