|
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
June 22nd 04, 04:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net... "Tony Cox" wrote in message link.net... And isn't airspace above FL600 in the US class E? Yes. Why the need for a change at that altitude? Well, above some level there's just no need for it to be Class A anymore. The level decided upon was FL 600. Yes, but surely an IFR flight plan would be just as valid when ascending through FL600 as when descending below FL180. Assuming the mode C is properly calibrated, that is. 
|
|
#2
June 22nd 04, 04:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Tony Cox" wrote in message ink.net... Yes, but surely an IFR flight plan would be just as valid when ascending through FL600 as when descending below FL180. Absolutely, in each case you're leaving Class A airspace and entering Class E airspace. Assuming the mode C is properly calibrated, that is. The IFR flight plan is just as valid with an improperly calibrated encoder. I worked a flight above FL600 just once. About fifteen years ago I was a controller at Chicago Center working traffic in the Madison, WI, area. A NASA ER-1 departed MSN requesting an unrestricted climb to FL610. I coordinated with the high altitude sector and issued the climb. He went up like a rocket! The Mode C readout couldn't keep up with him. Shortly after he reported out of FL600 and cancelled IFR, the Mode C read FL600. I asked a Data Systems Specialist about it and he told me that FL600 and higher will read out as FL600.
|
|
#3
June 22nd 04, 05:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message ink.net... I worked a flight above FL600 just once. About fifteen years ago I was a controller at Chicago Center working traffic in the Madison, WI, area. A NASA ER-1 departed MSN requesting an unrestricted climb to FL610. What's an ER-1? I coordinated with the high altitude sector and issued the climb. He went up like a rocket! The Mode C readout couldn't keep up with him. Shortly after he reported out of FL600 and cancelled IFR, the Mode C read FL600. I asked a Data Systems Specialist about it and he told me that FL600 and higher will read out as FL600. Cool!!!
|
|
#4
June 22nd 04, 05:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message ... What's an ER-1? At the time, it was a derivitive of the Lockheed TR-1, which has since been redesignated U-2R.
|
|
#5
June 22nd 04, 05:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Tony Cox" wrote in message
ink.net... Assuming the mode C is properly calibrated, that is. How do you measure altitude at 328k feet? Surely a standard barometric device isn't going to work? Paul
|
|
#6
June 22nd 04, 05:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Paul Sengupta" wrote in message
... "Tony Cox" wrote in message ink.net... Assuming the mode C is properly calibrated, that is. How do you measure altitude at 328k feet? Surely a standard barometric device isn't going to work? Paul Below about 50 milliBar, people use a Pirani Gauge, which is essentially a broken light bulb -- the wire gets hotter & changes electrical resistance as there is less air to cool the wire. 50mBar is around 75K ft. Lower than about 10-2 milliBar, Ion gauges are the way to go. They are like broken vacuum tubes.
|
|
#7
June 22nd 04, 06:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Tony Cox" wrote in message ink.net... "Paul Sengupta" wrote in message How do you measure altitude at 328k feet? Surely a standard barometric device isn't going to work? Paul Below about 50 milliBar, people use a Pirani Gauge, which is essentially a broken light bulb -- the wire gets hotter & changes electrical resistance as there is less air to cool the wire. 50mBar is around 75K ft. Lower than about 10-2 milliBar, Ion gauges are the way to go. They are like broken vacuum tubes. Ah, thanks! Paul
|
|
#8
June 22nd 04, 05:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Paul Sengupta" wrote in message
... "Tony Cox" wrote in message ink.net... Assuming the mode C is properly calibrated, that is. How do you measure altitude at 328k feet? Surely a standard barometric device isn't going to work? Paul Ground based radar? Inertial telemetry? GPS? Good question... Jay B in AZ
|
|
#9
June 22nd 04, 07:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Jay Beckman" writes:
How do you measure altitude at 328k feet? Surely a standard barometric device isn't going to work? Ground based radar? Inertial telemetry? GPS? Regardless, they'd better make damn sure that they get it right otherwise someone is likely to run around telling the crowd how long "to impact"... http://www.avweb.com/newswire/10_24b.../187440-1.html (Also...how does "inertial telemetery" determine altitude?!) --kyler
|
|
#10
June 22nd 04, 10:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Jay Beckman" wrote in message news:_tZBc.7933$5t2.5921@fed1read01... "Paul Sengupta" wrote in message ... "Tony Cox" wrote in message ink.net... Assuming the mode C is properly calibrated, that is. How do you measure altitude at 328k feet? Surely a standard barometric device isn't going to work? Paul Ground based radar? Inertial telemetry? GPS? Good question... Jay B in AZ Rutan answered it with "...these data come from the inertial nav system."
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Did the Germans have the Norden bombsight? | Cub Driver | Military Aviation | 106 | May 12th 04 07:18 AM |
| Hubble plug to be pulled | John Carrier | Military Aviation | 33 | March 19th 04 04:19 AM |
| Rules on what can be in a hangar | Brett Justus | Owning | 13 | February 27th 04 05:35 PM |
| OT (sorta): Bush Will Announce New Space Missions | Dav1936531 | Military Aviation | 0 | January 9th 04 10:34 AM |
| Strategic Command Missions Rely on Space | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | September 30th 03 09:59 PM |
Hybrid Mode
