Help estimating altitude without altimeter?

If you can only see whole woods or forests you are quite high. If you
can see individual trees you are getting a bit low. If you can see the
branches you are very low, If you can see the leaves...don't even
ask!

If you can see your reference point, estimate your distance away from
it and judge the angle (should be about 15 degrees), you should be
able to land accurately with a bit of practice, without reference to
the altimeter. Remember that the altimeter is pretty useless when
outlanding at a field of unknown elevation.

Derek Copeland (UK gliding instructor)


On Oct 29, 2:52*am, ZZ wrote:
The reference "point" assuming that you can see it, is the the runway or
more specifically, the TDZ.

Paul
ZZ



Surfer! wrote:
In message , ZZ
writes
Tom:

How many patterns have you flown since you began your training? Until
you develop a clear picture in your mind of how your airfield looks at
different points in the pattern,
Snip

I would say it's 'how the reference point looks'. *We can have a
reference point anywhere, but if landing out we won't be seeing our own
familiar airfield. *Is the reference point technique taught in the US?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I knew that my original comment was going to start fist fights. But it's
winter in the northern hemisphere and we need something to do.

We have a student pilot who says that he is having trouble estimating
his altitude in the pattern. So instead shall we will advise him to
estimate angles? What this pilot really lacks is experience. What I
contend is that INITIALLY forcing him to see many "ideal" patterns,
i.e. repetition, is an important step in learning what a "normal"
pattern looks like and when the pattern is poorly flown, he will then
recognize it right away. Certainly, angles are part of what is being
learned but quantifying the angle is not required to learn. Of course
lift/sink, wind, low arrivals at the field, rope breaks, rock-offs, last
minute runway changes and buffoonery from the guy in the pattern in
front of him will force him to modify his pattern. My students are
trained to fly all of these problems without altimeter reference. But
initially, I begin by giving them a solid grounding in what "normal"
LOOKS LIKE.

As for our student who is trying to estimate his altitude, keep flying.
It will come all together.

Paul Corbett
ZZ








delboy wrote:
If you can only see whole woods or forests you are quite high. If you
can see individual trees you are getting a bit low. If you can see the
branches you are very low, If you can see the leaves...don't even
ask!

If you can see your reference point, estimate your distance away from
it and judge the angle (should be about 15 degrees), you should be
able to land accurately with a bit of practice, without reference to
the altimeter. Remember that the altimeter is pretty useless when







outlanding at a field of unknown elevation.

Derek Copeland (UK gliding instructor)


On Oct 29, 2:52 am, ZZ wrote:
The reference "point" assuming that you can see it, is the the runway or
more specifically, the TDZ.

Paul
ZZ



Surfer! wrote:
In message , ZZ
writes
Tom:
How many patterns have you flown since you began your training? Until
you develop a clear picture in your mind of how your airfield looks at
different points in the pattern,
Snip
I would say it's 'how the reference point looks'. We can have a
reference point anywhere, but if landing out we won't be seeing our own
familiar airfield. Is the reference point technique taught in the US?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

If you can estimate the distance and judge the angle, this fixes the
height - this is simple trigonometry.

In the UK we teach an exercise called the zig-zag circuit where the
instructor demonstrates a circuit starting at the right high key
distance, height and angle to the reference point, but allows the
gider to drift in so the low key point is reached at about the right
height, but much too close in. Thus the student can see that the
angle looks much too steep (the impression given is that you are much
too high, but you are not). Then you move back out until the angle
looks right and complete the circuit normally.

I do not disagree with ZZ that regular experience of what a circuit
should look like is a necessary part of training. Also learning to
judge what items on the ground, such as trees, vehicles and houses
look like from different heights.

Derek Copeland

P.S This is posted from Google Groups, as I can't seem to access
r.a.s. directly from gp.net. Is there a problem with my email address
or UK postings Andy?