|
Listers,
The overhead
approach isn't inherently unsafe. It's a tool; like all tools, it's only
unsafe when improperly used, or without taking proper precautions. In my
mind, the major concern when considering the use of an overhead is this:
MOST "non-military" pilots (not controllers) have no idea what it
is.
To me, the
unexpected is dangerous in many situations--around other people, other cars on
the highway and most certainly around other aircraft. If an individual
(non-military type) approaching a non-towered airport is flying an aircraft not
equipped with a radio he/she will "know" just where to look for other traffic so
they can fit in--unless the other traffic is doing something unexpected.
Pilots in other radio-equipped aircraft (that aren't equipped with an
ex-military pilot) will be very confused by the terminology and procedures of
the overhead; consider the recent story posted here about the CFI that chastised
one Lister for executing an overhead.
I've long since
given up on my 20-15 vision as my only savior in the pattern. Too many
times have I completely missed seeing other aircraft--even aircraft reporting
their position on the radio. Instead, in addition to my eyes, I rely on
other pilots utilizing a good traffic scan, the radio to advise
similarly-equipped aircraft and following a known and accepted procedure
designed to help me fit in to the expected traffic flow as much as
possible. Eliminating any of these elements increases the likelihood of an
uplanned encounter of the worst kind.
I've done overhead
approaches at my own (3K6) airport and I can tell you they are FUN! It IS
a great way to get the aircraft slowed and on the ground as quickly as possible
(and as a bonus you can avoid any manpad-equipped enemy in the area,
wink-wink, nudge-nudge). On the other hand, I live at this particular
airport and I'm intimately familiar with traffic flows in the area. Even
still, I've never attempted an overhead without an advisory from Unicom and a
circuit around the pattern to look for other traffic. The chance of
descending into another aircraft is very real with a low-wing aircraft --
especially when you're overtaking.
Perhaps those who
wish to regularly fly overhead approaches should contact AOPA and see if they
are willing to develop an on-line training program to educate pilots about
overhead approaches (maybe as part of a larger refresher lesson on non-towered
airport operations). You might attend your local airport safety meeting
and brief pilots on overhead pattern operations--be sure to discuss
advantages and disadvantages. Talk about overheads with others when you're
hanging around the FBO. AOPA's Air Safety Foundation offers kits for
anyone wishing to conduct a safety seminar. Schedule a seminar in your
area and be sure to discuss overheads.
Incidently, my
Legacy FG isn't airborne yet, I'm still using my Grumman Traveler to terrorize
the skies. I'm sure it's much easier to "fit in" to the pattern with the
Traveler that it will be with the Legacy. But when the time comes, I'll
accept that my aircraft has very different operating parameters from most others
in the pattern, and take responsibility to avoid interfering with the "normal"
flow.
I don't think the
overhead approach is inherently unsafe, but like everything else, there are
tradeoffs. Conduct your operations with a risk vs reward attitude, and
always know "why" you're doing what you're doing.
Fly
safely,
-----Original Message-----
From:
Barry Hancock [mailto:sportform@cox.net]
Sent: Friday, January 27,
2006 23:09
Subject: Runway checks, passes,
flybys
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....
|