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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
"Stefan" wrote: Pneumatic altimeters are reliable, Most of the time. In very cold weather, you can run into something by relying on a pneumatic altimeter. -- Dan C172RG at BFM |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
"Bob Gardner" wrote: AIM 1-1-19(a)(8) tells pilots not to use GPS altitude: "GPS altitude should not be relied upon to determine aircraft altitude since the vertical error can be quite large." Except when using WAAS, when it is quite small. -- Dan C172RG at BFM |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Dan Luke wrote:
In very cold weather, you can run into something by relying on a pneumatic altimeter. Pssst, I'll tell you a secret: All that stuff you had to learn to pass the written was somehow linked to real life. Stefan |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
I'll file that away for the day when most of the GA fleet is WAAS-capable.
I'm sure that the AIM will have changed by that time. Bob Gardner "Dan Luke" wrote in message ... "Bob Gardner" wrote: AIM 1-1-19(a)(8) tells pilots not to use GPS altitude: "GPS altitude should not be relied upon to determine aircraft altitude since the vertical error can be quite large." Except when using WAAS, when it is quite small. -- Dan C172RG at BFM |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
"Stefan" wrote: Pssst, I'll tell you a secret: All that stuff you had to learn to pass the written was somehow linked to real life. Really? Gosh! -- Dan "How can an idiot be a policeman? Answer me that!" - Chief Inspector Dreyfus |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Dan Luke wrote:
"Matt Whiting" wrote: Not that unusual. GPS isn't very accurate vertically. Most GPS manuals tell you not to rely on the altitude in any serious way. It's usually more accurate than the altimeter, which is not corrected for non-standard temperature. That's not what my KLN89B manual says... Matt |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
GeorgeB wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 06:27:43 -0400, Cub Driver wrote: On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 20:54:01 -0700, "Aluckyguess" wrote: I am getting over 500ft. difference and more. Oh,. good grief! I'm sure I've never had as much as 100 ft of variance, and more often it's 20 feet or so. (Garmin 296) I frequently drive by 2 signs marking the "eastern continental divide" with the elevation. With my WAAS equipped, non-aviation GPSR (Meridian Gold), I habitually flip to a screen with elevation displayed and have yet to differ by more than 40 ft. As Dan says, I am usually within 15 ft. But sometime and someplace you may not be: http://gpsinformation.net/main/altitude.htm I took two trips across parallel bridges in eastern Virginia 3 days apart; the reading was stable and within 5 ft of what I visually estimated it should be. It differed by 2 ft betweent he 2 days; my eyes told me the bridge heights did also ... I would trust a WAAS equipped GPS, tracking 5 or more birds in a clear environment, to be more ACCURATE than a barometric altimeter. I would USE my barometric altimeter if it were working as other aircraft in the area are, adjusted to local barometer per information gained by radio from official sources. Yes, augmented systems are a different matter. Matt |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Gardner wrote:
AIM 1-1-19(a)(8) tells pilots not to use GPS altitude: "GPS altitude should not be relied upon to determine aircraft altitude since the vertical error can be quite large." Main reason is that other planes will be using pressure-based altimeters so maintaining separation can only be done when everyone uses the same method with the same errors. GPS altitude is measured above the GPS sphere, which is not sea level. No, GPS altitude is measured above the ellipsoid defined by WGS-84, not any spherical surface. Furthermore, the altitude is then corrected using a lookup table to account for the difference between the geoid (which represents the sea-level surface) and the ellipsoid. The altitude figure displayed by the GPS receiver is therefore measured from the hypothetical sea-level surface. Bob Gardner "Aluckyguess" wrote in message news How come the GPS reads a different altitude than the Altimeter? As others have mentioned, the pressure-based altimeter assumes a standard atmosphere model for the temperature lapse rate and can be quite far off if the actual conditions don't match the model - even when the altimeter is corrected for the current ground-level pressure. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
"Tauno Voipio" wrote in message
Yes - it's called the reference ellipsoid. There are actually several of them and some GPS receivers allow selecting your favorite one. Interesting. Actually, if Earth would disappear with all its mass, GPS would get unusable, as the satellites would continue out of their tracks due to the lack of gravity pull. Yeah, but they'd work longer than a pressure altimeter so I think we should still adopt GPS altimeters in case this ever actually happens. -- Jim Fisher |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
"Tauno Voipio" wrote in message
Yes - it's called the reference ellipsoid. There are actually several of them and some GPS receivers allow selecting your favorite one. Interesting. Actually, if Earth would disappear with all its mass, GPS would get unusable, as the satellites would continue out of their tracks due to the lack of gravity pull. Yeah, but they'd work longer than a pressure altimeter so I think we should still adopt GPS altimeters in case this ever actually happens. -- Jim Fisher |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
GREAT AVIATION READS | Cribsheet | Piloting | 1 | September 12th 04 02:51 AM |
GREAT AVIATION READS | Cribsheet | Rotorcraft | 0 | September 10th 04 06:06 PM |
GREAT AVIATION READS | Cribsheet | Military Aviation | 0 | September 7th 04 06:37 PM |
When the ASI Reads Below Zero | BTIZ | Piloting | 11 | August 23rd 04 04:57 PM |
Newsweek Reads RAM! | Bob McKellar | Military Aviation | 0 | February 17th 04 02:10 AM |