Altimeter Setting

[Rolf]

Over the years (30 or so) Caesar Creek Soaring Club has vacillated
with setting the altimeter to zero or MSL. Last year the Board decided
to put the Club ships on an MSL basis (private gliders exempted).
There are however a number of members who are continuing to make it an
issue. I would be interested in your thought and comments.
Thanks
Rolf Hegele
CCSC President

[Greg Arnold[_3_]]

On 5/31/2010 7:07 PM, Rolf wrote:
> Over the years (30 or so) Caesar Creek Soaring Club has vacillated
> with setting the altimeter to zero or MSL. Last year the Board decided
> to put the Club ships on an MSL basis (private gliders exempted).
> There are however a number of members who are continuing to make it an
> issue. I would be interested in your thought and comments.
> Thanks
> Rolf Hegele
> CCSC President


It seems to me it would make a lot more sense to use MSL, as then the
elevation on the altimeter will correspond to the elevations on the
sectionals and other charts and maps. What is the rationale for using AGL?

[Brian Whatcott]

Rolf wrote:
> Over the years (30 or so) Caesar Creek Soaring Club has vacillated
> with setting the altimeter to zero or MSL. Last year the Board decided
> to put the Club ships on an MSL basis (private gliders exempted).
> There are however a number of members who are continuing to make it an
> issue. I would be interested in your thought and comments.
> Thanks
> Rolf Hegele
> CCSC President


The English way is (or at least was) to set QFE for landings and
takeoffs, and to set QNH at (if I remember) 3000 ft. The station baro
setting for QFE was transmitted on arrival at destination. En-route, the
forecast QNH was used. Both settings were provided in millibars.

Oh, I should translate QNH to mean a baro setting = 0 ft "Altitude" at
mean sea level and QFE baro setting reads 0 ft "height" at station
elevation.

The American way is to use QNH until at flight level altitudes the
pressure altitude setting of 29.92 inHg comes into play.
The American way minimizes screwing around with baro settings: a current
QNH value may be obtained by tuning ATIS, AWOS etc. frequencies en route.
The English way can I suppose lead to better pattern altitudes
( = circuit heights) because they can always be 500 ft, 1000 ft,
or 400 ft., 800 ft indications.

The American way involves descending to a pattern altitude as given by
elevation (from the chart) + pattern height. At Altus for example, that
would be 1433 + 1000 ft


For what it's worth...


Brian W

[jsbrake[_2_]]

York Soaring in Ontario, Canada just switched over to MSL for the club
operations after using AGL for so many years. It was hotly debated
with arguments on both sides.

AGL is great for basic training. We teach the circuit based on AGL:
800'-1000' at the IP to start the circuit, turn base at 400'-600' and
turn final at 300'-500'. Real quick and simple, just read it off the
altimeter with no math conversion. Minimises the mental load on a
student pilot.

Causes minor problems in operations, though:
- xc pilots work on MSL but the club ships were AGL, so moving the
dials back and forth
- pilots confusing MSL vs AGL readings
- power pilots are on MSL, people would confuse heights given over the
radio, thinking it was AGL

As a concession to those firmly entrenched with AGL, we've put printed
stick-on rings around the altimeters that has AGL markings specific
for our club. The thousands pointer indicates zero AGL when set to
field elevation.

[hretting]

They must all decide if they wish to be airmen or mere pilots. Those
wishing to select zero are lazy and don't want to think or maintain an
acceptable level of airmenship. Those who allow such practice are
tired of beating a dead dog to fetch a bone.
Here's the thing.... when the canopy closes, who's to know. The
individual is still responsible for his performance.
The club should establish the level of expected performance and
standard operating procedures. This level must be high knowing that
some individuals will slack off 20+%. Training to 95% - 20% is just
within acceptable levels. But train to 80% , well now you have to have
good insurance and extra gliders.
The good side of weak requirements is the increase demonstration of
Darwins theory of Evolution and the improvement to the gene pool.
Wait till someone has to tell the old geezers they fly like crap and
no longer are allowed. They won't be thinking MSL anymore.
30 years to decide, huh? All of you should go back to school.
Who the hell is in charge?
R

[ContestID67[_2_]]

Rolf,

From the inception of the club to about 5 years ago, we flew and
taught AGL only. No self respecting power pilot would fly AGL.
Flying AGL is a crutch intended to help new pilots. But It is better
to learn it right from the get-go than to have to relearn it later and
maybe getting into an accident.

So about 5 years ago my Club's flight chair said that flying AGL was
wrong, dangerous and (if I am not mistaken) illegal. So the board
made an edict and we changed overnight at the start of a season. We
marked all altimeters in club ships "MSL Only Club Policy". There was
some, but not a tremendous amount of, consternation ... such as "But
it is so flat around here." or "But I always land back home."

We did have one incident related to the AGL/MSL switch that might be a
good to read about. One day yours truly flew a club ship and set the
altimeter to MSL. The next pilot was an die hard AGL'er. The AGL'ers
were used to finding the altimer not quite at zero due to barometric
changes and would "tweak" the altimeter to zero at the start of each
flight. Our field elevation is 888 feet. So the next pilot tweaks
the altimeter to "zero" but instead of subtracting 888 feet (by moving
the hands CCW), he tweaks it CW and adds 112 feet! Can you see where
this is going?

He then takes a tow to what he thinks is 3,000 feet AGL but is only
really at 2,000 feet AGL. The tow pilot doesn't think much about it
as people get off tow early all the time. About to enter the pattern
the AGL'er thinks, "Gee, the ground seems to be kind of large
today ... but I am still at 1500 feet AGL so I'm must be OK." He then
almost lands short as he was 1,000 feet lower than he thought. End of
story? Nah.

The AGL'er gets back on the ground and complains that the altimeter
must be wrong. We look at the altimer and see that it is showing
1,000 feet. Putting 2+2 together we figured out what he did. So get
this ... an old timer CFIG says it was my fault as I should have reset
the altimeter to zero when I got out. Sorry, wrong-o. Who was the
PIC on the second flight? The AGL'er of course. It is his
responsibility to ensure that the instrumentation is set correctly,
not mine. Can you tell that it still grates a bit? Ok, I feel better
now.

Anyway, my suggestions are to;

1) Do it!
2) Convert "big bang" all at once, not by dribs and drabs or over a
"transition" period.
3) Mark the altimeter with an "MSL Only" sign to reenforce the new
policy each time a pilot climbs into the cockpit.

Good luck, John DeRosa

PS Early in my soaring career, I remember flying at a commercial
operation while on a business trip and was told to set the altimeter
to MSL. I started sweating worrying about all the math I would need
to calculate in my head. Luckily I was in Miami at the time and the
field elevation was all of 20 feet - not much of a problem.

[GM]

On May 31, 10:07*pm, Rolf > wrote:
> Over the years (30 or so) Caesar Creek Soaring Club has vacillated
> with setting the altimeter to zero or MSL. Last year the Board decided
> to put the Club ships on an MSL basis (private gliders exempted).
> There are however a number of members who are continuing to make it an
> issue. I would be interested in your thought and comments.
> Thanks
> Rolf Hegele
> CCSC President

Rolf, if memory serves me right, the FARs are clear about it: setting
to MSL is required.

[PK]

On May 31, 7:28*pm, Greg Arnold > wrote:
> On 5/31/2010 7:07 PM, Rolf wrote:
>
> > Over the years (30 or so) Caesar Creek Soaring Club has vacillated
> > with setting the altimeter to zero or MSL. Last year the Board decided
> > to put the Club ships on an MSL basis (private gliders exempted).
> > There are however a number of members who are continuing to make it an
> > issue. I would be interested in your thought and comments.
> > Thanks
> > Rolf Hegele
> > CCSC President
>
> It seems to me it would make a lot more sense to use MSL, as then the
> elevation on the altimeter will correspond to the elevations on the
> sectionals and other charts and maps. *What is the rationale for using AGL?

There is absolutly no rationale for setting the altimeter to AGL.The
only excuse I am willing to accept, and it is a rather poor one, if he
or she would NEVER EVER be willing to be out of glide to their home
field. And how many glider pilots were NEVER EVER in that position? 6PK

[Greg Arnold[_3_]]

On 5/31/2010 8:06 PM, ContestID67 wrote:

>
> He then takes a tow to what he thinks is 3,000 feet AGL but is only
> really at 2,000 feet AGL. The tow pilot doesn't think much about it
> as people get off tow early all the time. About to enter the pattern
> the AGL'er thinks, "Gee, the ground seems to be kind of large
> today ... but I am still at 1500 feet AGL so I'm must be OK." He then
> almost lands short as he was 1,000 feet lower than he thought. End of
> story? Nah.

The poor guy couldn't tell the difference between 500' AGL and 1500' AGL
by looking out the window? Sounds like it was time to retire his wings.

[Wayne Paul]

"Rolf" > wrote in message ...
> Over the years (30 or so) Caesar Creek Soaring Club has vacillated
> with setting the altimeter to zero or MSL. Last year the Board decided
> to put the Club ships on an MSL basis (private gliders exempted).
> There are however a number of members who are continuing to make it an
> issue. I would be interested in your thought and comments.
> Thanks
> Rolf Hegele
> CCSC President

I have never understood the "setting the altimeter to zero" concept. It seem totally unprofessional. Maybe my view goes back to my formal Naval Aviation training. Anyway, where I fly in the summer the field from which we fly, Mackay, Idaho is 5,890 MSL. The primary outlanding fields are Copper Basin - 7,920 MSL; Twin Bridges - 6,890 MSL; Flying Joseph 5,600 MLS; and, ..... need I say more? I don't even think I could crank my altimeter down to 0 at Mackay. It sure would complicate the math while flying in terrain that reaches above 12,000 MSL.

It seems that the 0 concept would also complicate the use of Turnpoint Exchange PDA/Fight Computer and contest databases.

Wayne
http://www.soaridaho.com/

[Deadstickdon]

On May 31, 11:22*pm, Greg Arnold > wrote:
> On 5/31/2010 8:06 PM, ContestID67 wrote:
>
>
>
> > He then takes a tow to what he thinks is 3,000 feet AGL but is only
> > really at 2,000 feet AGL. *The tow pilot doesn't think much about it
> > as people get off tow early all the time. *About to enter the pattern
> > the AGL'er thinks, "Gee, the ground seems to be kind of large
> > today ... but I am still at 1500 feet AGL so I'm must be OK." *He then
> > almost lands short as he was 1,000 feet lower than he thought. *End of
> > story? *Nah.
>
> The poor guy couldn't tell the difference between 500' AGL and 1500' AGL
> by looking out the window? *Sounds like it was time to retire his wings..

Here's a good one. I usually fly out of a busy general aviation
airport right on the edge of Class C airspace. We are surrounded by
mountains, talk to power planes and controllers, and fly cross country
a lot, so we always use MSL. Recently I spent a sunny afternoon down
at the local gliderport where they do a lot of training. I took a tow
to the ridge and got off at about 3,200 (MSL). Much later that
afternoon, the owner was up flying so I asked someone what I owed for
the tow. They asked me how high I went and I said "3,200 feet." A
quick look at the handy chart on the wall told me what I owed them for
"3,200 feet" and I happily paid and left. On the drive home I was
musing about how the price of tows was always going up, but who cares
when the planes and gadgets cost so damned much. Then it hit me WHY
they were going up. The gliderport uses AGL for training AND to
calculate the tows to simplify the billing, and I hadn't deducted the
field elevation when I told him "3,200 feet." I had bought about 800
feet of it sitting at the end of the runway waiting to hook up. All
I could do was laugh at myself, and they are welcome to the tip for
all they do for all of us. At least I hadn't scratched around cross
country for two hours with my gear down like I usually do... Now THAT
****es me off!

Don

[Mike Ash]

In article
>,
ContestID67 > wrote:

> We did have one incident related to the AGL/MSL switch that might be a
> good to read about. One day yours truly flew a club ship and set the
> altimeter to MSL. The next pilot was an die hard AGL'er. The AGL'ers
> were used to finding the altimer not quite at zero due to barometric
> changes and would "tweak" the altimeter to zero at the start of each
> flight. Our field elevation is 888 feet. So the next pilot tweaks
> the altimeter to "zero" but instead of subtracting 888 feet (by moving
> the hands CCW), he tweaks it CW and adds 112 feet! Can you see where
> this is going?

I did pretty much the same thing in my MSL-only club. Atmospheric
pressure had changed by 6-700ft from the last time the plane had flown,
and I did the nearest-thousand thing you describe. Even better, I
actually managed to do this twice in a row in our ASK-21! Discovered it
when I got off tow. Casually asked my passenger what his altimeter said,
and this discovered I'd managed to screw up both of them. Easy fix in
the air once I realized what I'd done.

Watch that thousands hand when you set your altimeter, and know what
your altitudes look like outside the cockpit!

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

[Tom[_12_]]

Thorndike's Law of Primacy

Things learned first create a strong impression in the mind that is
difficult to erase. For the instructor, this means what is taught must
be right the first time. For the student, it means that learning must
be right. “Unteaching” wrong first impressions is harder than teaching
them right the first time. If, for example, a student learns a faulty
technique, the instructor will have a difficult task correcting bad
habits and “reteaching” correct ones.

The student's first experience should lay the foundation for all that
is to follow. What the student learns must be procedurally correct and
applied the very first time. The instructor must present subject
matter in a logical order, step by step, making sure the students have
already learned the preceding step. If the task is learned in
isolation, is not initially applied to the overall performance, or if
it must be relearned, the process can be confusing and time consuming.
Preparing and following a lesson plan facilitates delivery of the
subject matter correctly the first time.

[T8]

On May 31, 10:07*pm, Rolf > wrote:
> Over the years (30 or so) Caesar Creek Soaring Club has vacillated
> with setting the altimeter to zero or MSL. Last year the Board decided
> to put the Club ships on an MSL basis (private gliders exempted).
> There are however a number of members who are continuing to make it an
> issue. I would be interested in your thought and comments.
> Thanks
> Rolf Hegele
> CCSC President

Teach the kids to fly msl. Maybe that'll shame the old codgers into
doing it right.

Taking off to find that you have mis-set or not set the altimeter is
to find out that your check list discipline needs work.

I get a chuckle at every contest I go to. I can always find at least
one altimeter set to zero. Only some of those pilots are from
Ohio :-).

-Evan Ludeman / T8

[toad]

On May 31, 10:07*pm, Rolf > wrote:
> Over the years (30 or so) Caesar Creek Soaring Club has vacillated
> with setting the altimeter to zero or MSL. Last year the Board decided
> to put the Club ships on an MSL basis (private gliders exempted).
> There are however a number of members who are continuing to make it an
> issue. I would be interested in your thought and comments.
> Thanks
> Rolf Hegele
> CCSC President

The very fact that some people are having an issue should show how
limiting it is being trained to use QFE ( altimeter = 0 at the
field ). Tom's citing the law of primacy is a very good reason the
start the new students to use MSL altitude from the first flight.
Thousands of power students do it all the time. If a power pilot can
do it, then a glider pilot can.

[tstock]

On May 31, 10:07*pm, Rolf > wrote:
> Over the years (30 or so) Caesar Creek Soaring Club has vacillated
> with setting the altimeter to zero or MSL. Last year the Board decided
> to put the Club ships on an MSL basis (private gliders exempted).
> There are however a number of members who are continuing to make it an
> issue. I would be interested in your thought and comments.
> Thanks
> Rolf Hegele
> CCSC President

I'm glad this issue came up. I am a new glider pilot (I soloed about
a year ago) and at my glider port, the students are generally taught
to set the altimeter to zero. I understand this is probably just to
reduce the task loading and also accidents due to miscalculations for
low time students. But when studying for the written exam there was
so much emphasis placed on MSL, I never understood why we simply set
the altimeter to AGL. Granted we are in Florida so there is not a
huge difference, but the difference is there none the less.

Seems counterintuitive unless you always expect to fly over the
airport. I suppose I should spend some time on the simulator and get
comfortable with doing it right.

Tom

[John Smith]

> start the new students to use MSL altitude from the first flight.
> Thousands of power students do it all the time.

As do thousands of glider students, at least on this side of the pond.
The only situation we set the altimeter to QFE (i.e. zero on the ground)
is when we do serious aerobatics.

[Bob Whelan[_3_]]

On 5/31/2010 8:07 PM, Rolf wrote:
> Over the years (30 or so) Caesar Creek Soaring Club has vacillated
> with setting the altimeter to zero or MSL. Last year the Board decided
> to put the Club ships on an MSL basis (private gliders exempted).
> There are however a number of members who are continuing to make it an
> issue. I would be interested in your thought and comments.

Wearing my dry humor hat just a bit...

Do we U.S.-ers live in a democracy? If yes, then the preponderance of
replies-to-now suggests your club whiners are outvoted. ('We' don't, for
the seriously curious and unknowing, but that's another topic entirely...)

Is CCSC run like a democracy? (You poor devils...)

I learned at an 800' msl gliderport/general-aviation field, long ago and
far away. I remember my instructor's first preflight instruction; it
included setting the altimeter to 0'. I asked, "Why not to field
elevation?" He gave me the, "It's easier for your puny, overworked
brain," answer. I said, "OK," and got with the program. (It was the
first time I ever disagreed with my instructor, though...)

Eventually it was solo time. I did so without breaking anything. Next
flight, Tom (my instructor, and not Knauff), hopped in back after I
preflighted and instructed me to set the altimeter to field elevation. I
asked, "Why?" He said, "Because now you're a fledged pilot, and real
pilots care how high they are above ALL the ground, not one single
airport in the entire United States." I'd cared all along, but I didn't
tell him so & silently complied. It confused me a nano-second or two
fretting about my 'new' pattern height while on tow, but I figured it
out and have never been confused since...well, about this particular
issue, I mean!

Fast forward to another mountain airport and another time... There I wuz
about to launch from a field at 8149' msl elevation, with a steenking,
howling crosswind of 20+ knots. Naturally, I didn't want to land right
off tow, so I decided I'd tow to 3,000' agl instead of my normal
2,000'...insurance against broken thermals and getting blown downwind
away from the only landable pace for miles around (i.e. the airport).

I pop off at what my poor overstressed brain said was 3000' agl, known
that instant to be an indicated 10,150' (I rounded up 'for safety's
sake'!), in a decent-feeling upwelling and begin grinding around,
keeping a beady eye on my drift relative to the field. I begin climbing
too, but for some reason I couldn't get comfortable as fast as I thought
my climb rate should be permitting...something about that lurking ground
bugged me. About 500' into my climb I realized it was because the ground
was WAY too close for being 3500' agl. Apparently my instructor had been
right about my 'puny overworked brain' all those years ago!

Or maybe I was just an idiot that particular day. Also, I like to think
I'd'a entered the pattern 'by eye' and not at 0' agl had that thermal
not worked for me.

Legality aside, use agl...*please!!!*

Flying's real safe so long as you don't inadvertently hit anything.
Though I don't know this for a fact, I'll bet my retirement that at
best, it'll be embarrassing to inadvertently hit the earth when your
'field level' altimeter suggests you're still OK.

Bob - sometimes 'common sense' isn't - W.

[T8]

On Jun 1, 10:54*am, Bob Whelan > wrote:

> Legality aside, use agl...*please!!!*

Bob... I think you need another cup of coffee.

-Evan Ludeman / T8

[bildan]

On Jun 1, 8:54*am, Bob Whelan > wrote:
> On 5/31/2010 8:07 PM, Rolf wrote:
>
> > Over the years (30 or so) Caesar Creek Soaring Club has vacillated
> > with setting the altimeter to zero or MSL. Last year the Board decided
> > to put the Club ships on an MSL basis (private gliders exempted).
> > There are however a number of members who are continuing to make it an
> > issue. I would be interested in your thought and comments.
>
> Wearing my dry humor hat just a bit...
>
> Do we U.S.-ers live in a democracy? If yes, then the preponderance of
> replies-to-now suggests your club whiners are outvoted. ('We' don't, for
> the seriously curious and unknowing, but that's another topic entirely...)
>
> Is CCSC run like a democracy? (You poor devils...)
>
> I learned at an 800' msl gliderport/general-aviation field, long ago and
> far away. I remember my instructor's first preflight instruction; it
> included setting the altimeter to 0'. I asked, "Why not to field
> elevation?" He gave me the, "It's easier for your puny, overworked
> brain," answer. I said, "OK," and got with the program. (It was the
> first time I ever disagreed with my instructor, though...)
>
> Eventually it was solo time. I did so without breaking anything. Next
> flight, Tom (my instructor, and not Knauff), hopped in back after I
> preflighted and instructed me to set the altimeter to field elevation. I
> asked, "Why?" He said, "Because now you're a fledged pilot, and real
> pilots care how high they are above ALL the ground, not one single
> airport in the entire United States." I'd cared all along, but I didn't
> tell him so & silently complied. It confused me a nano-second or two
> fretting about my 'new' pattern height while on tow, but I figured it
> out and have never been confused since...well, about this particular
> issue, I mean!
>
> Fast forward to another mountain airport and another time... There I wuz
> about to launch from a field at 8149' msl elevation, with a steenking,
> howling crosswind of 20+ knots. Naturally, I didn't want to land right
> off tow, so I decided I'd tow to 3,000' agl instead of my normal
> 2,000'...insurance against broken thermals and getting blown downwind
> away from the only landable pace for miles around (i.e. the airport).
>
> I pop off at what my poor overstressed brain said was 3000' agl, known
> that instant to be an indicated 10,150' (I rounded up 'for safety's
> sake'!), in a decent-feeling upwelling and begin grinding around,
> keeping a beady eye on my drift relative to the field. I begin climbing
> too, but for some reason I couldn't get comfortable as fast as I thought
> my climb rate should be permitting...something about that lurking ground
> bugged me. About 500' into my climb I realized it was because the ground
> was WAY too close for being 3500' agl. Apparently my instructor had been
> right about my 'puny overworked brain' all those years ago!
>
> Or maybe I was just an idiot that particular day. Also, I like to think
> I'd'a entered the pattern 'by eye' and not at 0' agl had that thermal
> not worked for me.
>
> Legality aside, use agl...*please!!!*
>
> Flying's real safe so long as you don't inadvertently hit anything.
> Though I don't know this for a fact, I'll bet my retirement that at
> best, it'll be embarrassing to inadvertently hit the earth when your
> 'field level' altimeter suggests you're still OK.
>
> Bob - sometimes 'common sense' isn't - W.

These days it'a mostly a non-issue. PDA-type glide computers, and
some built-in units, provide constantly updated AGL height since they
are loaded with a digital elevation map and know your GPS position.
Just make sure the local atmospheric pressure is set. Some even set
that for you at takeoff: (Hmm, GPS says I'm at BDU and we're not
moving so we must be on the ground which, according to my airport
database, is 5288' which means the station pressure is 29.92".)
Airborne, you can just listen to an AWOS to get station pressure.

BTW, that last bit, airborne altimeter setting, IMHO is the biggest
reason to set altimeters to MSL. Altimeters can only be set
accurately to MSL when airborne since that's the only station pressure
data anyone transmits. Professionals worked this out a long time
ago. It isn't up to us to figure out yet another way to do it.

[Bob Whelan[_3_]]

On 6/1/2010 9:16 AM, T8 wrote:
> On Jun 1, 10:54 am, Bob > wrote:
>
>> Legality aside, use agl...*please!!!*
>
> Bob... I think you need another cup of coffee.
>
> -Evan Ludeman / T8
>
Heh...you may be right. I meant - of course - "Set the steenking
altimeters so they display relative to MSL at the time/location of
setting...from which you can then 'instantly derive' AGL from perusing
the chart you naturally have because you're a legal type of pilot, n'est pa?

Bob W.

[Andy[_1_]]

On Jun 1, 8:26*am, bildan > wrote:
> *Professionals worked this out a long time
> ago. *It isn't *up to us to figure out yet another way to do it.

Not picking on you Bill, but have to jump in somewhere. At least one
major US airline used QFE for all takeoffs and landings, at least up
until the time the MD-11 was designed and maybe they still do. I
believe they received the QFE setting from company ops. That
requirements added a lot of complication to the PFD altimeter
software, including a customer specific option to enable QFE setting
and all the logic required to quickly transition between the QFE, QNH,
and QNE settings . In the days before glass cockpits I think that
same airline had an extra altimeter dedicated to QFE operation.

So some people saw the value of QFE operations in USA.

I always set QNH but was trained to set QFE for local flights in
England.

Andy

[Cats]

I'm not sure what the fuss is about. I was taught not to use it for
landing but to judge the circuit by eye - after all I might land in a
field at a completely different altitude. (it read -500' after my
last field landing) 1013 is good if I get into wave so I know what FL
I'm at - there is airspace to avoid - though a good wave day often has
a QFE of 1013 where I fly.

[John Smith]

> I'm not sure what the fuss is about. I was taught not to use it for
> landing but to judge the circuit by eye - after all I might land in a

It helps when communicating with other aircraft.

[BT[_3_]]

We can't set "Zero", we are too high in MSL, we can't "dial it down that
far".
What does the poor AGLr due when he visits another club or travels out west?
He needs to learn the "correct way" and learn to do the mental math.


"Rolf" > wrote in message
...
> Over the years (30 or so) Caesar Creek Soaring Club has vacillated
> with setting the altimeter to zero or MSL. Last year the Board decided
> to put the Club ships on an MSL basis (private gliders exempted).
> There are however a number of members who are continuing to make it an
> issue. I would be interested in your thought and comments.
> Thanks
> Rolf Hegele
> CCSC President

[BT[_3_]]

if you set it to zero.. I field elevation is 1000MSL, so you are reading
1000ft low.
So how do you know when you are above 12500 for O2 rules..
and how do you know when you are going to bust 18000 Class A airspace..
your altimeter is 1000ft low.!!

BT

"Rolf" > wrote in message
...
> Over the years (30 or so) Caesar Creek Soaring Club has vacillated
> with setting the altimeter to zero or MSL. Last year the Board decided
> to put the Club ships on an MSL basis (private gliders exempted).
> There are however a number of members who are continuing to make it an
> issue. I would be interested in your thought and comments.
> Thanks
> Rolf Hegele
> CCSC President

[BT[_3_]]

If you took off from an 8149ft MSL Mt Airport.. you can't set the altimeter
to zero without breaking it!!

"Bob Whelan" > wrote in message
...

>
> Fast forward to another mountain airport and another time... There I wuz
> about to launch from a field at 8149' msl elevation, with a steenking,
> howling crosswind of 20+ knots. Naturally, I didn't want to land right off
> tow, so I decided I'd tow to 3,000' agl instead of my normal
> 2,000'...insurance against broken thermals and getting blown downwind away
> from the only landable pace for miles around (i.e. the airport).
>
> I pop off at what my poor overstressed brain said was 3000' agl, known
> that instant to be an indicated 10,150' (I rounded up 'for safety's
> sake'!), in a decent-feeling upwelling and begin grinding around, keeping
> a beady eye on my drift relative to the field. I begin climbing too, but
> for some reason I couldn't get comfortable as fast as I thought my climb
> rate should be permitting...something about that lurking ground bugged me.
> About 500' into my climb I realized it was because the ground was WAY too
> close for being 3500' agl. Apparently my instructor had been right about
> my 'puny overworked brain' all those years ago!
>

[Dean[_2_]]

Andy,

You are correct. Several US airlines used to use QFE for takeoff
and landing. (Eastern and American). American stopped the practice
when Boeing told them they wouldn't build those funky altimeters(mucho
twisting up and down each takeoff and landing) for the B777. Plus they
had enough pilots from other carriers and military saying, "why are
you doing this?" . i.e. Takeoffs and landings had 2 altimeters set at
QFE and one at QNH. The practice also became absurd once radar
altimeters became standard equipment. (they read AGL). My airline has
used QNH from the beginning. Less chance for errors because of fewer
large altimeter corrections. Of course an altimeter setting 28.xx
instead of 29.xx can create an issue!
Back to gliders. Anyone who can't do the math(MSL) shouldn't be
flying gliders or anything. Period How tough is the math really? I
learned to fly in power aircraft.(general aviation-always use QNH).
Gliders don't have radar altimeters but pilots have Mark 1 eyeballs to
figure out high/low/on glideslope early in their flying career. This
thread has been fun to follow. The reliance on PDAs is just another
distraction for pilots. I suppose one can rely on them for altitude
information but it defeats the purpose of enjoying soaring for simple
and elegant flying if we are fixated on instrumentation and gadgets to
figure out if we are high or low.
Its a good reminder. We need to be vigilant for traffic at all
times. Don't fixate on altimeter/PDA. Look at the terrain and have
fun.

Aloha, Dean

[150flivver]

On May 31, 10:14*pm, GM > wrote:

> Rolf, if memory serves me right, the FARs are clear about it: setting
> to MSL is required.

I don't recall any regulation requiring the altimeter to be set to QNH
unless the particular operation requires it (eg. an instrument
approach).

[Alan[_6_]]

In article > 150flivver > writes:
>On May 31, 10:14=A0pm, GM > wrote:
>
>> Rolf, if memory serves me right, the FARs are clear about it: setting
>> to MSL is required.
>
>I don't recall any regulation requiring the altimeter to be set to QNH
>unless the particular operation requires it (eg. an instrument
>approach).


14 CFR 91.121 (aka FAR 91.121)

For extra credit, note 91.121(a)(1)(i) which says you must use the setting
from the local radio source in preference to setting to the field elevation.
As was pointed out in this group a couple years ago, the examiner in the back
seat knows that regulation.

Alan

[Bruce]

On 2010/06/01 04:54 PM, Bob Whelan wrote:
> ybe I was just an idiot that particular day. Also, I like to think I'd'a
> entered the pattern 'by eye' and not at 0' agl had that thermal not
> worked for me.
>
> Legality aside, use agl...*please!!!*
>
> Flying's real safe so long as you don't inadvertently hit anything.
> Though I don't know this for a fact, I'll bet my retirement that at
> best, it'll be embarrassing to inadvertently hit the earth when your
> 'field level' altimeter suggests you're still OK.
>
> Bob - sometimes 'common sense' isn't - W.
My Std Cirrus has an elegant solution - lots of panel space.
2 Altimeters. The metres one is set to QFE. Then I at least have some
idea how high the target should be on the final glide, iff the barometer
has not moved too much... Helps my puny brain.

The "legal" feet altimeter is always set to show MSL.

Bruce

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

[[email protected]]

OK.. MSL it is......But.......

There's a lot more to the story!

Funny thing, where is REALLY matters, (collision avoidance) MSL is not
used.........such as transponders, PCAS etc.....they use pressure alt,
as does IFR flight above 18,000. Also flight recorders use pressure
alt. Acrobatic pilots tend to use alt setting zero, since they want
to know exactly where the ground is without doing math.

Of course all the "experts" say that glider landing, especially off
field landing, MUST be done by "visual reference to the ground" not by
altimeter at all.

Then there's

Absolute altitude
Calibrated altitude
Radar altitude
GPS altitude
All that "Q" stuff
Field elevation
So called, (but incorrectly) AGL (really should be "above starting
point" as the ground varies as soon as you move!)
Non standard pressure lapse rates
Flight for high to low pressure, flight from hot to cold, etc
Mean sea level
Altimeter error....(anybody know how much error is allowed?)(anybody
ever go around te airport and note the differences from one altimetier
to the other?)

Sensitive altimeter, non sensitive altimeter?

Then how about "metric" altimiters? 300 meters per revolution
How about altimeters with the "zero" on the bottom

So.... I trust that all you instructors teach all of this and more to
your first-lesson students....don't leave ANYTHING out... law of
primacy and all that.....

Cookie

[Cats]

On Jun 2, 11:27*am, "
> wrote:
<snip>
>
> Of course all the "experts" say that glider landing, especially off
> field landing, MUST be done by "visual reference to the ground" not by
> altimeter at all.
<snip>

Why put experts in the above in double quotes? Do you doubt that a
field landing should be done by visual reference?

[[email protected]]

On Jun 2, 7:16*am, Cats > wrote:
> On Jun 2, 11:27*am, > wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > Of course all the "experts" say that glider landing, especially off
> > field landing, MUST be done by "visual reference to the ground" not by
> > altimeter at all.
>
> <snip>
>
> Why put experts in the above in double quotes? *Do you doubt that a
> field landing should be done by visual reference?

No, I quoted "expert" because the same guys who are so big on
altimeter setting say don't use the altimeter on landing. I am of the
school that says the altimeter is not all that important, (in most
common glider flying) so where you set it is not all that important
either........you gotta do math in your head one way or the other!

My overall point was that in situations where it really matters, like
off field landings, the altimeter is not useful. Also MSL is not the
"datum" used in collision aviodance.

BTW "" double quotes"" would look like this "quotes" look like
this.......LOL

Cookie

[[email protected]]

Just to play devil's advocate on this "zero altimeter" thing.........

Here is a scenario.....

Your kid is running in a one mile track race........you want to time
the race.......

The race begins.....you look at your watch....the time is 12:30:
26.010

As your kid crossed the finish line you look again at you
watch...........12:35:49 070

How fast did the kid do the mile?

Now, when my kid starts the race, I had my watch set at 0:00:00.000

At the finish it reads.......5:23.060..........done! no math!

Altimeter is a TOOL.......tool's are for the ease of use of the
user.......My tools work for me, I don't work for my tools. Tools can
be used in different ways for different purposes. Using MSL on the
altimeter does serve a good purpose for many situations, but not
all........

Cookie


Cookie

[Cats]

On Jun 2, 12:39*pm, "
> wrote:
<snip>
>
> BTW * "" double quotes"" would look like this *"quotes" look like
> this.......LOL

No, those are double double quotes.
The Single quote character is this: '
The Double quote character is this: "

Double quotes (plural) as you had two of them - one each end of
expert.

[T8]

On Jun 2, 7:47*am, " >
wrote:
> Just to play devil's advocate on this "zero altimeter" thing.........
>
> Here is a scenario.....
>
> Your kid is running in a one mile track race........you want to time
> the race.......
>
> The race begins.....you look at your watch....the time is 12:30:
> 26.010
>
> As your kid crossed the finish line you look again at you
> watch...........12:35:49 070
>
> How fast did the kid do the mile?
>
> Now, when my kid starts the race, I had my watch set at 0:00:00.000
>
> At the finish it reads.......5:23.060..........done! no math!
>
> Altimeter is a TOOL.......tool's are for the ease of use of the
> user.......My tools work for me, I don't work for my tools. Tools can
> be used in different ways for different purposes. *Using MSL on the
> altimeter does serve a good purpose for many situations, but not
> all........
>
> Cookie
>
> Cookie

So what do you do when on a XC flight, not particularly high, and
encounter class D airspace that you'd like to fly over?

-T8

[150flivver]

On Jun 2, 12:38*am, (Alan) wrote:
> In article > 150flivver > writes:
>
> >On May 31, 10:14=A0pm, GM > wrote:
>
> >> Rolf, if memory serves me right, the FARs are clear about it: setting
> >> to MSL is required.
>
> >I don't recall any regulation requiring the altimeter to be set to QNH
> >unless the particular operation requires it (eg. an instrument
> >approach).
>
> * 14 CFR 91.121 * (aka FAR 91.121)
>
> * For extra credit, note 91.121(a)(1)(i) which says you must use the setting
> from the local radio source in preference to setting to the field elevation.
> As was pointed out in this group a couple years ago, the examiner in the back
> seat knows that regulation.
>
> * * * * Alan

Yeah, but as for 91.121 you're not maintaining any particular cruising
altitude or flight level when operating a glider. I certainly agree
that cross country gliders should be operating off QNH but if you're
flying locally, you should have the option of setting QFE. I fly a
towplane and use QFE 99% of the time--any position calls I make I
convert to MSL (I have a table to reference on my legboard). If I
have to go and retrieve a landout, I'll use QNH.

[Tom[_12_]]

"Yeah, but as for 91.121 you're not maintaining any particular
cruising
altitude or flight level when operating a glider. "


The FAA legal department told me they recognize the problem /
confusion with the English language usage used in the regulation.
Gliders do not "cruise." However, the intent of the rule is clear.
Glider pilots must be aware of airspace altitude restrictions
including aircraft cruising.

Recognized exceptions to setting the altimeter to MSL include crop
dusting and aerobatics.

Yesterday, there was a very close near-miss with a glider and
commercial jet descending for a landing. The club where the glider
flies commonly uses and teaches using AGL altimeter settings.

It will only take a very few of these encounters for gliders to be
required to have ADS-B transponders and perhaps be banned from certain
airspace near airports where larger aircraft fly altogether.

A new, highly accurate GPS satellite was launched yesterday. First of
a series leading up to the new transponder technology.

Tom Knauff

[Andy[_1_]]

On Jun 1, 6:11*pm, Dean > wrote:
> American stopped the practice
> when Boeing told them they wouldn't build those funky altimeters(mucho
> twisting up and down each takeoff and landing) for the B777.

That's interesting since the same company designed and built the
display systems for both the MD-11 and the 777 and that company knew
how to make a QFE altimeter work very well on a PFD. Hardly any
twisting at all required for the MD-11. Maybe it was the old NIH
syndrome, DAC vs Boeing.

Andy

[Rob[_7_]]

On May 31, 11:06*pm, ContestID67 > wrote:
> Rolf,
>

> So about 5 years ago my Club's flight chair said that flying AGL was
> wrong, dangerous and (if I am not mistaken) illegal. *

The "legal" issue is a slippery slope. Newbies to the sport (and I
still consider myself one) may take everything their instructor says
as the bible. Seems like learning and adhering to the FARs is a
critical part of soaring. If we're taught to break certain FARs from
the get go, what is the lesson there?

Rob

[[email protected]]

On Jun 2, 10:43*am, Rob > wrote:
> On May 31, 11:06*pm, ContestID67 > wrote:
>
> > Rolf,
>
> > So about 5 years ago my Club's flight chair said that flying AGL was
> > wrong, dangerous and (if I am not mistaken) illegal. *
>
> The "legal" issue is a slippery slope. *Newbies to the sport (and I
> still consider myself one) may take everything their instructor says
> as the bible. *Seems like learning and adhering to the FARs is a
> critical part of soaring. *If we're taught to break certain FARs from
> the get go, what is the lesson there?
>
> Rob

That maybe you have the wrong instructor.
UH

[mattm[_2_]]

On Jun 2, 10:57*am, wrote:
> On Jun 2, 10:43*am, Rob > wrote:
>
> > On May 31, 11:06*pm, ContestID67 > wrote:
>
> > > Rolf,
>
> > > So about 5 years ago my Club's flight chair said that flying AGL was
> > > wrong, dangerous and (if I am not mistaken) illegal. *
>
> > The "legal" issue is a slippery slope. *Newbies to the sport (and I
> > still consider myself one) may take everything their instructor says
> > as the bible. *Seems like learning and adhering to the FARs is a
> > critical part of soaring. *If we're taught to break certain FARs from
> > the get go, what is the lesson there?
>
> > Rob
>
> That maybe you have the wrong instructor.
> UH

Perhaps, but the student is the wrong person to judge the
professionalism of the instructor. I seem to recall that as one
of the 1 hour sessions in my last CFI clinic, after all. All of us
instructors do have the duty to be professional about what we're
teaching.

When I started flying many years ago the glider operation used
QFE since we were only doing local flying. It was pointed out at some
point that we would have to convert to doing it the proper way, but
that
pattern ops were easier to teach that way. Later I moved to
a club environment that pretty much used QNH. I took my flight test
there and it was pointed out that you had to switch over to QNH
before you could take the test. After that, I moved to yet another
club that was mostly using QFE, but after several years Tom came to
visit, and we've used QNH since then. I have to say that it never
really
bothered me as to which setting was in use.

Whenever going cross country, of course, I have always used QNH and,
for that matter,
I never look at my altimeter once I'm established on downwind, anyway.
At the very first place we used Tom's landing checklist that ended
with
"ignore the altimeter", and that's stuck with me all along. I fly
at least 80 flights a year as a primary instructor, and truthfully I
can't tell
you at what altitude we turn base or final. I judge those turns
entirely
by angle.

-- Matt

[Bruce Hoult]

On Jun 2, 10:27*pm, "
> wrote:
> Then how about "metric" altimiters? *300 meters per revolution

I've never seen that, but I've flown a few gliders with altimeters
where one revolution is 3000 ft -- presumably designed to be 1000m
and tweaked by 10%.


I really can't see that it's important what you set before takeoff in
a glider. QFE is as good as anything if you're not going to talk to
anyone, and all you usually care about is which way the needle is
rotating. If you *do* have to talk to someone then you should be
listening on the radio to set your altimeter to the appropriate and
latest QNH for the area.

[T8]

On Jun 2, 11:41*am, Bruce Hoult > wrote:
> On Jun 2, 10:27*pm, "
>
> > wrote:
> > Then how about "metric" altimiters? *300 meters per revolution
>
> I've never seen that, but I've flown a few gliders with altimeters
> where one revolution is 3000 ft *-- presumably designed to be 1000m
> and tweaked by 10%.
>
> I really can't see that it's important what you set before takeoff in
> a glider. QFE is as good as anything if you're not going to talk to
> anyone, and all you usually care about is which way the needle is
> rotating. *If you *do* have to talk to someone then you should be
> listening on the radio to set your altimeter to the appropriate and
> latest QNH for the area.

But it's so easy to do this correctly (QNH)... all the time. It costs
nothing.

-T8

[kirk.stant]

On Jun 2, 6:39*am, " >
wrote:
> On Jun 2, 7:16*am, Cats > wrote:
>
....Also MSL is not the
> "datum" used in collision aviodance.

> Cookie

Uh, wrong. When you report your altitude over the radio, you are
going to read it off the altimeter, and if you are below 18,000ft (in
the US) it should be set to QFE for the closest reporting point.

So when someone calls out that he is "Eastbound over Littletown at
7300ft" on a hazy afternoon, and you are westbound over Littletown,
staring into the sun, at 7400ft, you had better hope he is using the
correct altimeter setting! Cuz that's how you are going to check to
see if you have altitude deconfliction (since I doubt you have TCAS in
your glider).

You are correct that transponders use pressure altitude when
reporting, but that is a different issue - you don't normally use raw
Mode C altitude data in the cockpit for altitude deconfliction - and
ATC applies a correction when reporting traffic altitude over the
radio.

My .02$: QFE can be useful for low altitude aerobatics - for an
airshow pilot who performs at a lot of different locations. That's
about it, since the advent of radio altimeters and GPS. Otherwise,
QNH is what should be used (and it's arguably required by the FARs),
from the very beginning. I don't want to share airspace with someone
who can't do the math and needs the altimeter to know when to turn
Base and Final! (Hint - if you are really math-in-the-cockpit
challenged, write the darn pattern altitude on the back of your
hand!).

Kirk
66

[Cats]

On Jun 2, 2:36*pm, Tom > wrote:
<snip>
>
> Yesterday, there was a very close near-miss with a glider and
> commercial jet descending for a landing. The club where the glider
> flies commonly uses and teaches using AGL altimeter settings.
<snip>

And did the glider's altimeter setting have anything to do with the
near-miss?

[Andy[_1_]]

On Jun 2, 6:36*am, Tom > wrote:

>required to have ADS-B transponders

Unless I completely misunderstood the concept ADS-B (OUT) is not a
transponder system. It will transmit without interrogation.

Andy

[kirk.stant]

On Jun 2, 11:10*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
> On Jun 2, 6:39*am, " >
> wrote:> On Jun 2, 7:16*am, Cats > wrote:
>
> ...Also MSL is not the
>
> > "datum" used in collision aviodance.
> > Cookie
>
> Uh, wrong. *When you report your altitude over the radio, you are
> going to read it off the altimeter, and if you are below 18,000ft (in
> the US) it should be set to QFE for the closest reporting point.

Doh... obviously, I meant "QNH" (set to read MSL) not QFE (set to read
height above selected airfield).

Later reference to QFE is correct.

Everyone sufficiently confused now?

Now back to your regular program....

Kirk
66

[kirk.stant]

On Jun 2, 8:04*am, 150flivver > wrote:
> On Jun 2, 12:38*am, (Alan) wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article > 150flivver > writes:
>
> > >On May 31, 10:14=A0pm, GM > wrote:
>
> > >> Rolf, if memory serves me right, the FARs are clear about it: setting
> > >> to MSL is required.
>
> > >I don't recall any regulation requiring the altimeter to be set to QNH
> > >unless the particular operation requires it (eg. an instrument
> > >approach).
>
> > * 14 CFR 91.121 * (aka FAR 91.121)
>
> > * For extra credit, note 91.121(a)(1)(i) which says you must use the setting
> > from the local radio source in preference to setting to the field elevation.
> > As was pointed out in this group a couple years ago, the examiner in the back
> > seat knows that regulation.
>
> > * * * * Alan
>
> Yeah, but as for 91.121 you're not maintaining any particular cruising
> altitude or flight level when operating a glider. *I certainly agree
> that cross country gliders should be operating off QNH but if you're
> flying *locally, you should have the option of setting QFE. *I fly a
> towplane and use QFE 99% of the time--any position calls I make I
> convert to MSL (I have a table to reference on my legboard). *If I
> have to go and retrieve a landout, I'll use QNH.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Interesting. I also fly a towplane for a club and use QNH exclusively
- so when I call the glider release, it's MSL and doesn't need any
conversion (and associated potential for mistake). That call is a
safety-of-flight issue, IMHO - and not only for local club traffic,
but for any other aircraft passing by - and much more important than
reporting the tow height to the ground for billing purposes (which, in
our club, is not a tow pilot responsibility anyway - the member logs
it after the flight or gets charged a flat 3k ft tow...). As chief
tow pilot I don't want my tow pilots doing anything during their tow
flight that takes them away from clearing their flight path,
especially with lots of gliders milling around!

Kirk
66

[Andy[_1_]]

On Jun 2, 10:14*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:

> Everyone sufficiently confused now?

Too many "Qs". Who knows what they all mean anyway? There was one I
used to enjoy when in the cadet signals corps "Shall I point my
searchlight at a cloud, occulting if necessary, in order to pinpoint
my position". Don't use that much anymore but a variant appears in
the "abbreviations available for maritime mobile service" as QUQ.

See http://life.itu.ch/radioclub/rr/m1172.htm if you want fun read.

Andy

[Darryl Ramm]

On Jun 2, 6:36*am, Tom > wrote:
> "Yeah, but as for 91.121 you're not maintaining any particular
> cruising
> altitude or flight level when operating a glider. "
>
> The FAA legal department told me they recognize the problem /
> confusion with the English language usage used in the regulation.
> Gliders do not "cruise." However, the intent of the rule is clear.
> Glider pilots must be aware of airspace altitude restrictions
> including aircraft cruising.
>
> Recognized exceptions to setting the altimeter to MSL include crop
> dusting and aerobatics.
>
> Yesterday, there was a very close near-miss with a glider and
> commercial jet descending for a landing. The club where the glider
> flies commonly uses and teaches using AGL altimeter settings.
>
> It will only take *a very few of these encounters for gliders to be
> required to have ADS-B transponders and perhaps be banned from certain
> airspace near airports where larger aircraft fly altogether.
>
> A new, highly accurate GPS satellite was launched yesterday. First of
> a series leading up to the new transponder technology.
>
> Tom Knauff
>

Thanks for the clarification of the FAA perspective on this. That and
just commons sense also says teach and use QNH, do instructors want
glider pilots to talk to other traffic?, to ATC when needed?, if there
is no other traffic or ATC locally, do instructors want pilots to have
the good foundation to do so when it would add to saftey? Do they want
pilots fixated on altimeter measurements in off-field landings (which
setting QFE may encourage), etc. Do they want new student pilots to be
heading towards flying XC or wasting time flying patterns? Start them
doing things properly and it won't need to be undone if those students
happen to blunder their way to a successful transition to XC flying.
It maybe is more a worry if there are DPE's out there that let a
student pass a check ride with QFE set. I know at some locations the
difference may not be noticed.

---

On the near miss, was they point that the glider pilot should have
been talking to ATC, and that QNH vs. QFE settings there a factor? Or
was the point something else?

If it was in an area of high density airline traffic then a good
option for the glider pilot would be to install a transponder.
Different ATC facilities are also very accommodating in terms of
working with gliders on flight following or similar procedures, most
would much rather hear from us than not.

Unfortunately Tom's post seems to confuse ADS-B and transponders.
Since we are facing lots of confusion sorting our the benefits,
issues, etc. with ADS-B I really want to avoid confusion on basic
points like this.

The new GPS satellite really has nothing directly to do with ADS-B,
although it will help improve GPS overall.

ADS-B is not a transponder. If using UATs there is no transponder
involved. If using 1090ES then the transponder is transmitting ADS-B
data but that's kind of an entirely separate function from it's role
as a transponder. Transponder literally means something that replies
to an interrogation. ADS-B is the reverse, the "A" means "automatic"
i.e. no interrogation. So strictly there is no such thing as an "ADS-B
transponder".

To my previous post in a separate thread on ADS-B, if the issue is
gliders flying in areas of high airline or fast jet traffic, that
traffic is very well equipped with TCAS II which can issue a
resolution advisory (RA) to help avoid the glider. TCAS II only can do
so if the glider is equipped with a Mode C or Mode S transponder. TCAS
cannot issue an RA against an ADS-B UAT equipped glider that does not
also have a transponder. Those airliners and fast jets may or may not
be able to display ADS-B UAT equipped glider traffic depending on
whether they have ADS-B CDTI capabilities on their traffic displays
(and again CDTI does not issue an RA, that's TCAS-II's jobs). There is
no requirement for anybody to equip with CDTI. As the FAA rolls out
ADS-B GBTs (Ground Based Transceivers==ground stations) ATC will see
ADS-B UAT traffic on their traffic displays. It is quite likely that
ATC radar will not see gliders today that are not transponder
equipped, and the GBTs will at least provide visibility of a UAT
equipped glider to ATC (and over a much larger airspace volume than
conventional SSR coverage). But without a transponder that last
fallback of TCAS-II won't work without transponders.

BTW I hope the ridge-running folks out there are trying to look at the
GBT coverage in areas they fly. That will give a good idea of the use
of ADS-B as a SAR/last know position tool. The other issue is going to
be a mixed environment of 1090ES and UAT devices on the ridges,
outside of GBT coverage to provide ADS-R (relay services) -- (e.g. at
points down low on a ridge) a Mode S transponder transmitting ADS-B
over 1090ES will not be seen by a UTA receiver and visa versa. The
only real solution I see there is dual-link receivers, luckily this is
not something terribly difficult, most of the work to do a UAT or
1090ES receiver is common, its just requires a bit more work, and
cost, to put both in one box.


Darryl

[Bob Whelan[_3_]]

On 6/2/2010 11:54 AM, Andy wrote:
> On Jun 2, 10:14 am, > wrote:
>
>> Everyone sufficiently confused now?
>
> Too many "Qs". Who knows what they all mean anyway?

Mama I don' wanna become a jargoon, so here's my query: can we agree to
quit with the "Q's"?

QED?

Bob - my coffee's fine - W.

[kirk.stant]

On Jun 2, 1:32*pm, Bob Whelan > wrote:
> On 6/2/2010 11:54 AM, Andy wrote:
>
> > On Jun 2, 10:14 am, > *wrote:
>
> >> Everyone sufficiently confused now?
>
> > Too many "Qs". *Who knows what they all mean anyway?
>
> Mama I don' wanna become a jargoon, so here's my query: can we agree to
> quit with the "Q's"?
>
> QED?
>
> Bob - my coffee's fine - W.

Que? No comprendo!

66

[Frank Whiteley]

On Jun 2, 12:32*pm, Bob Whelan > wrote:
> On 6/2/2010 11:54 AM, Andy wrote:
>
> > On Jun 2, 10:14 am, > *wrote:
>
> >> Everyone sufficiently confused now?
>
> > Too many "Qs". *Who knows what they all mean anyway?
>
> Mama I don' wanna become a jargoon, so here's my query: can we agree to
> quit with the "Q's"?
>
> QED?
>
> Bob - my coffee's fine - W.

QED, the meaning is in here
http://www.angelfire.com/va3/navy_mars/ACP131.pdf

Frank Whiteley

[Craig[_2_]]

On Jun 2, 2:09*pm, Frank Whiteley > wrote:
> On Jun 2, 12:32*pm, Bob Whelan > wrote:
>
> > On 6/2/2010 11:54 AM, Andy wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 2, 10:14 am, > *wrote:
>
> > >> Everyone sufficiently confused now?
>
> > > Too many "Qs". *Who knows what they all mean anyway?
>
> > Mama I don' wanna become a jargoon, so here's my query: can we agree to
> > quit with the "Q's"?
>
> > QED?
>
> > Bob - my coffee's fine - W.
>
> QED, the meaning is in herehttp://www.angelfire.com/va3/navy_mars/ACP131.pdf
>
> Frank Whiteley

Here's how the Air Force dealt with the issue after the Thunderbirds
crash in '04.
http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/briefs/186582-1.html

Craig

[Greg Arnold[_3_]]

On 6/2/2010 2:21 PM, Craig wrote:
> On Jun 2, 2:09 pm, Frank > wrote:
>> On Jun 2, 12:32 pm, Bob > wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/2/2010 11:54 AM, Andy wrote:
>>
>>>> On Jun 2, 10:14 am, > wrote:
>>
>>>>> Everyone sufficiently confused now?
>>
>>>> Too many "Qs". Who knows what they all mean anyway?
>>
>>> Mama I don' wanna become a jargoon, so here's my query: can we agree to
>>> quit with the "Q's"?
>>
>>> QED?
>>
>>> Bob - my coffee's fine - W.
>>
>> QED, the meaning is in herehttp://www.angelfire.com/va3/navy_mars/ACP131.pdf
>>
>> Frank Whiteley
>
> Here's how the Air Force dealt with the issue after the Thunderbirds
> crash in '04.
> http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/briefs/186582-1.html
>
> Craig


It seems like a Thunderbirds show is one example of where AGL should be
used, but they continued to use MSL. Must be hard to use different
numbers for each show.

[BT[_3_]]

We can't set to "Zero" our MSL on the ground is higher than the altimeter
can adjust.

We train our students to "enter the downwind between 3800-3600 MSL (800-1000
AGL), then forget the altimeter. LOOK OUTSIDE

We cannot set "Zero", our MSL on the ground is higher than the altimeter can
adjust.

If the tow pilot cannot do mental math to call down the release height..
6400 release minus 2800 field elevation = 3.6 for the radio call then
perhaps the tow pilot is over tasked and should not be flying?
We cannot set "Zero", our MSL on the ground is higher than the altimeter can
adjust.

If we were to try to use zero... then how would our students or other
"trained pilots" know when they are bumping their heads on the Class B above
us defined by MSL, or if a transient traffic calls at a set altitude.. they
they may be at the same altitude and not 1000ft different?

We cannot set "Zero", our MSL on the ground is higher than the altimeter can
adjust.

A visiting pilot trying to set zero, will not be approved for local solo
flights until he can show proficiency at FAR required operations (91.121)

We cannot set "Zero", our MSL on the ground is higher than the altimeter can
adjust.


"kirk.stant" > wrote in message
...
> On Jun 2, 8:04 am, 150flivver > wrote:
>> On Jun 2, 12:38 am, (Alan) wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > In article
>> > >
>> > 150flivver > writes:
>>
>> > >On May 31, 10:14=A0pm, GM > wrote:
>>
>> > >> Rolf, if memory serves me right, the FARs are clear about it:
>> > >> setting
>> > >> to MSL is required.
>>
>> > >I don't recall any regulation requiring the altimeter to be set to QNH
>> > >unless the particular operation requires it (eg. an instrument
>> > >approach).
>>
>> > 14 CFR 91.121 (aka FAR 91.121)
>>
>> > For extra credit, note 91.121(a)(1)(i) which says you must use the
>> > setting
>> > from the local radio source in preference to setting to the field
>> > elevation.
>> > As was pointed out in this group a couple years ago, the examiner in
>> > the back
>> > seat knows that regulation.
>>
>> > Alan
>>
>> Yeah, but as for 91.121 you're not maintaining any particular cruising
>> altitude or flight level when operating a glider. I certainly agree
>> that cross country gliders should be operating off QNH but if you're
>> flying locally, you should have the option of setting QFE. I fly a
>> towplane and use QFE 99% of the time--any position calls I make I
>> convert to MSL (I have a table to reference on my legboard). If I
>> have to go and retrieve a landout, I'll use QNH.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Interesting. I also fly a towplane for a club and use QNH exclusively
> - so when I call the glider release, it's MSL and doesn't need any
> conversion (and associated potential for mistake). That call is a
> safety-of-flight issue, IMHO - and not only for local club traffic,
> but for any other aircraft passing by - and much more important than
> reporting the tow height to the ground for billing purposes (which, in
> our club, is not a tow pilot responsibility anyway - the member logs
> it after the flight or gets charged a flat 3k ft tow...). As chief
> tow pilot I don't want my tow pilots doing anything during their tow
> flight that takes them away from clearing their flight path,
> especially with lots of gliders milling around!
>
> Kirk
> 66

[[email protected]]

On Jun 2, 8:17*am, T8 > wrote:
> On Jun 2, 7:47*am, " >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Just to play devil's advocate on this "zero altimeter" thing.........
>
> > Here is a scenario.....
>
> > Your kid is running in a one mile track race........you want to time
> > the race.......
>
> > The race begins.....you look at your watch....the time is 12:30:
> > 26.010
>
> > As your kid crossed the finish line you look again at you
> > watch...........12:35:49 070
>
> > How fast did the kid do the mile?
>
> > Now, when my kid starts the race, I had my watch set at 0:00:00.000
>
> > At the finish it reads.......5:23.060..........done! no math!
>
> > Altimeter is a TOOL.......tool's are for the ease of use of the
> > user.......My tools work for me, I don't work for my tools. Tools can
> > be used in different ways for different purposes. *Using MSL on the
> > altimeter does serve a good purpose for many situations, but not
> > all........
>
> > Cookie
>
> > Cookie
>
> So what do you do when on a XC flight, not particularly high, and
> encounter class D airspace that you'd like to fly over?
>
> -T8- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Interesting question.....
First of all, I recommend MSL altimeter setting for X -C flight.

Second, if I'm going to fly OVER the Class D.....I won't do anything
in particular.........

Third, If I am going to ENTER the Class D, I will contact via two way
radio

Forth, Class D is often defined using the "AGL" datum....Class D is
typically 2500' AGL over the airport in question.

Fifth, the class D is depicted on the chart in MSL

Sixth, If for some unknown reason, my altimeter was set to zero at
take off instead of 372' (msl of my home airport) I would simply add
400 to my indicated altitude, or get the altimeter setting along the
way.

Seventh, since the class D (if typical) is 2500 AGL, and I took off
from that airport at altimerer zero, then I would know whether I was
in, or over, the airspace easily......

Cookie

[[email protected]]

On Jun 2, 12:10*pm, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
> On Jun 2, 6:39*am, " >
> wrote:> On Jun 2, 7:16*am, Cats > wrote:
>
> ...Also MSL is not the
>
> > "datum" used in collision aviodance.
> > Cookie
>
> Uh, wrong. *When you report your altitude over the radio, you are
> going to read it off the altimeter, and if you are below 18,000ft (in
> the US) it should be set to QFE for the closest reporting point.
>
> So when someone calls out that he is "Eastbound over Littletown at
> 7300ft" on a hazy afternoon, and you are westbound over Littletown,
> staring into the sun, at 7400ft, you had better hope he is using the
> correct altimeter setting! *Cuz that's how you are going to check to
> see if you have altitude deconfliction (since I doubt you have TCAS in
> your glider).
>
> You are correct that transponders use pressure altitude when
> reporting, but that is a different issue - you don't normally use raw
> Mode C altitude data in the cockpit for altitude deconfliction - and
> ATC applies a correction when reporting traffic altitude over the
> radio.
>
> My .02$: *QFE can be useful for low altitude aerobatics - for an
> airshow pilot who performs at a lot of different locations. *That's
> about it, since the advent of radio altimeters and GPS. *Otherwise,
> QNH is what should be used (and it's arguably required by the FARs),
> from the very beginning. *I don't want to share airspace with someone
> who can't do the math and needs the altimeter to know when to turn
> Base and Final! (Hint - if you are really math-in-the-cockpit
> challenged, write the darn pattern altitude on the back of your
> hand!).
>
> Kirk
> 66

Transponders and PCAS, and TCAS all use Pressure altitude as the
reference, not MSL......It has to be "translated" later by somebody or
something........Class A uses ony pressure altitude....

Just pointing out there is more to the story! There are many datums
for altitude...........Any one is translatable to another.......Just
add or subtract.

Don't you think all this "Q" crap really confuses the issue? Why not
use real English words? Q for altitude? Go Figure!

Cookie

[[email protected]]

On Jun 2, 1:14*pm, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
> On Jun 2, 11:10*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
> > On Jun 2, 6:39*am, " >
> > wrote:> On Jun 2, 7:16*am, Cats > wrote:
>
> > ...Also MSL is not the
>
> > > "datum" used in collision aviodance.
> > > Cookie
>
> > Uh, wrong. *When you report your altitude over the radio, you are
> > going to read it off the altimeter, and if you are below 18,000ft (in
> > the US) it should be set to QFE for the closest reporting point.
>
> Doh... obviously, I meant "QNH" (set to read MSL) not QFE (set to read
> height above selected airfield).
>
> Later reference to QFE is correct.
>
> Everyone sufficiently confused now?
>
> Now back to your regular program....
>
> Kirk
> 66

See what I mean?

Cookie

[[email protected]]

On Jun 2, 8:08*am, Cats > wrote:
> On Jun 2, 12:39*pm, > wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
> > BTW * "" double quotes"" would look like this *"quotes" look like
> > this.......LOL
>
> No, those are double double quotes.
> The Single quote character is this: '
> The Double quote character is this: "
>
> Double quotes (plural) as you had two of them - one each end of
> expert.

You're right! """I stand corrected!""" ( I put that in triple-
double quotes because I am quoting my self when I quoted somebody
else, who was quoting somebody else!

Cookie

[valsoar]

II'm sure someone already pointed this out but in the US, I really
don't have a choice...

Sec. 91.121

Altimeter settings.

(a) Each person operating an aircraft shall maintain the cruising
altitude or flight level of that aircraft, as the case may be, by
reference to an altimeter that is set, when operating--
(1) Below 18,000 feet MSL, to--
(i) The current reported altimeter setting of a station along the
route and within 100 nautical miles of the aircraft;
(ii) If there is no station within the area prescribed in paragraph (a)
(1)(i) of this section, the current reported altimeter setting of an
appropriate available station; or
(iii) In the case of an aircraft not equipped with a radio, the
elevation of the departure airport or an appropriate altimeter setting
available before departure; or
(2) At or above 18,000 feet MSL, to 29.92'' Hg.

[Brian Whatcott]

kirk.stant wrote:
> /snip/ When you report your altitude over the radio, you are
> going to read it off the altimeter, and if you are below 18,000ft (in
> the US) it should be set to QFE for the closest reporting point.

Uh?

>
> So when someone calls out that he is "Eastbound over Littletown at
> 7300ft" on a hazy afternoon, and you are westbound over Littletown,
> staring into the sun, at 7400ft, you had better hope he is using the
> correct altimeter setting! Cuz that's how you are going to check to
> see if you have altitude deconfliction (since I doubt you have TCAS in
> your glider).

Perhaps not applicable to gliders, but a semicircular rule for VFR
flight makes sense: Odd and a half thousands on course 0-179DegMag
Even and a half thousands on course 180 to 359 magnetic...
>
> You are correct that transponders use pressure altitude when
> reporting, but that is a different issue - you don't normally use raw
> Mode C altitude data in the cockpit for altitude deconfliction - and
> ATC applies a correction when reporting traffic altitude over the
> radio.
>
> My .02$: QFE can be useful for low altitude aerobatics - for an
> airshow pilot who performs at a lot of different locations. That's
> about it, since the advent of radio altimeters and GPS. Otherwise,
> QNH is what should be used (and it's arguably required by the FARs),
> from the very beginning. I don't want to share airspace with someone
> who can't do the math and needs the altimeter to know when to turn
> Base and Final! (Hint - if you are really math-in-the-cockpit
> challenged, write the darn pattern altitude on the back of your
> hand!).
>
> Kirk
> 66
>

Brian W

[Lewis Hartswick]

Cats wrote:
> The Single quote character is this: '

That isn't a quote . At least wasn't when I wet to school in the USA
It may be elsewhere or it could have change in the last 60 years.
...Lew..

[5Z]

On May 31, 8:22*pm, PK > wrote:
> There is absolutly no rationale for setting the altimeter to AGL.The
> only excuse I am willing to accept, and it is a rather poor one, if he
> or she would NEVER EVER be willing to be out of glide to their home
> field. And how many glider pilots were NEVER EVER in that position? 6PK

Not even that!

What if the pilot hears a radio call such as "Airport XYZ traffic,
Cessna 1234, 2 miles south crossing midfield at 2500"?

Where will he be looking? Up? Down?

When I flew at CCSC 18 or so years ago, I would set the club ship's
altimeter to the CORRECT setting, and let the next pilot deal with it.

-Tom

[5Z]

On Jun 2, 4:47*am, " >
wrote:
> Altimeter is a TOOL.......tool's are for the ease of use of the
> user.......My tools work for me, I don't work for my tools. Tools can
> be used in different ways for different purposes. *Using MSL on the
> altimeter does serve a good purpose for many situations, but not
> all........

So at the 500' MSL airport your kid sets the altimeter to ZERO. He
takes off and is cruising around at 2,000' when an airplane checks in
at 2,500', so the kid answers with his altitude. As your kid looks
around and UP for the plane, and the plane's pilot is looking DOWN,
BAM!! End of story :-(

Need I say more?

-Tom

[sisu1a]

(snip)
> We can't set to "Zero" our MSL on the ground is higher than the altimeter
> can adjust.
(snip)
> We cannot set "Zero", our MSL on the ground is higher than the altimeter can
> adjust.
(snip)
> We cannot set "Zero", our MSL on the ground is higher than the altimeter can
> adjust.
(snip)
> We cannot set "Zero", our MSL on the ground is higher than the altimeter can
> adjust.
(snip)
> We cannot set "Zero", our MSL on the ground is higher than the altimeter can
> adjust.

Uhh, nice try- but you were assigned 25 standards to write about not
being able to set "Zero" on your altimeter at your MSL on the ground -
and you only turned in five. Unacceptable. For that, you owe 25 more,
plus 25 additional standards about skimping on your assigned
standards.

When those are done and you've calmed down we can talk about when you
get to start soaring again, but for now your grounded mister. à²*_à²*

-Paul

[5Z]

On Jun 2, 6:04*am, 150flivver > wrote:
> *I fly a
> towplane and use QFE 99% of the time--any position calls I make I
> convert to MSL (I have a table to reference on my legboard).

Why? To keep track of AGL release altitudes?

Seems to me it would be easier to do the math for that at the end of
the day, instead of during a stressful collision resolution.

-Tom

[Martin Gregorie[_5_]]

On Wed, 02 Jun 2010 21:13:37 -0600, Lewis Hartswick wrote:

> Cats wrote:
>> The Single quote character is this: '
>
> That isn't a quote . At least wasn't when I wet to school in the USA It
> may be elsewhere or it could have change in the last 60 years.
> ...Lew..

Its meaning is context dependent. I know three uses of it:

1) As 'single quote marks' in an English sentence.
2) As a character literal marker in programming, e.g 'a'.
3) To indicate ownership, it which case it's occurrence is never paired.

Only the first two uses are called quote marks or single quotes. When
used as the third case it is called an apostrophe.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

[T8]

On Jun 3, 4:18*am, Martin Gregorie >
wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Jun 2010 21:13:37 -0600, Lewis Hartswick wrote:
> > Cats wrote:
> >> The Single quote character is this: '
>
> > That isn't a quote . At least wasn't when I wet to school in the USA It
> > may be elsewhere or it could have change in the last 60 years.
> > * * ...Lew..
>
> Its meaning is context dependent. I know three uses of it:
>
> 1) As 'single quote marks' in an English sentence.
> 2) As a character literal marker in programming, e.g 'a'.
> 3) To indicate ownership, it which case it's occurrence is never paired.
>

In case 3, it's not "it's", it's "its". And now you can add a fourth
case for contractions. :-).

-Evan

[kirk.stant]

> Interesting question.....
> First of all, I recommend MSL altimeter setting for X -C flight.

So are you recommending or suggesting AGL for local flights?

Why? You just listed numerous reasons why MSL is preferable!

Kirk

[150flivver]

On Jun 3, 8:10*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
> > Interesting question.....
> > First of all, I recommend MSL altimeter setting for X -C flight.
>
> So are you recommending or suggesting AGL for local flights?
>
> Why? *You just listed numerous reasons why MSL is preferable!
>
> Kirk

QFE is only an accurate above ground altitude at the reporting point.
If you go somewhere other than where the QFE setting was input, it is
not an accurate agl altitude. QNH is accurate over a wide geographic
area and it is what most aircraft will have set so announcing your MSL
altitude would have some relevance for deconfliction. I use QFE in
the towplane because it's a local flight and I can record the release
altitude for billing. I convert the altimeter reading to MSL for any
position reports. It's not a big deal to me. Our gliders use QNH. I
clear like a bandit and am smart enough not to spend a lot of time
inside the airplane doing math.

[BT[_3_]]

ROFLMAO...


"sisu1a" > wrote in message
...
> (snip)
>> We can't set to "Zero" our MSL on the ground is higher than the altimeter
>> can adjust.
> (snip)
>> We cannot set "Zero", our MSL on the ground is higher than the altimeter
>> can
>> adjust.
> (snip)
>> We cannot set "Zero", our MSL on the ground is higher than the altimeter
>> can
>> adjust.
> (snip)
>> We cannot set "Zero", our MSL on the ground is higher than the altimeter
>> can
>> adjust.
> (snip)
>> We cannot set "Zero", our MSL on the ground is higher than the altimeter
>> can
>> adjust.
>
> Uhh, nice try- but you were assigned 25 standards to write about not
> being able to set "Zero" on your altimeter at your MSL on the ground -
> and you only turned in five. Unacceptable. For that, you owe 25 more,
> plus 25 additional standards about skimping on your assigned
> standards.
>
> When those are done and you've calmed down we can talk about when you
> get to start soaring again, but for now your grounded mister. à²*_à²*
>
> -Paul
>
>
>

[Eric Greenwell]

On 6/1/2010 7:54 AM, Bob Whelan wrote:
> On 5/31/2010 8:07 PM, Rolf wrote:
>> Over the years (30 or so) Caesar Creek Soaring Club has vacillated
>> with setting the altimeter to zero or MSL. Last year the Board decided
>> to put the Club ships on an MSL basis (private gliders exempted).
>> There are however a number of members who are continuing to make it an
>> issue. I would be interested in your thought and comments.
>
> Wearing my dry humor hat just a bit...
>
snip
> Fast forward to another mountain airport and another time... There I
> wuz about to launch from a field at 8149' msl elevation, with a
> steenking, howling crosswind of 20+ knots. Naturally, I didn't want to
> land right off tow, so I decided I'd tow to 3,000' agl instead of my
> normal 2,000'...insurance against broken thermals and getting blown
> downwind away from the only landable pace for miles around (i.e. the
> airport).
>
> I pop off at what my poor overstressed brain said was 3000' agl, known
> that instant to be an indicated 10,150' (I rounded up 'for safety's
> sake'!), in a decent-feeling upwelling and begin grinding around,
> keeping a beady eye on my drift relative to the field. I begin
> climbing too, but for some reason I couldn't get comfortable as fast
> as I thought my climb rate should be permitting...something about that
> lurking ground bugged me. About 500' into my climb I realized it was
> because the ground was WAY too close for being 3500' agl. Apparently
> my instructor had been right about my 'puny overworked brain' all
> those years ago!

Uh, Bob, have you ever tried to set an altimeter to zero when you are at
8149'? Not going to happen - it will still show 1000's of feet when
you've run out of adjustment. Now what do you do? AGL isn't an option,
so you'd have to use MSL (as you did).

Perhaps, perhaps, if you'd used MSL from the start your brain would "do
the math better". There is a way around the math problem that's simple:
a simple "dial" on the altimeter marked in 1000's of feet, which can be
rotated to show AGL from any elevation you choose. The 1000's needle
points to your AGL on the "dial".

Before electronic flight computers, I used this "dial" and prayer wheel
when flying XC. I reset the dial to elevation of whatever field I was
currently using as my target.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (netto to net to email me)

- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl

- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of what you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz

[Bob Whelan[_3_]]

On 6/4/2010 4:14 PM, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> On 6/1/2010 7:54 AM, Bob Whelan wrote:
>> On 5/31/2010 8:07 PM, Rolf wrote:
>>> Over the years (30 or so) Caesar Creek Soaring Club has vacillated
>>> with setting the altimeter to zero or MSL. Last year the Board decided
>>> to put the Club ships on an MSL basis (private gliders exempted).
>>> There are however a number of members who are continuing to make it an
>>> issue. I would be interested in your thought and comments.
>>
>> Wearing my dry humor hat just a bit...
>>
> snip
>> Fast forward to another mountain airport and another time... There I
>> wuz about to launch from a field at 8149' msl elevation, with a
>> steenking, howling crosswind of 20+ knots. Naturally, I didn't want to
>> land right off tow, so I decided I'd tow to 3,000' agl instead of my
>> normal 2,000'...insurance against broken thermals and getting blown
>> downwind away from the only landable place for miles around (i.e. the
>> airport).
>>
>> I pop off at what my poor overstressed brain said was 3000' agl, known
>> that instant to be an indicated 10,150' (I rounded up 'for safety's
>> sake'!), in a decent-feeling upwelling and begin grinding around,
>> keeping a beady eye on my drift relative to the field. I begin
>> climbing too, but for some reason I couldn't get comfortable as fast
>> as I thought my climb rate should be permitting...something about that
>> lurking ground bugged me. About 500' into my climb I realized it was
>> because the ground was WAY too close for being 3500' agl. Apparently
>> my instructor had been right about my 'puny overworked brain' all
>> those years ago!
>
> Uh, Bob, have you ever tried to set an altimeter to zero when you are at
> 8149'? Not going to happen - it will still show 1000's of feet when
> you've run out of adjustment. Now what do you do? AGL isn't an option,
> so you'd have to use MSL (as you did).

Heck, I've never tried to set an altimeter to zero ANYtime/where, except
for my pre-solo flights (@800' msl) before my instructor decided I was
then smart enough to do simple arithmetic in my skull. And except for
the time I couldn't ADD (3,000' to 8,149'), my lack of arithmetic skills
have never been a problem.

> Perhaps, perhaps, if you'd used MSL from the start your brain would "do
> the math better".

Perhaps indeed...I'm OK with one (aggravating initially, funnier by the
second once I'd climbed away!) bozo error in 1100+ tows. So far as I
know, I'm still 100% on my subtractions!

There is a way around the math problem that's simple:
> a simple "dial" on the altimeter marked in 1000's of feet, which can be
> rotated to show AGL from any elevation you choose. The 1000's needle
> points to your AGL on the "dial".
>
> Before electronic flight computers, I used this "dial" and prayer wheel
> when flying XC. I reset the dial to elevation of whatever field I was
> currently using as my target.
>
Sounds like a good tip for the sufficiently needy/motivated - thanks!

Bob W.

P.S. Funnily enough (excuse the shameless pseudo-plug), my memory says
that was the same day 'Wilderness Doug' gained his moniker. It was BLOWing.

[Chip Bearden[_2_]]

Just got back to RAS after a long absence to find this thread. Great
fun! :)

One more data point:

I learned to fly with CCSC (original poster is CCSC Pres.). Actually
at CCSC's former airport in Richmond, IN. The club gliders and most
private gliders had the altimeters set to AGL (zero). Easier math
(just read, no subtraction required). No radios in club gliders (to
hear warnings or communicate with power aircraft or anyone else). No
Class B or any other type of controlled airspace nearby (no Class B
anywhere in those days). It's Ohio: flat as a board so any airport we
could fly to was within 100' or so of takeoff altitude. Under the
conditions I was flying in--which arguably don't exist anymore--it's
undeniable that the mental load is lighter using AGL. I flew for
years, including cross country and midwestern regional and national
contests using AGL. I can't remember when I switched but it was no big
deal. I'd already had to do it a few times at wave camps, etc., and
just decided it was time to make the change. For some years even after
I switched to MSL, before each contest flight I would set the
altitmeter to zero, write down the altimeter setting, then reset it to
MSL. On final glide, I would reset it to AGL to make the mental math
easier with my cardboard "prayer wheel" final glider computer. I need
4200' to get home, the altimeter says 4800', so I'm in good shape.
Again, no subtraction required: just read the altimeter and compare to
the calculator.

There may still be situations where AGL works fine. Yeah, it's
probably better to start off doing it "right" with MSL, but we don't
start students off with spins or advanced thermaling techniques. We
begin with the easier stuff and move on gradually. This month marks
the 45th anniversary of my first lesson. I like to think I was no less
a "real pilot" for those years I flew with the altimeter set to AGL.

Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"
USA

[ZZ]

On 5/31/2010 7:07 PM, Rolf wrote:
> Over the years (30 or so) Caesar Creek Soaring Club has vacillated
> with setting the altimeter to zero or MSL. Last year the Board decided
> to put the Club ships on an MSL basis (private gliders exempted).
> There are however a number of members who are continuing to make it an
> issue. I would be interested in your thought and comments.
> Thanks
> Rolf Hegele
> CCSC President


With all due respect, WTF!!??

Virtually, all of the aviators that you are like likely to encounter are
set to MSL. ATC, towers, TFRs, most of the altitudes on sectionals
including airports that you may need to use, weather briefings, the
lower limit of class E (17,999) are virtually all MSL. If you are
working in AGL, you are doing mathematics all day!

I hope that you join us. It will be easier for you and safer for everyone.

Paul
ZZ

[ZZ]

On 8/10/2010 8:01 PM, ZZ wrote:
> On 5/31/2010 7:07 PM, Rolf wrote:
>> Over the years (30 or so) Caesar Creek Soaring Club has vacillated
>> with setting the altimeter to zero or MSL. Last year the Board decided
>> to put the Club ships on an MSL basis (private gliders exempted).
>> There are however a number of members who are continuing to make it an
>> issue. I would be interested in your thought and comments.
>> Thanks
>> Rolf Hegele
>> CCSC President
>
>
> With all due respect, WTF!!??
>
> Virtually, all of the aviators that you are like likely to encounter are
> set to MSL. ATC, towers, TFRs, most of the altitudes on sectionals
> including airports that you may need to use, weather briefings, the
> lower limit of class E (17,999) are virtually all MSL. If you are
> working in AGL, you are doing mathematics all day!
>
> I hope that you join us. It will be easier for you and safer for everyone.
>
> Paul
> ZZ
Correction. In my rant I meant the upper limit of class E.
Paul
ZZ

[Ralph Jones[_3_]]

On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 20:03:40 -0700, ZZ >
wrote:

>On 8/10/2010 8:01 PM, ZZ wrote:
>> On 5/31/2010 7:07 PM, Rolf wrote:
>>> Over the years (30 or so) Caesar Creek Soaring Club has vacillated
>>> with setting the altimeter to zero or MSL. Last year the Board decided
>>> to put the Club ships on an MSL basis (private gliders exempted).
>>> There are however a number of members who are continuing to make it an
>>> issue. I would be interested in your thought and comments.
>>> Thanks
>>> Rolf Hegele
>>> CCSC President
>>
>>
>> With all due respect, WTF!!??
>>
>> Virtually, all of the aviators that you are like likely to encounter are
>> set to MSL. ATC, towers, TFRs, most of the altitudes on sectionals
>> including airports that you may need to use, weather briefings, the
>> lower limit of class E (17,999) are virtually all MSL. If you are
>> working in AGL, you are doing mathematics all day!
>>
>> I hope that you join us. It will be easier for you and safer for everyone.
>>
>> Paul
>> ZZ
>Correction. In my rant I meant the upper limit of class E.
>Paul
>ZZ

WTF indeed.I don't think I'd want to be an officer of a club whose
operating rules forbid compliance with
FAR 91.121...

rj

[Andy[_1_]]

On Aug 11, 8:41*am, Ralph Jones > wrote:

> WTF indeed.I don't think I'd want to be an officer of a club whose
> operating rules forbid compliance with
> FAR 91.121...

I'm not taking sides in this big-endian/little-endian debate but
citing 91.121 has dubious merit.

it says ...
(a) Each person operating an aircraft shall maintain the cruising
altitude or flight level of that aircraft, as the case may be, by
reference to an altimeter that is set....

Cruising altitude and level flight have no applicability to the
operation of gliders. 91.121 has no significance for gliders flying
tow, and glide to landing, operations.

Andy