X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com
Return-Path: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 02:05:48 -0500
Message-ID: <redirect-998514@logan.com>
X-Original-Return-Path: <JJHALLE@stoel.com>
Received: from gateway1.stoel.com ([198.36.178.141] verified)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.8)
  with ESMTP id 997782 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 25 Feb 2006 10:06:02 -0500
Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=198.36.178.141; envelope-from=JJHALLE@stoel.com
Received: from PDX-SMTP.stoel.com (unknown [172.16.103.137])
	by gateway1.stoel.com (Firewall Mailer Daemon) with ESMTP id 525F1EB34D
	for <lml@lancaironline.net>; Sat, 25 Feb 2006 07:04:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from PDX-MX6.stoel.com ([172.16.103.64]) by PDX-SMTP.stoel.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713);
	 Sat, 25 Feb 2006 07:05:17 -0800
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Overhead approach questions
X-Original-Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 07:05:16 -0800
X-Original-Message-ID: <17E9FE5945A57A41B4D8C07737DB6072038913BD@PDX-MX6.stoel.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: lml Digest #1523
Thread-Index: AcY5+raNDXSCDNy+QBW7HfJbF2EMJQAIOLcQ
From: "Halle, John" <JJHALLE@stoel.com>
X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" <lml@lancaironline.net>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Feb 2006 15:05:17.0162 (UTC) FILETIME=[E32EACA0:01C63A1C]


<<Any suggestions on how I should first announce my intentions when
  approaching the airport.  Since "overhead approach" will not likely =
convey
  much understanding?>>

You are quite right that most civilian pilots do not understand what an =
overhead break is.  For that reason, at an uncontrolled airport, my =
personal assumption is that the break cannot be done if it is going to =
be even close to a traffic problem.  If the pattern seems crowded, I =
don't try it and if a problem seems to be developing on initial, I break =
it off.  I don't assume that any other pilot will react appropriately to =
what I am doing and assume that all spacing issues are my responsibility =
alone.  If there is another aircraft in the pattern and I am sure that I =
can come in without conflict, I do sometimes announce whether I intend =
to enter the pattern in front of or behind the other aircraft.  If it is =
in front, I will be at least 1/2 mile in front.  If behind, it will be =
well behind.  In either case, I am saying that the other pilot doesn't =
have to worry about me.  I don't think it helps much to talk about my =
airspeed or path because this assumes that I am asking other pilots to =
note these facts and do something about them, which I think is too much =
to expect.  The good news is that a break entry is a perfect way to see =
where all the traffic is before being committed to the break because it =
is all right in front of you and you can be pretty sure that, unless =
someone else is coming in for a break at the same time, there won't be =
traffic on initial.