even the pros dont get it right

Jay Somerset a écrit :
On Sun, 15 May 2005 20:51:43 +0100, "Chris" wrote:

Heard on London Airways today, NorthWest 43 called up at 'nine thousand feet
climbing to one five thousand feet' the controller ever the diplomat asked
'northwest 43 can you confirm you are climbing to Flight level 150?' 'Affirm
came the reply'
mind you he was in some cruddy old DC-10 so he was probably busy trying to
keep it in the air.



In the US, flight levels start at 18,000. In Europe, they start much lower.

This was just a terminology difference, and the controller was quite correct
in ensuring there was no miscommunication. The pilot was merely reporting
by reflex, forgetting for the moment that he was not within US airspace.

It happens.

I'd like to know what US pilots think of the FL rules in Europe,
starting at 3000 FT AGL, everyone uses standard 29.92" altimeter
setting (1013 mil). I guess the "logic" behind this is that everyone
been on the same altimeter setting, precise altitude separation is
easier to get than relying on everyone getting the proper "local
setting" for the area flown.

What do you think?

Happy flying.

I'd like to know what US pilots think of the FL rules in Europe, starting at 3000 FT AGL, everyone uses standard 29.92" altimeter setting

Well, terrain is an issue. 3000 AGL rides up and down with the terrain,
and at the altitudes I like to fly, I'd be passing through the border
(between flight levels and feet MSL) quite often. I am more in favor of
a higher transition altitude.

The transistion altitude should be one whose vacancy would not be an
issue. The vacancy of 3000 AGL is an issue for me.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

On Mon, 16 May 2005 17:45:45 +0200, "Olivier Demacon"
wrote:

I'd like to know what US pilots think of the FL rules in Europe,
starting at 3000 FT AGL, everyone uses standard 29.92" altimeter
setting (1013 mil). I guess the "logic" behind this is that everyone
been on the same altimeter setting, precise altitude separation is
easier to get than relying on everyone getting the proper "local
setting" for the area flown.

What do you think?

I think it would be a real pain for those of us who spend much of our time
at the lower altitudes; and would likely decrease the safety of operations
here in the US.

For example, on a typical flight of mine at 4000'MSL, I would be changing
the altimeter from 29.92 to the local setting many times. It's pretty
simple in the US to get local settings, and even easier if one is IFR.

When most traffic is commercial and generally operating at higher altitudes
then us GA pilots, it probably makes little difference.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

"Olivier Demacon" wrote in message
.. .

I'd like to know what US pilots think of the FL rules in Europe, starting
at 3000 FT AGL, everyone uses standard 29.92" altimeter setting (1013
mil). I guess the "logic" behind this is that everyone been on the same
altimeter setting, precise altitude separation is easier to get than
relying on everyone getting the proper "local setting" for the area flown.

What do you think?


Perhaps you meant 3000 MSL? A transition altitude based on some distance
above the ground doesn't make a lot of sense.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

Perhaps you meant 3000 MSL? A transition altitude based on some distance
above the ground doesn't make a lot of sense.

Acutally, it makes a lot of sense if you consider the airspace structure
and air traffic rules of Europe. It may make a lot less sense in the USA.

Stefan

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

Perhaps you meant 3000 MSL? A transition altitude based on some distance
above the ground doesn't make a lot of sense.

Actually, it makes a lot of sense if you consider the airspace structure
and air traffic rules of Europe. It may make less sense in the USA.

Stefan

In a previous article, said:
I'd like to know what US pilots think of the FL rules in Europe,
starting at 3000 FT AGL, everyone uses standard 29.92" altimeter
setting (1013 mil). I guess the "logic" behind this is that everyone
been on the same altimeter setting, precise altitude separation is
easier to get than relying on everyone getting the proper "local
setting" for the area flown.

What do you think?

Well, it eliminates the problem where one person is using an altimeter
setting from one side of a frontal boundary encountering somebody using an
altimeter setting from the other other side of a frontal boundary (both
settings within 100 miles of the potential collision).

But on the other hand, it could be a nightmare with all the VFR traffic we
have here in the US, especially since most of it seems to fly around 3000
AGL around here.

And with IFR flying it's not going to be an issue either way because (I
presume) that if you're approaching another aircraft the controllers will
give you both the same altimeter setting.

On consideration, I don't see any reason to change here.

--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
If I have pinged farther than others, it is because I routed upon
the T3s of giants.
-- Greg Andrews

I don't have my European charts in front of me, but depending on what
country you are flying in, the transition levels and transition
altitudes vary. In fact, the Transition ALTITUDE and the Transition
LEVEL can vary within the same country. Once you climb through the
Transition Altitude, all altitudes become Flight Levels and once you
descend below the Transition Level, the Flight Levels revert back to
normal altitudes. When flying to and over multiple destinations in
Europe, you can easily forget where these TA's and TL's begin and end.

Also, many of the older (US) jets only have altimeters that are set to
inches. You must constantly make the interpretation from millibars (or
hectopascals) to inches via a conversion chart. Fortunately, the newer
jets let you select which medium of altimeter settings you want to use
based on where you are flying. If this was an old DC10, you can bet
they were doing the conversion "longhand".

Until you flown in Europe and experienced "their different way"
(especially France) of doing things, don't be too hard on a US carrier
that just spent 8+ hours enroute to Europe in an old "steam gauge"
airliner. ;-)

BJ


Chris wrote:

Heard on London Airways today, NorthWest 43 called up at 'nine thousand feet
climbing to one five thousand feet' the controller ever the diplomat asked
'northwest 43 can you confirm you are climbing to Flight level 150?' 'Affirm
came the reply'
mind you he was in some cruddy old DC-10 so he was probably busy trying to
keep it in the air.

B. Jensen wrote:

Until you flown in Europe and experienced "their different way"
(especially France) of doing things, don't be too hard on a US carrier
that just spent 8+ hours enroute to Europe in an old "steam gauge"
airliner. ;-)

Actually, yes, I am so hard. I expect from an ATP to know the rules of
the air he is flying in. I expect his employer to offer appropriate
training. I expect the pilot to prepare his flight.

On the other hand, everybody is making mistakes, of course.

Stefan

Stefan wrote:

Actually, yes, I am so hard. I expect from an ATP to know the rules of
the air he is flying in. I expect his employer to offer appropriate
training. I expect the pilot to prepare his flight.

And I expect a surgeon with a Ph.D. in medicine and years of training to
be flawless too, however, we both know that isn't always the case. (sigh)

On the other hand, everybody is making mistakes, of course.

Yep...it's called being human. (double sigh)

BJ