Just where in the FAR/AIM is the "Overhead approach" defined? And where and
in what civil rating is it taught? I know it did not appear in the PTS for
the private rating in 2000.

The Overhead is not in any civilian ratings...but is recognized by every controller I've ever requested it from in the entire country. It may not be "standard" but it is a recognized maneuver.

To insinuate that the overhead is somehow unsafe is unfair. It can be implemented in an unsafe manner at an uncontrolled airport...but that's an oxymoron in and of itself. I would argue that a "standard" pattern (i.e. the way that most civilians are taught and fly it....waaay to wide and waaay to big) is unsafe in the respect that it does not allow them to reach the runway in the event of a power loss....

I sure like the idea that if I'm on a mile initial that the engine can quit at any point thereafter and I'll have the ability to put it down on the tarmac....

I'm not trying to instigate debate...just pointing out that to characterize the "overhead" as somehow unrecognized, unsafe, or reckless is not between the foul poles....

Barry (this poor horse isn't even good for glue anymore) Hancock