A great deal of this is about education, communication, and proper execution....and each of those topics applies to both those doing the overheads, and those in the standard pattern. As an FFI and FAST formation pilot, my efforts have been directed towards outreach (externally), and standardization (internally). In the end, the goal is to fly safely, and mix well with our fellow pilots.
Take for instance the FAST program that the Reno Sport and Jet Classes run just prior to Pylon Racing Seminar each June. During PRS, an FAA waiver is in effect, and the field is closed. However, for the 4 days prior, during our FAST work, there is no waiver, local traffic is abundant, and picture well over thirty daily 4-ships of race aircraft (RVs to Legacies to L-39s) coming and going all day.
We've had issues from a lead accidentally breaking towards an aircraft on downwind, to a local intentionally taking the runway as a 4-ship was on base to final to prove a point. We've seen the spectrum of "aw 'shucks'" that can happen, and we've seen the debate rage from both sides on how to work this through. This year I spent time at the Stead Airport User's Group meetings, presenting our formation procedures and communications, and we actually put the presentation on the user's group website for dissemination to area pilots. We're trying!
Similar situations sometimes occur at formation clinics, or at airports that have a lot of formation activity.
The formation crowd will tell ya that breaking up all of those flights, to enter on the 45 and try to blend with local traffic or other formation flights in the pattern, would be extremely chaotic, and would probably end up producing conflicts entering downwind, and very long downwind legs. Not good at all.
The non-formation, non-overhead guys will say they don't understand what our position reports mean, and don't know what to expect from our flight paths, and given the variety of calls I've heard and procedures I've seen used...at time...its hard to blame them.
Solution? Collaborate to graduate (standard USN/USAF term, to lead into a discussion of terms).
My request, as a formation guy, would be to humbly request my brothers and sisters in the standard pattern to learn a few very basic terms...just a few. Its actually really straight-forward, but it is a different set of terms...but not unlike the new set of terms you learned when you learned to fly. These are just a few added terms to your aviation language vocabulary. To that I would add only a request to develop a basic understanding of the procedure...just the basics.
In return, I would pledge...and ask my formation brothers and sisters to do the same...to know and use the standard terms, use them clearly and correctly on the radio, and fly the procedure in a safe and standard way. No showboating unless you're, well, in a show (legally)!
So if a lead says his flight is on a 3-mile straight-in initial for the overhead break 26, everyone knows where he is, and what his intentions are. When he says his flight is over the 26 numbers for the overhead, everyone is still in the know. When he says the flight is midfield or upwind numbers in the break, everyone knows where to look. After that, its downwind, abeam, base and final, just like everyone is used to.
The lead has the responsibility to clear the break turn and downwind for pattern traffic, and if he doesn't, he is wrong. If the pattern is full and the flight can't be integrated safely, the lead has the responsibility to fly through and depart the pattern. Navy guys call it "spinning it", but we won't use that term locally, and if the lead said he was departing the pattern to re-enter the overhead, everyone would (should) know what that meant, and would be listening for the next initial call. It takes time and burns fuel, but the safe and courteous formation pilot will do it. A flight pushing its way into a crowded pattern is wrong and dangerous, and local traffic certainly has the right to be angry about it. Formation guys can do better than that, and well-trained ones do.
The above is of course a scenario for a non-towered field. Typical overhead altitude is pattern altitude or 500' above PA. At a towered field, the tower will direct, and the formation leads and pilots have the responsibility to follow directions. The scenario Echo Tango described earlier in the thread, where the lead or pilot disregards instructions, and comes zorching into a low-pass, pitch up break without clearance or regard for other aircraft is obviously dangerous, and I find it hard to believe they came away with no paper in their file, or worse. I respect and follow tower instructions when bringing a flight into the break, as do all the well-trained formation pilots I know.
So it circles back to education, communication, and proper execution. Standardization comes into play as well. Overheads really aren't the devil's spawn. Well flown, they work great for recovering formation flights, as has been said here before. Poorly flown, with abstract communication, they are distracting, confusing and potentially dangerous...but no differently than, and no more so than, a poorly flown and communicated standard pattern entry that is anything
but standard.
Not sure if we'll ever solve this debate, but my pitch is to learn the basics of both sides, and do our part to respect, communicate and integrate well with those on both sides of the fence on this. Fly like pros, and watch for those still learning. If your a formation guy, be a good ambassador!
Off the soapbox now!
Hey, and for what its worth, during FAST, PRS and Race Week, the RV flights have been lauded as doing the best overheads and race starts of all the aircraft there.
Cheers,
Bob