BeechTalk - BT - Is the overhead break an illegal maneuver?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 06 Dec 2023, 14:00

Username Protected wrote:

He did fit in.....but those of us in cargo shorts and crocs are doing a 360 3-4 miles out and a straight in. :peace:

And here I thought folks insisting on straight ins to a busy pattern were the problem. Oh well

Username Protected · **Posted:** 06 Dec 2023, 23:54

Can’t we all just get along?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 06 Dec 2023, 23:59

Some people ride mopeds....some Harley’s. Then there are crotch rockets too.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Dec 2023, 01:02

Username Protected wrote:

For those looking for "friendly" (maybe?) places to safely execute these maneuvers, I think I see at least one of them every time I go to Gillespie Field (KSEE).

We brought a 4 ship into KSEE a few years ago the the tower literally cancelled an approach clearance for a trainer on the LOC-D and sent them back to the IAF due to “a four ship needing the overhead”.
Epic.
Tower folks came to the BBQ that night. :cheers:

Tj

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Dec 2023, 23:32

Username Protected wrote:

For those looking for "friendly" (maybe?) places to safely execute these maneuvers, I think I see at least one of them every time I go to Gillespie Field (KSEE).

We brought a 4 ship into KSEE a few years ago the the tower literally cancelled an approach clearance for a trainer on the LOC-D and sent them back to the IAF due to “a four ship needing the overhead”.
Epic.
Tower folks came to the BBQ that night. :cheers:

Tj

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Dec 2023, 14:07

Username Protected wrote:

..Back in the late 90s the controllers at Brown Field would occasionally let us land our parachutes on the airport and I remember zipping past the tower and they were hooting and hollering just as much as we were. I love that pilot/controller relationship, hope it doesn’t go away like so many other things have.

Agree! A few years ago, the POTOMAC controllers weren’t getting paid timely due to some higher-level dispute. I arranged for a nice catered lunch at Potomac TRACON, thanked them, and went back home. Thinking no more about the matter, a week later, I filed some complex flight plan to somewhere, taxied out at KSHD and called for my clearance.

“Good morning, Fred. Cleared direct”. I still get the giggles thinking about that clearance.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Dec 2023, 14:39

Yup.... I know a guy who bribes our tower dudes with donuts. I have no idea if it works....just say'n. :peace:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Dec 2023, 18:10

Username Protected wrote:

I filed some complex flight plan to somewhere, taxied out at KSHD and called for my clearance.

“Good morning, Fred. Cleared direct”. I still get the giggles thinking about that clearance.

Ha! Awesome, yes. :thumbup:

Buzz Fink, the owner of our skydiving operation had an open invitation to the controllers for a tandem jump and a couple of them took him up on the offer. They were always invited to our parties too.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Dec 2023, 11:01

Username Protected wrote:

Thankfully, they still show up on the Mk1 Mod 0 eyeball.

My vision (corrected) is excellent.

Yet every flight it seems that there is an aircraft or two that shows up on ADSB that I cannot find…. That my wife cannot find…. That my adult daughter cannot find…… And we know where it is and the direction it’s going.

I’m a big believer in looking out the windows, but eyes can miss things…

The overhead break seems like a maneuver that has far less possibility of traffic conflict at a tower controlled airport.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Dec 2023, 11:26

Username Protected wrote:

The overhead break seems like a maneuver that has far less possibility of traffic conflict at a tower controlled airport.

No, not even close. It ties up airspace and takes more time overall to land the aircraft. The only exception to that would be if the aircraft are approaching the airport area and are already essentially on final.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Dec 2023, 11:30

Username Protected wrote:

The overhead break seems like a maneuver that has far less possibility of traffic conflict at a tower controlled airport.

No, not even close. It ties up airspace and takes more time overall to land the aircraft. The only exception to that would be if the aircraft are approaching the airport area and are already essentially on final.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Dec 2023, 18:07

Username Protected wrote:

The overhead break seems like a maneuver that has far less possibility of traffic conflict at a tower controlled airport.

No, not even close. It ties up airspace and takes more time overall to land the aircraft. The only exception to that would be if the aircraft are approaching the airport area and are already essentially on final.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Dec 2023, 18:10

How are you doin all that with two or three students flying rectangles in the pattern? :scratch:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Dec 2023, 18:15

Username Protected wrote:

How are you doin all that with two or three students flying rectangles in the pattern? :scratch:

The same way everyone else is. Courtesy, and happy to yield to those less maneuverable.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Dec 2023, 18:38

Username Protected wrote:

not my experience. it is fewer nm of distance traveled, and can be flown at a higher speed, closer to the runway, therefore is much quicker than a standard rectangle.

He was talking about a towered field. I have seen and dealt with many overheads. The military guys are fine. They are fast and well versed in how to do it. GA guys? Forget it. Almost always a CF. I worked at Grand Forks, ND for 4 years. Almost always had 4-6 in each pattern in the day time. An overhead simply blows it up and makes the whole thing inefficient.