Specifically, what is your question about how Va would affect the break?



Sound policy.



In your hypothetical scenario, your interval (the plane you’re going to follow in the pattern) is the aircraft in the climbing crosswind. You would break to arrive on downwind with sufficient interval behind that aircraft.



This is like saying an instrument pilot shouldn’t report the FAF at an uncontrolled field because an inexperienced VFR pilot may have no idea what he is talking about and the aircraft bursts into flames from the resulting helmet fire.

Certainly, no one is going to learn about this procedure if the Karens who have never flown it get to control the conversation.

No such thing

If he was arrested and refused or blew with booze on his breath he’s guilty

That’s how the FAA views it for us

Flying the OA and using it as a tool for pattern entry, is way easier than trying to explain it.

All of the interval accommodation methods you would normally use can be used with the OA. It just gives you another (most times better) option with traffic.

You wont know unless you try it, practice it and add it to the tool kit.

What I'm wondering about is when performing this in a GA airplane (Bonanza, Baron, 210) arriving at high speed near VNE and then rolling into a 45-60 degree level turn (I'm assuming rolling crisply to look clean) then bleeding off speed in the turn would mean pulling G.
G load put on the airframe but at a speed above VA or in the yellow arc? It's not always smooth air down low in the pattern. No G meter to look after to see what you pulled.

Light end of flight VA speed may be less.

Earlier 310 example was given performing the break with 15 deg flaps. But if I remember right 310 is limited to +2 G with flaps down.

It's not I am trying to be a Karen. Just wondering how it is handled because this is a structural limitation of the airframe.

Yes the example of IFR approach radio call at uncontrolled field is exactly the same problem. A solo student has no idea about procedure turn inbound or where fixes are called out by others when they are flying practice approaches in good VFR conditions. It's not part of any training even up to the Private level that I know of. If performing the Break to cut into the downwind between two airplanes established they won't have an idea what you're doing. When I am arriving at non towered airport I'll announce I'm on the approach inbound and how many miles out. Maybe add over XX fix but I add how many miles out and straight in for XX runway.

An example would be the pattern in JNX by Raleigh. Very busy flight school but I stop there for cheap CAA fuel with the Kingair a lot. No tower. It's usually a Beehive in the pattern with Diamond trainers and I just slow up to arrive a bit outside the pattern. I can see where everyone is and make some calls as I work in to where I can turn from downwind to base and fit in. It's easy to use plain language they all understand and no issues. I'm usually constant power and just adding gear and flaps as needed for drag like normal. It's not a single engine fighter.

It is a topic I never see discussed when choosing this type of arrival.

I have a G-meter in my Bo. Even if you don't, a level 60deg AOB turn is a 2G turn, and, if you pull more, you will climb.




One does not use the the break to cut in between aircraft. You follow your interval just as you would in any other pattern scenario.



And that's a shame because it really is the safest and most efficient method to get airplanes into the pattern and on deck while maintaining altitude deconfliction during entry and maximizing the opportunity to identify your interval.

Here are the V-speeds for the 310. All the banks are done inside the fence where the speeds are 140 kts and below.

Va 210 mph 182 kts
Vfe (15) 160 mph, 139 kts
Vfe (full) 140 mph, 122 kts
Vle 140 mph, 122 kts

Nothing about a 310 maneuver could be construed as "Crisp". You are carrying up to 300lbs on each wingtip.

They are slick, but relatively heavy on the controls compared to a Baron or a Bo. The 210 is similar to the 310 in this regard.

The 310 is very robust however. In 2020, I had a bad wake turbulence encounter. No Ill effects other than a shaken passenger and pilot.

The OA in a GA is not nearly as impressive as its seems in one's imagination. Its slow, deliberate and easy to perform.

I wouldn't do one in traffic, if I hadn't practiced it a few times and communicated well with others in the pattern. Its not like you're swaggering into traffic; you merge like any other entering traffic. Its fairly common at airports with parallel runways and lots of student traffic. (Prescott Embry Riddle for example)

What are the V-speeds of a Baron 55?

Glad you're aware. Seems like I've ridden with a few people lately for biannuals that had no clue about VA or even to slow down a bit in the bumps instead of up in the yellow arc. Descriptions were sounding like just below VNE pulling to idle and pulling hard turn to bleed speed around the turn to be on downwind. Jet fighter ok but V tail Bo?

I guess I'm doing about the same maneuver as the slow gentle break described but instead I am positioning myself on upwind leg instead of over the airport. Or just entering downwind like normal.
I still curve around to downwind and add drag with near constant power to the threshold. Just beginning the turn in a different spot. Not much of a base or crosswind just short wings level to look for traffic. Conventional pattern leg radio calls if needed.

Often with Cessna twins I am already gear down and go to full flaps abeam the touchdown spot. I guess this is the "Perch" position?? Constant descent, constant power to short final but not constant airspeed until fully configured for landing. Target torque or MP. Blueline or above until very short final Kingair I use full flaps when on base at home usually.

Home airport 76N is in a valley with mountains 4 sides. Long finals are not possible

But terms to be aware of I'll pass along to students in case it comes up. High performance Warbirds are very rare around here at non towered airports or when no airshow is going on.

Va and the yellow arc are unrelated. Va describes how YOU can break your airplane in a clean configuration in a single axis with abrupt full control deflection in smooth air. Once the air is turbulent, more than one axis is being controlled (asymmetric G) or the aircraft's configuration changes, that number is meaningless. Leaving aside the laziness of POH writers in failing to identify a Vb and instead using Va as a lazy maybe-right-maybe-not substitute, Va says absolutely nothing about how Mother Nature (in the bumps, in this case) can break your airplane.



Gosh, with that description, I'm surprised you didn't mention shock cooling, too. Vne is Vne for a reason (usually flutter). A conforming, well-maintained aircraft may be flown by a competent pilot up to Vne, and the pilot may expect the aircraft to perform safely. A V-tail Bo is a Utility category aircraft with an upper symmetrical G-limit of 4.4 Gs in the clean configuration. A normal break in a V-tail Bo will not exceed 2 Gs and the application of G will be symmetrical. Your point about not dropping the gear or moving the flaps during G-loading is prudent and correct. If, however, you are not confident your Bo can safely encounter a smooth, decelerating 2G pull, it's time for some instruction or maintenance or both.

As for "the bumps," the bottom of the yellow arc will provide airframe "protection" for vertical gusts of 30 fps (or about 18 knots). The top of the yellow arc will provide airframe "protection" for vertical gusts of at least 15 fps (or about 9 knots). Both vertical gusts are squarely in the realm of "moderate turbulence," and this is typically only found near the jet stream, in mountain wave turbulence and in and around thunderstorms. A general rule of thumb is this: if YOU are physically uncomfortable, slow down. YOU will usually become uncomfortable before the (properly maintained) plane does.



As I explained earlier, for a piston GA plane, the overhead break is a glorified upwind entry. The upwind leg of the overhead is also not usually flown directly over the runway. It is offset to the opposite side of the pattern (offset to the right for a left pattern) so that the pilot can see anyone on the runway and/or lifting while looking for their interval on crosswind/downwind.



I think it's valuable to open the AIM, show the students the overhead break, and then go fly it so that they can see what it is and how it is flown. If you're ever down in the Florida Keys, I'd be happy to show the right way and that it is not even remotely the extreme maneuver or a maneuver reserved only for warbirds and fighters many OWTs paint it.

My preferred way to fly the break:

Pushing 250kts, as Dash Two I’m stacked high and a handful of feet back and above lead on about the 30 degree bearing line. We fly over the runway about 15’ above the deck, lead gives me the kiss off signal and pulls up. I wait 3 seconds and pull up, pop the speed brake, stop the pull (we want to limit rolling Gs) and smoothly pull into a roughly 60 degree bank while keeping an eye on lead. By the 180 degree mark I should be below 140 kts (our gear speed) so I’ll drop full flaps and gear at the point where lead did, then a standard base to final with a landing on the opposite side of the runway my lead landed on.

Flaps up, cowl flaps open, canopy open, big grin on my face.

Robert

This notion of blasting into the upwind at Vne has got me slapping my forehead.

Do any of you normally cruise at Vne? It's a serious question... if you do, then great, that's your business, but if you don't, then you probably wouldn't start a break at that speed either.

The purpose of the break is to cross the field at cruise speed and then expeditiously get to the downwind leg and be slowed to a normal downwind speed and configured for landing, by the time you're abeam the approach end of the runway. That's it. Everything else is extra or even unnecessary.

Anything more than that is either details to help accomplish the overall purpose or else details to look good. The latter has its time and place, but let's not confuse the discussion by mixing utility with appearance and conflating "looking good" as some kind of mandatory steps of a procedure.


As Matt just put it, a well flown overhead break is actually pretty boring in a GA airplane. There aren't any vapor trails coming off the wings or a Bo or a 310.

My flight instructor with a lot of military experience taught me the overhead break in my previous Baron, a B55. There was no ground briefing he just decided to throw it in for fun after bouncing me around in the heat for an IPC.

He instructed me to keep my speed up at pattern altitude on final all the way to the numbers. I'm thinking to myself, "huh?" Then instructed a descending right turn 45 degree angle of bank. I was shocked at how well it worked. Airspeed came down nicely in the turn while descending and an easy landing.

It's my favorite approach now and I request it when the pattern is not busy. I don't see any way the FAA could object to it. It's way easier than it sounds.

I did not buy a fast plane to go slow.

I am usually within about 10 knots of Vne for an overhead (unless the bumps make me uncomfortable) and at full throttle because it is not only important to look good, one must also SOUND good.

I'm at gear speed when I roll out on downwind, even from Vne. Drop the gear, trim, drop the flaps as I am passing the numbers, trim again, and then start my approach turn with the landing checklist complete.

Perhaps it would help to use the term the AIM, AC 90-66, and other references use: overhead approach (in the AC) or overhead approach maneuver (in AIM 5−4−27).

The path you follow, along an extended final from the initial point to the place where you make a continuous 180-degree turn to the downwind, is the important detail.

You can fly an overhead approach without making an aggressive, abrupt bank, and you don't have to scream along to the threshold at high cruise speed. All the advantages discussed in this thread still obtain, especially if you fly certain types of aircraft or are leading a formation.

Military pilots have their reasons and procedures for flying an aggressive "break," but that doesn't mean we have to try to emulate them in our aircraft, especially when we're trying to fit into the flow with a mix of traffic.

It is a fairly benign maneuver and more comfortable from an energy management perspective. No need for that long final in a high drag config. With a Baron, you can even perch at idle on both motors and be completely fine.

Aaaaaand... cue the stabilized approach critiques of the overhead.