Talk:Overshoot (aviation)

Definition in aviation
I think this needs some amplification. The present article describes an overshoot as an aborted landing, but then refers to the runway safety area article where there is reference to the overshoot area, which is where the aircraft may end up if the pilot fails to abort a landing when they should have done so.

I've done a quick check of usage in some UK Air Accident Investigation Branch reports. There the term is used in three situations. One is where the pilot deliberately or otherwise misses the touchdown point and initiates a go around/missed approach, secondly where the aircraft fails to stabilise at a planned course or altitude (eg because of automatic pilot failure), lastly to refer to the runoff area of a runway/landing strip. I'm not a pilot but I think the article needs improvement (granted Wikipedia isn't a dictionary, but the article is attempting to explain a technical term). Remarkable where browsing takes you! AJHingston (talk) 21:17, 9 January 2011 (UTC)


 * An overshoot is to miss the runway. Whether by coming in too fast or too high, the plane is not able to make a safe landing on the runway, and either crashes or, if the pilot has enough speed or altitude to push the throttle and get back in the air, has to go around for another try.


 * On an aircraft carrier, this would mean that the plane's tailhook has missed all three of the arresting cables which stop the plane from rolling off the end of the deck. When this happens they call the plane a "bolter," (at least, that's the term here in the U.S.). Naval pilots must go full throttle upon touchdown, so if they miss the arresting wires they'll be able to get back up in the air for another try.


 * The opposite of an overshoot would be an undershoot, which means to miss the runway by coming in too low and slow. Zaereth (talk) 17:41, 10 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry, should have made myself clearer. In official UK usage an overshoot (or undershoot) can evidently take place at any altitude and in many different circumstances. For example, if an aircraft is instructed or commanded to descend to a given altitude and level off, but descends below that altitude, that would be described as an overshoot. An overshoot is also a term used when an aircraft turns to a course beyond the bearing which is intended. And in the case of the landing phase, if an aircraft lands long or is unable to stop for some other reason before the end of the runway that would be described as an overshoot. So an overshoot is essentially an event, whilst an aborted landing is one of a number of possible decisions or outcomes which may result from an overshoot, depending on the circumstances. It isn't that an overshoot is an aborted landing or should always result in one. AJHingston (talk) 18:38, 12 January 2011 (UTC)


 * That's true here in the U.S. as well. While I was speaking strictly in terms of landing, even then the term has a very broad meaning. An overshoot could mean hitting the runway before reaching the stall speed, and bouncing back up in the air. In its broadest sense, overshoot means "to fly past, or go beyond." The Oxford Dictionary of the U.S. Military defines overshoot as "n. a phase of flight wherein a landing approach of an aircraft is not continued to touchdown." I hope that helps. Zaereth (talk) 18:54, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * By the way, I fully agree that the article could use some expanding. I'm lucky if I can scrounge up 15 minutes a day to spend in front of a computer, so I tend to add info in short bursts. If no one beats me to it, I'll probably get back to this article sometime in the future. Zaereth (talk) 19:11, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, here we go. At this website here, under McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Aviation, it describes the various definitions. Zaereth (talk) 20:08, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Merge with Basic fighter maneuvers
This article was originally part of a much larger article, which covered every definition of overshoot. That has since been turned into a DAB page, leaving this one to discuss only the term as used in fighter combat. As it is, i don't think it will every really stand on its own as an independant article, but probably should be moved to the basic fighter maneuvers article, where it is most relevant. (Under the "concepts" section would be my choice.) Does anyone agree or disagree with this idea? Zaereth (talk) 19:55, 19 July 2013 (UTC)