Uh Lowflybye, someone (correctly) flying the ILS is 200-250' AGL at 1/2 mile, not 500'. Very easy to spot base to final, looking down at what you are descending toward. Someone hauling ass at you from 3-4 miles away at your altitude isn't nearly as visible when masked by terrain behind them, etc. Maybe not a problem where you are at but a huge issue where mountains surround the airports.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this one. I believe 500' AGL on final is about the worst place you could possibly enter the pattern. There is no other point where you could have as large of a potential speed disparity and conflict. Pick any other spot - crosswind, 45, overhead at TPA, whatever, I'll bet it is a safer call. In addition, I doubt you would find but maybe 1 in 5 CFI's who know what the "proper procedure" overhead entry is in the first place, much less find it in the PTS. Your comment about 500' to 1500' is the first time I have seen someone write it down. Can you share where this is specifically covered in the FAR/AIM? Does it really make sense to promote this?

Thanks for keeping it light, Kevbert.

flynengr wrote: Your comment about 500' to 1500' is the first time I have seen someone write it down. Can you share where this is specifically covered in the FAR/AIM? Does it really make sense to promote this?

Thanks for keeping it light, Kevbert.

I'm all for keeping it light...the discussion is for learning purposes and safety so gettin a bur under our saddle does no good for anyone. Im not promoting that everyone should go do this procedure...on the contratry, don't do it unless you have had some training with it and when the traffic pattern volume allows it to be done safely...what I am promoting is that pilots should be aware of it as you may very well come accross someone doing it...I agree with you as well that many CFI's dont know or have never seen the overhead approach which I feel should be a safety concern.

Just as is the case with formation flying with regards to the FAR/AIM...not much is mentioned about the overhead approach other then AIM 5-4-26 http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publicat ... -31-08.pdf (Scroll to page 13) The diagram on the previously referenced article illustrates the normally accepted altitudes for the approach.

Most of the information learned about the overhead approach is gained through the EAA Warbirs of America, Comemorative Air Force or other similar organization along with formation training either in the military or through a formal F.A.S.T. program on the civilian side.

Clear skies & tailwinds

It's my opinion that pattern entry procedures should cater to the lowest common denominator. When the airport is active with students, Sport Pilots, and low-time VFR-only pilots who haven't taken the time to get briefed on the EAA Warbird manual, I think it's bad time to change it up with an entry procedure that only 1 guy (or flight of 4) is expecting or is familiar with.

The reason the 45 entry to downwind is so heavily promoted by the FAA is to achieve a level of convention, something simple that everyone can rely on and expect some consistency from...not to mention it's safe as it provides a good viewing perspective of relevant traffic to your entry (crosswind, downwind.) Entry at TPA takes the altitude convergence risk out of the equation for the most part as well.

IMO, the overhead entry is just as bad a straight-in. It's outside the common convention, and puts the onus of avoiding traffic solely on the guy who's deviating from convention, putting others at a disadvantage.

And what's so important about the warbird flight of [insert number] arriving perfectly in sequence? If they're as well organized as a real squadron, why can't they time their pattern entries a couple miles from the airport, and pay some consideration to the student pilot who's still struggling to make position calls while managing traffic entering on the 45?

Exactly....

Love it or hate it...to each his own...just be aware of it so you will know what to expect when you see it.

This turned into a very interesting thread about a entry pattern I've never heard of before. And I just recieved my PPL last year. Never saw it in a flight manual and my instructors never gave it a mention. About the only reason I can think of a use for it by a flight of [x amount], is to practice for airshow's.

I'll have to agree with Zanes last post. But, It really doesn't matter to me what kind of pattern a flight of 2-6 planes wants to do as long as the lead pilot uses good judgement and calls out all of there correct possition reports and no body else in the pattern (eather on the 45, crosswind, downwind, etc.) is affected by these hotrod pilots buzzing into the pattern in an oncommon pattern that's not published for that airfield. I really don't think any of us non warbird pilots should have to know about or expect to know about this warbird entry pattern procedure. Sounds like a entry pattern that was developed for use at military fields or a private trianing field, not at public airfields with GA aircraft.

Like a said, it doesn't matter to me what kind of entry patterns other pilots want to do, as long as they report there proper possitions and intensions and no other aircraft is affected by there unconventional entry pattern. If I'm on the 45 and a flight 2-6 planes comes on the freq. and say they want to practice a warbird entry and they are 3-5 miles out, I might come back with a polite reply and say I'll expidite my landing or I may even say I'll do a couple 360's on the 45 to allow the flight of 2-6 to do there thing. Even if I'm on downwind, I might extend it for a these hotrod pilots if asked nicely.

Most all of us pilots are here for the same reason, to have as much fun as possible flying what ever you enjoy flying. Just don't expect other pilots all ready in a proper pattern to yield there right of way for a pilots coming in on an unconventional pattern.

I have to agree with 170.The average pilot out there seems to have a hard time with traffic patterns in general.Most would not know what you were talking about by announcing an overhead break.I would be very leery of doing this kind of entry with other traffic in the pattern.In my opinion it just adds risk and is not necessary.Don't get me wrong.I enjoy seeing it.It sure does look cool, but at the right time and place.

I happen to be based at a privately owned but public use airport.A few years back we had a Stearman flown by a very experienced pilot collide with a cessna 150 which was on short final.The Stearman was in a continuous left turn from downwind to final and went right on top of the 150 and put it in the trees.

You will only fly a non-standard pattern "rectangular"once because the airport owner will tell you not to come back.

I have to be careful even with the cub because my pattern is std but flown much tighter than most and I am always looking for traffic outside me.

Bill

I have been slow on reading all this thread. I too was uninformed on the overhead approach. Now when the pattern is empty, instead of doing straight in I can hardly wait to do the overhead. I want to come in at cruise speed a little low pitch up, bleed off speed and land.

Other confusion areas I have noticed, foreign student pilots ing go iesh.

IFR pilots shooting approaches and making calls like everybody understands IFR calls. IFR work needs to make calls that VFR students can understand, so they can be safe.

One of my pet peeves. I am shooting a IFR approach in VFR conditions under the hood with a safety pilot. We are making calls all the way down. 5,3, 2, 1 miles straight in runway what ever on instrument approach, low approach.

Right at the critical time to see how good I did some other pilot will cut me off. When all they would have to do is extend down wind of 5 or 10 seconds. gee-sh. No big deal I guess.

I know where your coming from, Rob. And I should have mentioned that I have yielded to faster aircraft and aircraft on a GPS/striaght in approach to Caldwell if they are calling out there intensions. No big deal for me or anyone else (you would think) to extend the downwind for a turbo prop/jet, or someone on a long IFR/GPS final at a uncontrolled airport. But just as long as those pilots are being respectful of other pilots in the pattern.

During my training at Caldwell, I remember a plane on a GPS approach to Caldwell saying he was 10 out on a GPS approach for 30. I heard him but not sure if anyone else did (there was about 2-3 of us in the pattern). Then he called 5 miles out, GPS approach for 30, then 3, 2 and then another aircraft cut him off on right base. The aircraft turning from base to final appoligized saying he didn't hear or see him and continued to land while the pilot on his GPS approach was pissed and had a few choice words for the pilot that cut him off. I wanted to say something back to both of them, but was a newbie at the time and didn't want to start crap. Bottom line is, I knew there was a plane on a GPS approach, the guy was saying where he was and his intensions and I was planning/timing my possition in the pattern to accomidate his arrival. Just too bad there was another pilot in the pattern that didn't.

58Skylane wrote:...just as long as those pilots are being respectful of other pilots in the pattern.

That is the key to this entire thread...but remember that just because your flying the "standard" pattern does not mean the others are incorrect, illegal, or dangerous and you could just as easily cut off someone in those patterns (who may actually have the right of way)...respect should be mutual and judgement should dictate the appropriate action.

Knowledge of the other pattern procedures enhances safety...that's what I have been trying to promote with the overhead pattern discussion. Like I said; love it, or hate it, but don't be ignorant of it.

We could have this same discussion about rotorcraft traffic patterns...how many of us understand those traffic patterns or know what to expect? How about gliders? I would venture a guess that most instructors don't teach those either and many "standard pattern" pilots may be surprised when confronted with them. This is a safety discussion that we are planning at our next EAA meeting as we have routine warbird and helicopter traffic along with occasional glider and banner tow traffic at our airfield.

Clear skies & tailwinds.

Avid I get your frustration with the motormouths.There are a lot of non-tower airports around here and when everyone gets yakking you can't get a position report out when you really need to.

A week or two ago I was flying over to the Kitsap peninsula and was on 122.9 which is the freq. of the airport I was heading for as well as a number of others in the area.

Two bozos were yapping about landing, meeting up near one guy's pick up, and what they were planning to do once arriving.

The chit chat was getting a bit annoying when a very clear voice came on from McCord AFB tower " ...two aircraft approaching xxx you are in my airspace." This was followed by a quick oops and pure silence. I figure this was followed by a very quick search for the NASA forms. Of course the paperwork is far easier than getting your C172 untangled from a C17.

TD