Overhead Break: Are We (Once Again) Doing it Wrong?

[graveyard4DCS]

Overhead Break: Are We (Once Again) Doing it Wrong?

After watching the recent MiG-29 landing tutorials, and remembering the debates that followed the earlier F-16 overhead break video, I thought it’s worth revisiting the overhead break (OHB) from a different perspective. The point is not just HOW to fly it, but WHY it was designed that way in the first place. Without that context, it’s easy to miss the purpose of the maneuver and fall into the same recurring mistakes we see in most DCS tutorials.

TAC ATTACK - 1977: the "break" arrival has been designed to avoid the kills in the traffic pattern...

As with the previous posts Runway Attacks in DCS World: Is (Almost) Everyone Doing It Wrong ??? and Flying Formations in DCS: Are We (Also) Doing It Wrong?, this is not about calling out individuals. We'll just treat visible mistakes as a learning opportunity, that's the basis of any serious debrief. What matters is understanding the tactical logic behind the OHB, and how to translate that into the sim with the right mindset.

Below is a short list of the common errors that keep recurring in tutorial videos:

• Approaching slow, instead of keeping combat speed until the break
• Flying directly over the runway centerline instead of offsetting to the cold side
• Gentle 3G (and even less than 2G sometimes...) breaks that don’t place you properly abeam
• Eyes glued to the HUD instead of scanning outside
• Using the “45° cue” regardless of spacing, leading to huge base legs
• Flat final turns instead of rolling aggressively nose-low
• Touching down one-third into the runway like a civilian airliner instead of maximizing runway length
• Dropping the nose immediately on touchdown instead of using aerodynamic braking (unless chute-equipped, or not recommended for the aircraft type)

Tutorial vs Reality... But the important is WHY such a difference?

Missing the reasons for these errors defeats the whole point of the OHB: recover fast, safely, and tactically.

I’ve tried to unpacked all of these points in a single article: combat origins, common mistakes, and practical guidance for executing the OHB properly in DCS. If you want to fly it like a real pylot, give it a read!

Combat origins of the "Tactical" or "Battle" Break

 

Edited October 7 by graveyard4DCS

[AndyJWest]

Excellent stuff: the only proviso I'd make is that 'aiming at, or short of the threshold' will only apply if you intend to flare. If you're in an F-14 or F/A-18, and intend to land hard, carrier-style, your velocity vector wants to be on your intended landing spot so you stay on AoA, and on the intended glide path, until impact.

[graveyard4DCS]

9 minutes ago, AndyJWest said:

If you're in an F-14 or F/A-18, and intend to land hard, carrier-style, your velocity vector wants to be on your intended landing spot so you stay on AoA, and on the intended glide path, until impact.

True, this same technique applies to "short landings", and is similar to the night landing technique when assessing height is difficult.

For most aircraft, the main landing gear can sustain the Vz of a standard 3° slope impact without flare (at normal weight).

[Cali]

I learned the OHB from a few real pilots, plus did an OHB in a F-16 at Nellis. Here is part of the video of it. 

 

[Pickle]

Did you delete your post on a certain sub because people didn't agree with you?  Seems weird to me.

[graveyard4DCS]

Yes. I made the mistake to think that people are willing to read, think by themselves and argue later. But I was mistaken. They tend to come with arguments of authority only. I will keep it in mind...

Edited October 12 by graveyard4DCS

[=475FG= Dawger]

Excellent thread. 
 

Real F-15 pilots had to be limited to 4 G’s while pretend fighter pilots are treating the overhead as an instrument maneuver. 
 

You can’t die so every overhead should be as fast as possible at the break, as low as possible at the break and looking through a black tunnel in the break. 
 

People mistakenly believe the training examples they see are regulatory in nature, not to be deviated from. 
 

They are just a baseline example to get a neophyte in the ballpark.