Recently, Steven P. McNicoll posted:

"Neil Gould" wrote in message
t...

You do when you imply that there is a necessary agreement between
what the altimeter senses and what it displays.


What implied that?

On 4/2/07, you wrote:
"An altimeter indicates altitude at the level of the instrument itself. "

and, again:
"In other words, an altimeter indicates altitude at the level of the
instrument itself. "

And so forth. That is not necessarily so.

You actually said, "When you tell a pilot "altimeter 3012" the pilot
simply adjusts the *Kollsman setting* to 3012." (emphasis mine).
As we described the same action, this distinction is without a
functional difference.


I think there's a significant functional difference between adjusting
the altimeter setting and adjusting the indicated altitude.

Well, I wrote:
"Consider that when you tell a pilot that the "altimeter is 30.12", the
pilot adjusts the indicated altitude by setting the Kollsman window to
that pressure setting."

The "adjustment" in both cases is to the Kollsman setting. The result is a
change in the displayed altitude. So, what is different is the structure
of the sentence, not the action or intent, unless you think your omission
of the resulting displayed altitude is significant. If so, why do you
think so?

Neil