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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
David Megginson wrote: On mailing lists, I've actually had violent reactions from otherwise experienced and competent pilots when I casually mentioned that pressure altimeters are routinely off by hundreds of feet at cruise altitude. It's pretty simple, really. It doesn't matter at all if your altimeter is off by hundreds of feet at cruise altitude if everybody else at that altitude has the same error. It would be possibly unsafe for you to set your altimeter accurately when everyone else is setting it to the broadcast local altimeter setting. In short, it doesn't matter. Just do it like everyone else. For noise abatement reasons. George Patterson A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something that cannot be learned any other way. Samuel Clemens |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
David Megginson wrote
Not at all -- I've just been surprised at how many U.S. pilots don't seem to know about altimeter temperature errors. On mailing lists, I've actually had violent reactions from otherwise experienced and competent pilots when I casually mentioned that pressure altimeters are routinely off by hundreds of feet at cruise altitude. Yep. They forgot it, since it wasn't really relevant. As for the violent reaction, it's not a pilot thing but a people thing. There are people who are often wrong but never uncertain. It's kind of sad when an experienced pilot gets that way, but it's really terrible when an old experienced instructor falls into that mode, since at that point he's largely worthless. But think for a second - why do you suppose MEA's and OROCA's provide 1000 ft of obstacle clearace normally, but 2000 in designated mountainlous areas? If you're IFR, you're not going to be clearing that peak by less than 2000 ft, and that is going to keep you out of the rocks in even the worst case scenario. If you're VFR, then you can see the peak and don't really need the altimeter anyway. Let's not forget that the worst case temperature error at 200 ft and -50C is only 60 ft, while altimeters can be up to 75 ft off in some cases and still be legal for IFR use. What if the errors compounded? I agree that it's unlikely (and would require a very cold day), but using your numbers someone with a 75 ft altimeter error and a 60 ft temperature error could end up at only 65 ft AGL when the altimeter read 200 ft AGL. Which is still not the end of the world. In a light airplane, you can easily go missed from 65 AGL (or land, if you break out). Anything heavy and fast enought that this isn't true is probably going to have a RADAR altimeter and Cat II certification anyway. Michael |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
"Michael" wrote in message om... Let's not forget that the worst case temperature error at 200 ft and -50C is only 60 ft, while altimeters can be up to 75 ft off in some cases and still be legal for IFR use. There used to be a DH penalty for an inop middle marker (either at the transmitter or receiver end) but this penalty no longer applies. All this ignores the possibility that the pilost has a RADAR altimeter available. In the US, it is up to the pilot to decide whether in his particular situation, given the available equipment and his skills, he should adjust the minima as appropriate based on the expected temperature error. Michael I've never seen, nor heard of a temperatures of -68F (at low airport-type altitudes) that was not associated with an inversion. I suppose that it might happen in Anarctica in the winter but there aren't any airports there. In Alaska, when its -40F on the surface it is usually at least 0F at 1000' AGL. Mike MU-2 |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
David Megginson wrote
That's what one would hope. Unfortunately, there are many gradations between CAVU and IMC, and pilots do seem to have an unfortunate tendency to fly into mountains or get stuck in canyons from time to time while (legally) VFR. Some people fly to the legal limits of the certificates and ratings they hold; others do not. I realize this is obvious. What should be equally obvious (but sometimes is not) is that in order to do so with a reasonable margin of safety, you need a much higher level of skill and knowledge than what is required to pass the checkride. What we're doing here is exploring one tiny corner of the knowledge envelope in great detail. Most pilots couldn't care less. Most pilots are also not going to fly in the mountains in anything less than good day-VMC, so they really don't care - or need to. The examiner is not able to check every possible knowledge area in depth - that's not his function. He only performs a rough check to make sure the instructor didn't leave out anything really major. Anything else would take much too long. So really, all you need is a few people who don't know what they don't know and pay the ultimate penalty to observe what you've described. I'm not sure if lack of knowledge of temperature errors has ever caused someone to fly into an obstruction he thought he was clear of, but I can certainly believe it has happened. Michael |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Let me add two links to the discussion:
This is on problems with cold weather altimetry: http://www.aircraftbuyer.com/learn/train06.htm This is about the accuracy of unaided GPS altitude in the context of vertical guidance, but it bears some relavence to the discussion of the accuracy of GPS altitude: http://www.bluecoat.org/reports/Graham_2001_RawGPS.pdf John Bell www.cockpitgps.com |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
I'm sure that in this case you are referring to the ICAO Cold Temperature Error Table, which is part of the AIM. Check it out online: http://www1.faa.gov/ATPubs/AIM/Chap7/aim0702.html#7-2-3 I don't know about you, but I have yet to meet a US flight instructor who does not require his students to have a copy of the AIM and be conversant with it. Uh. That table only showed up a couple of years ago. I bet most flight instructors have no idea its even there. Other than "hot to cold look out below" there ain't much on temperature errors in the FAA private pilot knowledge requirements. The reason that table finally showed up is because pilots familiar with Canadian and USAF procedures have been pushing the FAA to improve this area of pilot knowledge. We are not REQUIRED to do anything about those tables. If you're flying over mountains in Alaska on a cold night with an alitimeter setting from sea level? You can tell that to the granite. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
But think for a second - why do you suppose MEA's and OROCA's provide 1000 ft of obstacle clearace normally, but 2000 in designated mountainlous areas? If you're IFR, you're not going to be clearing that peak by less than 2000 ft, and that is going to keep you out of the rocks in even the worst case scenario. If you're VFR, then you can see the peak and don't really need the altimeter anyway. I don't buy it. On a good weather day in California it is not uncommon for the alimeter setting itself to account for 500 ft altimeter errors in the mountains. If you add up non-standard lapse rate, cold air and old and distant altimeter settings you can eat into the 2000 feet rather quickly. Then deal with turbulent air and downdrafts in the mountains on top of this. I don't like it one bit. Go land on a 2000 foot runway and tell me that's plenty of room between a little airplane with poor climb performance and a big mountain that you can't see. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
"John Bell" writes:
Let me add two links to the discussion: This is on problems with cold weather altimetry: http://www.aircraftbuyer.com/learn/train06.htm This is about the accuracy of unaided GPS altitude in the context of vertical guidance, but it bears some relavence to the discussion of the accuracy of GPS altitude: http://www.bluecoat.org/reports/Graham_2001_RawGPS.pdf Thanks -- those are good articles. The Nav Canada paper on non-WAAS GPS VNAV (the Graham paper) is especially interesting. All the best, David |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Different WAAS altitude readings | Wyatt Emmerich | Instrument Flight Rules | 21 | June 29th 04 07:27 PM |
GPS Altitude with WAAS | Phil Verghese | Instrument Flight Rules | 42 | October 5th 03 12:39 AM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |
WAAS question -- altitude accuracy? | Craig Davidson | Piloting | 10 | September 23rd 03 09:56 PM |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Piloting | 25 | September 11th 03 01:27 PM |