Who's flying out of the higest elev airport? [Archive]

Newps

March 8th 04, 06:50 PM

I was just at the airport today and I looked at my new overhauled United
altimeter. The lowest setting is 28.10. There is a little travel past
that but you'd have to guess at what the setting really is. The station
pressure here is usually around 26 inches. Looks like the highest
altitude for which you could correct to zero will be about 2000 MSL,
depending of course on the actual altimeter setting.

Dudley Henriques wrote:
> Thanks Newps; that jives with what I have so far anyway. I'm assuming a 27.5
> low end on the Kollsman. Does that sound right to you. I'm at home and can't
> check it :-)
> Dudley
> "Newps" > wrote in message
> news:5g13c.523826$na.1181072@attbi_s04...
>
>>Hey, I live at 3650 and can't set my altimeter to zero.
>>
>>
>>
>>Dudley Henriques wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hey, you mountain types out there :-) I'm doing some research on a
>
> safety
>
>>>issue and need your help . I need a post from someone flying out of
>
> Colorado
>
>>>somewhere, preferably Telluride or a field very close to Telluride. I
>
> need
>
>>>as close to the highest elevation in the U.S. as I can get.
>>>I'm not dealing with this issue in the context of right or wrong as it
>>>pertains to mountain flying. I need to know if the Kollsman window in
>
> your
>
>>>altimeters has a wide enough range to allow you, IF YOU DESIRED TO DO
>
> SO, to
>
>>>set your altimeters to 0 elevation on a consistent basis before take off
>
> at
>
>>>your field instead of a MSL setting. Again, I'm only interested in the
>>>possibility, not the right and wrongs involved with doing this.
>>>Thanks,
>>>Dudley Henriques
>>>International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
>>>Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
>>>For personal email, please replace
>>>the z's with e's.
>>>dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

G.R. Patterson III

March 8th 04, 07:06 PM

Dudley Henriques wrote:
>
> I just
> can't remember the Kollsman low pressure side maximum for our GA altimeters
> here in the U.S. I think it's 27.5 or 25.5 but I can't remember exactly
> which; and I need to have this for a data point.

Perhaps this will help.
http://www.ansys.com/industry/aerospace/conference_papers/whittum1.html

George Patterson
Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
not yield to the tongue.

Dudley Henriques

March 8th 04, 07:09 PM

I have it at present somewhere between 2500 and 3000 feet ASL as a possible
limit parameter based on averaging out the altimeter settings for the U.S.
It's interesting about the low Kollsman number range. With 28.10, I'm
beginning to see some variables in the low range that I didn't know was
there. I always assumed all the Kollsmans would all be the same. It will be
interesting to see if others have different numbers for their Kollsmans.
D
"Newps" > wrote in message
news:Mf33c.87121$PR3.1225813@attbi_s03...
> I was just at the airport today and I looked at my new overhauled United
> altimeter. The lowest setting is 28.10. There is a little travel past
> that but you'd have to guess at what the setting really is. The station
> pressure here is usually around 26 inches. Looks like the highest
> altitude for which you could correct to zero will be about 2000 MSL,
> depending of course on the actual altimeter setting.
>
>
>
> Dudley Henriques wrote:
> > Thanks Newps; that jives with what I have so far anyway. I'm assuming a
27.5
> > low end on the Kollsman. Does that sound right to you. I'm at home and
can't
> > check it :-)
> > Dudley
> > "Newps" > wrote in message
> > news:5g13c.523826$na.1181072@attbi_s04...
> >
> >>Hey, I live at 3650 and can't set my altimeter to zero.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>Dudley Henriques wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Hey, you mountain types out there :-) I'm doing some research on a
> >
> > safety
> >
> >>>issue and need your help . I need a post from someone flying out of
> >
> > Colorado
> >
> >>>somewhere, preferably Telluride or a field very close to Telluride. I
> >
> > need
> >
> >>>as close to the highest elevation in the U.S. as I can get.
> >>>I'm not dealing with this issue in the context of right or wrong as it
> >>>pertains to mountain flying. I need to know if the Kollsman window in
> >
> > your
> >
> >>>altimeters has a wide enough range to allow you, IF YOU DESIRED TO DO
> >
> > SO, to
> >
> >>>set your altimeters to 0 elevation on a consistent basis before take
off
> >
> > at
> >
> >>>your field instead of a MSL setting. Again, I'm only interested in the
> >>>possibility, not the right and wrongs involved with doing this.
> >>>Thanks,
> >>>Dudley Henriques
> >>>International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
> >>>Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
> >>>For personal email, please replace
> >>>the z's with e's.
> >>>dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>

Dudley Henriques

March 8th 04, 07:12 PM

This is pretty much what I need George. Thanks much.
Dudley
"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Dudley Henriques wrote:
> >
> > I just
> > can't remember the Kollsman low pressure side maximum for our GA
altimeters
> > here in the U.S. I think it's 27.5 or 25.5 but I can't remember exactly
> > which; and I need to have this for a data point.
>
> Perhaps this will help.
> http://www.ansys.com/industry/aerospace/conference_papers/whittum1.html
>
> George Patterson
> Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that
would
> not yield to the tongue.

Stan Prevost

March 8th 04, 08:51 PM

Dudley, I found reference to an air data computer which would accept an
altimeter setting of 26.75 to 33.00.

Stan

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> Hey, you mountain types out there :-) I'm doing some research on a safety
> issue and need your help . I need a post from someone flying out of
Colorado
> somewhere, preferably Telluride or a field very close to Telluride. I need
> as close to the highest elevation in the U.S. as I can get.
> I'm not dealing with this issue in the context of right or wrong as it
> pertains to mountain flying. I need to know if the Kollsman window in your
> altimeters has a wide enough range to allow you, IF YOU DESIRED TO DO SO,
to
> set your altimeters to 0 elevation on a consistent basis before take off
at
> your field instead of a MSL setting. Again, I'm only interested in the
> possibility, not the right and wrongs involved with doing this.
> Thanks,
> Dudley Henriques
> International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
> Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
> For personal email, please replace
> the z's with e's.
> dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt
>
>

Dudley Henriques

March 8th 04, 09:02 PM

Thanks Stan; that's an additional data point for sure.
D
"Stan Prevost" > wrote in message
...
> Dudley, I found reference to an air data computer which would accept an
> altimeter setting of 26.75 to 33.00.
>
> Stan
>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> nk.net...
> > Hey, you mountain types out there :-) I'm doing some research on a
safety
> > issue and need your help . I need a post from someone flying out of
> Colorado
> > somewhere, preferably Telluride or a field very close to Telluride. I
need
> > as close to the highest elevation in the U.S. as I can get.
> > I'm not dealing with this issue in the context of right or wrong as it
> > pertains to mountain flying. I need to know if the Kollsman window in
your
> > altimeters has a wide enough range to allow you, IF YOU DESIRED TO DO
SO,
> to
> > set your altimeters to 0 elevation on a consistent basis before take off
> at
> > your field instead of a MSL setting. Again, I'm only interested in the
> > possibility, not the right and wrongs involved with doing this.
> > Thanks,
> > Dudley Henriques
> > International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
> > Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
> > For personal email, please replace
> > the z's with e's.
> > dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt
> >
> >
>
>

John Galban

March 8th 04, 09:40 PM

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message t>...
> I need to know if the Kollsman window in your
> altimeters has a wide enough range to allow you, IF YOU DESIRED TO DO SO, to
> set your altimeters to 0 elevation on a consistent basis before take off at
> your field instead of a MSL setting. Again, I'm only interested in the
> possibility, not the right and wrongs involved with doing this.

I'm not flying out of a high mountain airport (at the moment), but I
can tell you that most of GA aircraft altimeters I've seen only adjust
down to about 28.00. This makes setting a "0" elevation troublesome
above 2500 ft. MSL.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

Dudley Henriques

March 8th 04, 10:05 PM

That's about what I'm getting also John. Thanks.
What I actually needed to know was the lower range on the Kollsman, which is
turning out to be just about where you have it at 28. I actually have it at
27.5 at this point, but considering averages, this puts the max 0 set about
where you are with it.
D

"John Galban" > wrote in message
om...
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
t>...
> > I need to know if the Kollsman window in your
> > altimeters has a wide enough range to allow you, IF YOU DESIRED TO DO
SO, to
> > set your altimeters to 0 elevation on a consistent basis before take off
at
> > your field instead of a MSL setting. Again, I'm only interested in the
> > possibility, not the right and wrongs involved with doing this.
>
> I'm not flying out of a high mountain airport (at the moment), but I
> can tell you that most of GA aircraft altimeters I've seen only adjust
> down to about 28.00. This makes setting a "0" elevation troublesome
> above 2500 ft. MSL.
>
> John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

Blanche

March 8th 04, 11:04 PM

Dudley:

I fly out of FTG (5500 MSL) in Denver. Having not much else to do
this week, I'll fly down to COS (6200) and see what happens with
the Kollsman. Difficult to get to Leadville right now (altho
it's only about 100 m from COS due to the high winds. Over
the weekend the winds in the mountains were clocked at 125 mph
in some areas. No passes for me right now!

bc

Dudley Henriques

March 8th 04, 11:11 PM

"Blanche" > wrote in message
...
> Dudley:
>
> I fly out of FTG (5500 MSL) in Denver. Having not much else to do
> this week, I'll fly down to COS (6200) and see what happens with
> the Kollsman. Difficult to get to Leadville right now (altho
> it's only about 100 m from COS due to the high winds. Over
> the weekend the winds in the mountains were clocked at 125 mph
> in some areas. No passes for me right now!
>
> bc
Hi Blanche;
Actually, if our data is correct as of this point, at 5500 feet you
shouldn't be able to zero the altimeter at FTG, without having to go all the
way up to COS in all that nasty wind :-)))

Next time you're out at FTG, try it for me will you? I don't think the
Kollsman will let you do it if the low range maximum is 27.5 where I think
it is!
Thanks much,
Dudley

C J Campbell

March 9th 04, 12:13 AM

For some reason, Dudley, your query reminds me of the old joke "How thick is
the atmosphere?" The answer, of course, is "100 miles, but don't tell the
pilots -- they think it is only 29,920 feet thick on a standard day."

Marty Shapiro

March 9th 04, 03:10 AM

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
nk.net:

> Hey, you mountain types out there :-) I'm doing some research on a
> safety issue and need your help . I need a post from someone flying
> out of Colorado somewhere, preferably Telluride or a field very close
> to Telluride. I need as close to the highest elevation in the U.S. as
> I can get. I'm not dealing with this issue in the context of right or
> wrong as it pertains to mountain flying. I need to know if the
> Kollsman window in your altimeters has a wide enough range to allow
> you, IF YOU DESIRED TO DO SO, to set your altimeters to 0 elevation on
> a consistent basis before take off at your field instead of a MSL
> setting. Again, I'm only interested in the possibility, not the right
> and wrongs involved with doing this. Thanks,
> Dudley Henriques
> International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
> Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
> For personal email, please replace
> the z's with e's.
> dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt
>
>

I don't have any direct experience with the airports in CO, but my pilots
guide shows LXV (Lake County Airport, Leadville, CO) is at 9,927' MSL. TEX
(Telluride Regional Airport) is 9,078' MSL.

The highest airport I've landed at is TVL (South Lake Tahoe, CA). The
alitude there is 6,264' MSL. None of the aircraft I flew to TVL (C172,
C182, RALL) had an altimeter which could have been set to indicate 0' at
that altitude.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

Dudley Henriques

March 9th 04, 03:30 AM

Thanks Marty. Appreciate the input.
D
"Marty Shapiro" > wrote in message
...
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
> nk.net:
>
> > Hey, you mountain types out there :-) I'm doing some research on a
> > safety issue and need your help . I need a post from someone flying
> > out of Colorado somewhere, preferably Telluride or a field very close
> > to Telluride. I need as close to the highest elevation in the U.S. as
> > I can get. I'm not dealing with this issue in the context of right or
> > wrong as it pertains to mountain flying. I need to know if the
> > Kollsman window in your altimeters has a wide enough range to allow
> > you, IF YOU DESIRED TO DO SO, to set your altimeters to 0 elevation on
> > a consistent basis before take off at your field instead of a MSL
> > setting. Again, I'm only interested in the possibility, not the right
> > and wrongs involved with doing this. Thanks,
> > Dudley Henriques
> > International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
> > Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
> > For personal email, please replace
> > the z's with e's.
> > dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt
> >
> >
>
> I don't have any direct experience with the airports in CO, but my pilots
> guide shows LXV (Lake County Airport, Leadville, CO) is at 9,927' MSL. TEX
> (Telluride Regional Airport) is 9,078' MSL.
>
> The highest airport I've landed at is TVL (South Lake Tahoe, CA). The
> alitude there is 6,264' MSL. None of the aircraft I flew to TVL (C172,
> C182, RALL) had an altimeter which could have been set to indicate 0' at
> that altitude.
>
> --
> Marty Shapiro
> Silicon Rallye Inc.
>
> (remove SPAMNOT to email me)

Newps

March 9th 04, 06:19 AM

You don't have to fly down there. Your altimeter goes down to 28.10.
You know the field elevation is 6200. Altimeter setting right now at
COS is 30.53. Therefore when set to 28.10 your altimeter will read
approx 3770.

Blanche wrote:

> Dudley:
>
> I fly out of FTG (5500 MSL) in Denver. Having not much else to do
> this week, I'll fly down to COS (6200) and see what happens with
> the Kollsman. Difficult to get to Leadville right now (altho
> it's only about 100 m from COS due to the high winds. Over
> the weekend the winds in the mountains were clocked at 125 mph
> in some areas. No passes for me right now!
>
> bc
>

ShawnD2112

March 9th 04, 07:39 PM

Dudley,
Interesting that the "right or wrongness" of the issue is of such a concern.
Isn't it funny how different cultures view the same problem with different
perspectives? Here in the UK, no motorcycle rider would even think of
getting on a bike without a full set of leathers, helmet, and gloves. In
the States, guys ride in shorts, sneakers, and no helmets where they can.
On the other side of the coin, Brits "filter" through traffic on
motorcycles, riding between lanes just to get through traffic faster,
whether it be in the city or the highway. Most Americans think that's too
dangerous to think about.

Here in the UK, setting the altimeter to field elevation, QFE, before
takeoff is not only allowed, it's taught and expected. Likewise, when
approaching the airfield, you're expected to reset the altimeter to that
airfield's QFE in the pattern. In the States, we would think that would
lead to all kinds of altitude-related accidents.

Different perspectives, but who's to say what's right and wrong?

Shawn
"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> Hey, you mountain types out there :-) I'm doing some research on a safety
> issue and need your help . I need a post from someone flying out of
Colorado
> somewhere, preferably Telluride or a field very close to Telluride. I need
> as close to the highest elevation in the U.S. as I can get.
> I'm not dealing with this issue in the context of right or wrong as it
> pertains to mountain flying. I need to know if the Kollsman window in your
> altimeters has a wide enough range to allow you, IF YOU DESIRED TO DO SO,
to
> set your altimeters to 0 elevation on a consistent basis before take off
at
> your field instead of a MSL setting. Again, I'm only interested in the
> possibility, not the right and wrongs involved with doing this.
> Thanks,
> Dudley Henriques
> International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
> Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
> For personal email, please replace
> the z's with e's.
> dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt
>
>

Newps

March 9th 04, 08:15 PM

ShawnD2112 wrote:

> Here in the UK, setting the altimeter to field elevation, QFE, before
> takeoff is not only allowed, it's taught and expected.

It is taught and expected here too.

Likewise, when
> approaching the airfield, you're expected to reset the altimeter to that
> airfield's QFE in the pattern.

Same here.

Dudley Henriques

March 9th 04, 08:23 PM

"ShawnD2112" > wrote in message
...
> Dudley,
> Interesting that the "right or wrongness" of the issue is of such a
concern.
> Isn't it funny how different cultures view the same problem with different
> perspectives? Here in the UK, no motorcycle rider would even think of
> getting on a bike without a full set of leathers, helmet, and gloves. In
> the States, guys ride in shorts, sneakers, and no helmets where they can.
> On the other side of the coin, Brits "filter" through traffic on
> motorcycles, riding between lanes just to get through traffic faster,
> whether it be in the city or the highway. Most Americans think that's too
> dangerous to think about.
>
> Here in the UK, setting the altimeter to field elevation, QFE, before
> takeoff is not only allowed, it's taught and expected. Likewise, when
> approaching the airfield, you're expected to reset the altimeter to that
> airfield's QFE in the pattern. In the States, we would think that would
> lead to all kinds of altitude-related accidents.
>
> Different perspectives, but who's to say what's right and wrong?
>
> Shawn

Hi Shawn;

Your comment on using QFE in the UK brings up an interesting point that I'm
researching right now and perhaps you can answer for me possibly.
Here in the U.S., our altimeters have a Kollsman range of about 27.5 and
32.0. This, considering an average atmosphere, denies you setting an
altimeter to 0 on any airport runway above about 2500 to 3000 feet MSL!!!
I'm wondering, since QFE is common in the UK, and by definition QFE is a
station pressure setting that will produce a 0 reading on the altimeter when
on the ground at that station; are your altimeters in the UK equipped with a
wider Kollsman range in the setting windows perhaps, and if not, how can a
QFE setting be used at airports with elevations above our limits here in the
U.S? It's an interesting point....or I must be missing something in my old
age :-))
Dudley

Chris

March 9th 04, 08:25 PM

Dudley,

if it's still useful for the number game ;*) ...
Here at LAM (7171ft, for 30.54) I get 4850ft for 28.1

Cheers
Chris

PP-ASEL
Student Glider Pilot
New Mexico

Dudley Henriques wrote:
> Hey, you mountain types out there :-) I'm doing some research on a safety
> issue and need your help . I need a post from someone flying out of Colorado
> somewhere, preferably Telluride or a field very close to Telluride. I need
> as close to the highest elevation in the U.S. as I can get.
> I'm not dealing with this issue in the context of right or wrong as it
> pertains to mountain flying. I need to know if the Kollsman window in your
> altimeters has a wide enough range to allow you, IF YOU DESIRED TO DO SO, to
> set your altimeters to 0 elevation on a consistent basis before take off at
> your field instead of a MSL setting. Again, I'm only interested in the
> possibility, not the right and wrongs involved with doing this.
> Thanks,
> Dudley Henriques
> International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
> Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
> For personal email, please replace
> the z's with e's.
> dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt
>
>

Dudley Henriques

March 9th 04, 08:27 PM

Where are you Newps?
Dudley

"Newps" > wrote in message
news:dBp3c.91932$PR3.1448201@attbi_s03...
>
>
> ShawnD2112 wrote:
>
>
> > Here in the UK, setting the altimeter to field elevation, QFE, before
> > takeoff is not only allowed, it's taught and expected.
>
> It is taught and expected here too.
>
>
> Likewise, when
> > approaching the airfield, you're expected to reset the altimeter to that
> > airfield's QFE in the pattern.
>
> Same here.
>
>

Newps

March 9th 04, 08:34 PM

Billings, MT. I did not get from reading Chris's posts that they adjust
their altimeters so that they get a zero reading on the ground. I
understood that they do it just like us. If you really want the ground
to be zero then you need a radar altimeter.

Dudley Henriques wrote:

> Where are you Newps?
> Dudley
>
> "Newps" > wrote in message
> news:dBp3c.91932$PR3.1448201@attbi_s03...
>
>>
>>ShawnD2112 wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Here in the UK, setting the altimeter to field elevation, QFE, before
>>>takeoff is not only allowed, it's taught and expected.
>>
>>It is taught and expected here too.
>>
>>
>> Likewise, when
>>
>>>approaching the airfield, you're expected to reset the altimeter to that
>>>airfield's QFE in the pattern.
>>
>>Same here.
>>
>>
>
>
>

Ron Natalie

March 9th 04, 08:43 PM

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message news:IIp3c.4260$> > Here in the UK, setting the altimeter to >This,
considering an average atmosphere, denies you setting an
> altimeter to 0 on any airport runway above about 2500 to 3000 feet MSL!!!

The highest elevation (Ben Nevis) in the UK is under 4500 feet. The highest airport isn't
even close to that.

Todd Pattist

March 9th 04, 09:19 PM

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote:

>how can a
>QFE setting be used at airports with elevations above our limits here in the
>U.S?

I bet it can't. The highest point in England is 3210' and
Scotland only goes to 4400'.
Todd Pattist
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
___
Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
Share what you learn.

Dudley Henriques

March 9th 04, 09:41 PM

BINGO!! Understanding the QFE question requires the understanding that all
anticipated destinations are below the limit parameters of the Kollsman
window....which is correct enough....but like most regulations, the way it's
written is just plain nuts!!!!
Why the hell the powers that be would put in a QFE option without explaining
that it's tied directly to the Kollsman parameters on the altimeters is
beyond me. I must know a hundred pilots who think it's an available option
anywhere!!! :-))

It's funny about things like this. I've been reading everything I can find
on the use of QFE, even that American Airlines had tried having their first
officers monitoring a QFE altimeter with the Captain using a standard
altimeter setting on final approaches, (which I understand is no longer the
case BTW) and there is absolutely nothing out there that specifies the
limiting parameter for QFE due to Kollsman range limits on the instrument
for airports outside the instrument parameters.
It's amazing that the governing agencies who write this stuff just assume
that sooner or later all of us will just figure out that only airports under
3K feet are eligible for the QFE option. Interesting!!!
I have to admit, it's basic enough, but for someone reading the regulations,
the assumption is that a QFE setting is available at all anticipated
destinations. I haven't found a reference anywhere that explains QFE as
available only within the Kollsman range. Understanding the regulation seems
to require a prior knowledge of the Kollsman limits to understand the
situation completely, which in many cases causes much misinterpretation of
the QFE options.
Dudley

"Todd Pattist" > wrote in message
...
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote:
>
>
> >how can a
> >QFE setting be used at airports with elevations above our limits here in
the
> >U.S?
>
> I bet it can't. The highest point in England is 3210' and
> Scotland only goes to 4400'.
> Todd Pattist
> (Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
> ___
> Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
> Share what you learn.

Dudley Henriques

March 9th 04, 09:45 PM

"Newps" > wrote in message
news:XSp3c.90616$ko6.554153@attbi_s02...
> Billings, MT. I did not get from reading Chris's posts that they adjust
> their altimeters so that they get a zero reading on the ground. I
> understood that they do it just like us. If you really want the ground
> to be zero then you need a radar altimeter.

Well, not really. If you can get the actual station pressure, (not the
altimeter setting for the station reduced to sea level ) and the airport
elevation is within the Kollsman limits, the altimeter should read 0 on the
ground after landing. This is the definition as I understand it, for the QFE
setting.
Dudley

Stefan

March 9th 04, 09:48 PM

Dudley Henriques wrote:

> It's amazing that the governing agencies who write this stuff just assume
> that sooner or later all of us will just figure out that only airports under
> 3K feet are eligible for the QFE option. Interesting!!!

Don't you have this backwards? Shouldn't it read: Just because QFE isn't
common in the USA, the manufactorers assume that it's not common
elsewhere either, and sell unsuitable instruments?

Stefan

Dudley Henriques

March 9th 04, 09:52 PM

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
news:IIp3c.4260$> > Here in the UK, setting the altimeter to >This,
> considering an average atmosphere, denies you setting an
> > altimeter to 0 on any airport runway above about 2500 to 3000 feet
MSL!!!
>
> The highest elevation (Ben Nevis) in the UK is under 4500 feet. The
highest airport isn't
> even close to that.

Discovering this is the answer. It's basic enough, but the regulations
writers in the UK leave it to the pilots to discover this limitation instead
of just telling everyone that a QFE setting can only be used at airports
below the ASL limits for the Kollsman window.
All I've been able to find in the UK regs is that QFE is an option. They
don't state any limitations at all for elevation as far as I've been able to
discover; perhaps not for the UK pilots, but it's not too clear for pilots
flying into the UK for the first time.
It's interesting, and confuses a lot of pilots.
Dudley

Dudley Henriques

March 9th 04, 10:13 PM

"Stefan" > wrote in message
...
> Dudley Henriques wrote:
>
> > It's amazing that the governing agencies who write this stuff just
assume
> > that sooner or later all of us will just figure out that only airports
under
> > 3K feet are eligible for the QFE option. Interesting!!!
>
> Don't you have this backwards? Shouldn't it read: Just because QFE isn't
> common in the USA, the manufactorers assume that it's not common
> elsewhere either, and sell unsuitable instruments?
>
> Stefan

Could be, if the Brits altimeters were indeed superior, but I'm
understanding so far from everybody that the UK altimeters don't actually
have a wider Kollsman range than the US altimeters, and that it's the same
above sea level limit there as we have here; so that would apparently take
you right back to square one with understanding the regs, wouldn't it? :-))
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
For personal email, please replace
the z's with e's.
dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt

Newps

March 9th 04, 10:20 PM

Dudley Henriques wrote:

> Well, not really. If you can get the actual station pressure, (not the
> altimeter setting for the station reduced to sea level ) and the airport
> elevation is within the Kollsman limits, the altimeter should read 0 on the
> ground after landing. This is the definition as I understand it, for the QFE
> setting.
> Dudley

OK then what's the point? Why would you want the altimeter to read zero
for normal flying?

Ron Parsons

March 9th 04, 10:28 PM

In article t>,
"Dudley Henriques" > wrote:

>Hey, you mountain types out there :-) I'm doing some research on a safety
>issue and need your help . I need a post from someone flying out of Colorado
>somewhere, preferably Telluride or a field very close to Telluride. I need
>as close to the highest elevation in the U.S. as I can get.
>I'm not dealing with this issue in the context of right or wrong as it
>pertains to mountain flying. I need to know if the Kollsman window in your
>altimeters has a wide enough range to allow you, IF YOU DESIRED TO DO SO, to
>set your altimeters to 0 elevation on a consistent basis before take off at
>your field instead of a MSL setting. Again, I'm only interested in the
>possibility, not the right and wrongs involved with doing this.
>Thanks,
>Dudley Henriques
>International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
>Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
>For personal email, please replace
>the z's with e's.
>dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt
>
>

I think AAL was the last major to set QFE for takeoff and landings. They
special ordered altimeters that would handle Mexico City.

--
Ron

Dudley Henriques

March 9th 04, 11:01 PM

Normally you wouldn't. The whole world uses MSL! Why the Brits have a QFE as
an option is a big mystery to most of us in the US, but apparently they have
it as an option for pattern and VERY local work.
Personally, I would never use it. I have zeroed my altimeter for low
altitude demonstration aerobatics, but I'd never recommend that pilots use a
0 set for any other purpose...and only under special circumstances with
aerobatics.
Dudley
Dudley
"Newps" > wrote in message
news:Oqr3c.92126$PR3.1462720@attbi_s03...
>
>
> Dudley Henriques wrote:
>
> > Well, not really. If you can get the actual station pressure, (not the
> > altimeter setting for the station reduced to sea level ) and the airport
> > elevation is within the Kollsman limits, the altimeter should read 0 on
the
> > ground after landing. This is the definition as I understand it, for the
QFE
> > setting.
> > Dudley
>
> OK then what's the point? Why would you want the altimeter to read zero
> for normal flying?
>

G.R. Patterson III

March 9th 04, 11:02 PM

Newps wrote:
>
> OK then what's the point? Why would you want the altimeter to read zero
> for normal flying?

If you can set the altimeter such that it reads 0 on the field, you can maintain
pattern altitude without having to do any arithmetic and without looking up the
field elevation. Of course, someone's gonna have to tell you the pressure at the
field.

George Patterson
Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
not yield to the tongue.

Dudley Henriques

March 9th 04, 11:03 PM

I wonder if having the extra raw data QFE monitor by the FO on approach was
worth the cost of retrofitting the airplanes? I understand in the end they
crap canned the idea anyway.
Dudley
"Ron Parsons" > wrote in message
...
> In article t>,
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote:
>
> >Hey, you mountain types out there :-) I'm doing some research on a safety
> >issue and need your help . I need a post from someone flying out of
Colorado
> >somewhere, preferably Telluride or a field very close to Telluride. I
need
> >as close to the highest elevation in the U.S. as I can get.
> >I'm not dealing with this issue in the context of right or wrong as it
> >pertains to mountain flying. I need to know if the Kollsman window in
your
> >altimeters has a wide enough range to allow you, IF YOU DESIRED TO DO SO,
to
> >set your altimeters to 0 elevation on a consistent basis before take off
at
> >your field instead of a MSL setting. Again, I'm only interested in the
> >possibility, not the right and wrongs involved with doing this.
> >Thanks,
> >Dudley Henriques
> >International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
> >Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
> >For personal email, please replace
> >the z's with e's.
> >dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt
> >
> >
>
> I think AAL was the last major to set QFE for takeoff and landings. They
> special ordered altimeters that would handle Mexico City.
>
> --
> Ron

G.R. Patterson III

March 9th 04, 11:05 PM

Dudley Henriques wrote:
>
> It's amazing that the governing agencies who write this stuff just assume
> that sooner or later all of us will just figure out that only airports under
> 3K feet are eligible for the QFE option. Interesting!!!

If the Feds had to explain everything in the AIM, it would be the size of the
Encyclopedia Brittanica.

George Patterson
Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
not yield to the tongue.

G.R. Patterson III

March 9th 04, 11:08 PM

Stefan wrote:
>
> Don't you have this backwards? Shouldn't it read: Just because QFE isn't
> common in the USA, the manufactorers assume that it's not common
> elsewhere either, and sell unsuitable instruments?

It's not unsuitable if it does the job, and it appears that the Kollsman range
is quite adequate for those areas in which QFE is the norm. It is also the case
that the altimeter design predates the regulations by about 70 years, so it's
not backwards at all.

George Patterson
Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
not yield to the tongue.

Dudley Henriques

March 9th 04, 11:10 PM

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Dudley Henriques wrote:
> >
> > It's amazing that the governing agencies who write this stuff just
assume
> > that sooner or later all of us will just figure out that only airports
under
> > 3K feet are eligible for the QFE option. Interesting!!!
>
> If the Feds had to explain everything in the AIM, it would be the size of
the
> Encyclopedia Brittanica.

EVERYTHING!!!! Hell George...I'd be happy if they only explained ONE
thing!!! :-))))
Dudley

Stefan

March 9th 04, 11:19 PM

Dudley Henriques wrote:

> Normally you wouldn't. The whole world uses MSL! Why the Brits have a QFE as
> an option is a big mystery to most of us in the US, but apparently they have
> it as an option for pattern and VERY local work.

It's not only the Brits. At least France uses QFE for approach, too.

I've never flown in the UK, but I have flown in France. There, if
nothing else is mentioned on the VAC, then normal circuit altitude is
assumed to be 1000 ft AAL. QFE eliminates the need of calculations.

Of course, they could do it differently, but this is the way it is.

Stefan

Blanche

March 9th 04, 11:32 PM

Just checked -- Kollsman in my cherokee only goes to 28.1

Blanche

March 9th 04, 11:33 PM

Newps > wrote:
>You don't have to fly down there. Your altimeter goes down to 28.10.

but but but but....

Waste a perfectly gorgeous day to fly?

Dudley Henriques

March 9th 04, 11:39 PM

"Stefan" > wrote in message
...
> Dudley Henriques wrote:
>
> > Normally you wouldn't. The whole world uses MSL! Why the Brits have a
QFE as
> > an option is a big mystery to most of us in the US, but apparently they
have
> > it as an option for pattern and VERY local work.
>
> It's not only the Brits. At least France uses QFE for approach, too.
>
> I've never flown in the UK, but I have flown in France. There, if
> nothing else is mentioned on the VAC, then normal circuit altitude is
> assumed to be 1000 ft AAL. QFE eliminates the need of calculations.
>
> Of course, they could do it differently, but this is the way it is.
>
> Stefan
Apparently it's used throughout Europe, or at least in most of it.
I can't really say it's a bad idea, but it does open up for some confusion
when you begin to get into the gray areas around 3000 feet above sea level.
In the flatlands, it would work ok I guess. As you say, it's just in how
they do things over there. They, I'm sure, think we could do it easier over
in the U.S. :-)
D

Dudley Henriques

March 9th 04, 11:41 PM

"Blanche" > wrote in message
...
> Just checked -- Kollsman in my cherokee only goes to 28.1

That jives with what we're seeing all around.

Sounds like it's a beautiful area you have to fly in out there.
Dudley

John T Lowry

March 10th 04, 12:51 AM

FAR Part 43, Appendix E, implies the altimeter setting will be from 28.10 to
30.99 in. Hg.

However, I fail to see what all this fuss is about. Say you're at 10,000 ft
and pressure is about normal, say 20 in. Hg. Plugging into the altimeter
setting formula, this means the altimeter setting is 29.14 in. Hg. Nowhere
near the stops. So....on to Leadville!

John.
--
John T Lowry, PhD
Flight Physics
5217 Old Spicewood Springs Rd, #312
Austin, Texas 78731
(512) 231-9391

"Blanche" > wrote in message
...
> Just checked -- Kollsman in my cherokee only goes to 28.1
>
>

S Green

March 10th 04, 12:56 AM

"Stefan" > wrote in message
...
> Dudley Henriques wrote:
>
> > Normally you wouldn't. The whole world uses MSL! Why the Brits have a
QFE as
> > an option is a big mystery to most of us in the US, but apparently they
have
> > it as an option for pattern and VERY local work.
>
> It's not only the Brits. At least France uses QFE for approach, too.
>
> I've never flown in the UK, but I have flown in France. There, if
> nothing else is mentioned on the VAC, then normal circuit altitude is
> assumed to be 1000 ft AAL. QFE eliminates the need of calculations.
>
> Of course, they could do it differently, but this is the way it is.
Uk circuits are defined in heights AAL hence the convenience of setting QFE.
On an approach to an airfield you are given the QFE. If you are passing
through, ie in transit you would be given the QNH.

S Green

March 10th 04, 01:05 AM

"Blanche" > wrote in message
...
> Newps > wrote:
> >You don't have to fly down there. Your altimeter goes down to 28.10.
>
> but but but but....
>
> Waste a perfectly gorgeous day to fly?
>
ever thought that the reason they use QNH in the US is because the equipment
cannot do QFE because the range would have to be so high. Therefore its MSL
and the mental arithmatic.

In Europe, most of it is at a much lower elevation that the US and the
equipment will cope with our range of altitudes and the range of atmospheric
pressures we get. Hence we can use both QFE and QNH.
QNH is for when you are in transit and QFE is for in the pattern.
If you look at our Instrument Charts you will see both heights featured on
the approach plates and you can take your choice as to what you want to use.

G.R. Patterson III

March 10th 04, 01:14 AM

John T Lowry wrote:
>
> However, I fail to see what all this fuss is about.

The fuss is that you can't set the altimeter so that it reads 0 when on the ramp
at Leadville (or many places lower than that).

George Patterson
Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
not yield to the tongue.

March 10th 04, 02:16 AM

On 9 Mar 2004 16:33:13 -0700, Blanche >
wrote:

>Newps > wrote:
>>You don't have to fly down there. Your altimeter goes down to 28.10.
>
>but but but but....
>
>Waste a perfectly gorgeous day to fly?

Blanche... You didnt miss much flying to COS today. I fly out of it
everyday and today it was fairly rough. Got bounced around quite a
bit.

Scott

[email protected]

March 10th 04, 05:15 AM

No, it wouldn't work. Note that 1" of pressure in the Kollsman window
changes the displayed altitude by 1000 feed.

So, at Leadville, Colorado (9927 MSL), effectively 10,000 feet,
you would need to move the Kollsman window from 30.00 to 20.00 inches.

Nope, it doesn't go that low.

Jer/ Eberhard, Colorado Mountain type.

Dudley Henriques > wrote:
> Hey, you mountain types out there :-) I'm doing some research on a safety
> issue and need your help . I need a post from someone flying out of Colorado
> somewhere, preferably Telluride or a field very close to Telluride. I need
> as close to the highest elevation in the U.S. as I can get.
> I'm not dealing with this issue in the context of right or wrong as it
> pertains to mountain flying. I need to know if the Kollsman window in your
> altimeters has a wide enough range to allow you, IF YOU DESIRED TO DO SO, to
> set your altimeters to 0 elevation on a consistent basis before take off at
> your field instead of a MSL setting. Again, I'm only interested in the
> possibility, not the right and wrongs involved with doing this.
> Thanks,
> Dudley Henriques
> International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
> Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
> For personal email, please replace
> the z's with e's.
> dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt

Best regards,

Jer/ "Flight instruction and mountain flying are my vocation!" Eberhard

--
Jer/ (Slash) Eberhard, Mountain Flying Aviation, LTD, Ft Collins, CO
CELL 970 231-6325 EMAIL jer'at'frii.com WEB http://users.frii.com/jer/
C-206 N9513G, CFII Airplane&Glider, FAA-DEN Aviation Safety Counselor
CAP-CO Mission&Aircraft CheckPilot, BM218 HAM N0FZD, 197 Young Eagles!

ShawnD2112

March 10th 04, 06:44 AM

Nope, you're not missing anything, Dudley. Except maybe topography. I
don't think there ARE any airports higher than 2,000 feet in the UK, and
there's very little terrain that high, even in the Highlands. The practice
may have grown up here in Britain because high terrain isn't an issue. Most
alitimeters over here these days are US manufacture anyways because most of
the fleet were built in the US.

Your understanding of QFE is correct, it's the station elevation such that
the altimeter reads 0 at some point on the ground. It can lead to the odd
problem now and again, but normally isn't an issue. My airport is at about
500 ft MSL, so if someone hasn't set their altimeter to QFE, but flies that
pattern altitude as it reads on the instrument (without doing the mental
arithmetic to ADD 1,000 ft), he'll come across the field at 500' AGL. Add
to this that the Brits join the field at 2000 AGL on the side opposite
downwind (known as "The Dead side"), descend to 1,000' AGL as they pass
crosswind over the far end of the runway, then turn downwind and start their
descent. This means you get clowns passing the far end of the runway at 500
' AGL, just as you're passing through the same airspace in a climb in the
Pitts. Normally not a problem as not many GA airplanes can be at 500' by
the end of our runway, but it's happened to me once and is just something I
have to keep an eye out for when flying the Pitts. As I say, in 300 hours
flying in the UK, that's only happened to me once, so it's not common.

Different way of "approaching" the same issue (sorry for the pun).

Shawn
"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "ShawnD2112" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Dudley,
> > Interesting that the "right or wrongness" of the issue is of such a
> concern.
> > Isn't it funny how different cultures view the same problem with
different
> > perspectives? Here in the UK, no motorcycle rider would even think of
> > getting on a bike without a full set of leathers, helmet, and gloves.
In
> > the States, guys ride in shorts, sneakers, and no helmets where they
can.
> > On the other side of the coin, Brits "filter" through traffic on
> > motorcycles, riding between lanes just to get through traffic faster,
> > whether it be in the city or the highway. Most Americans think that's
too
> > dangerous to think about.
> >
> > Here in the UK, setting the altimeter to field elevation, QFE, before
> > takeoff is not only allowed, it's taught and expected. Likewise, when
> > approaching the airfield, you're expected to reset the altimeter to that
> > airfield's QFE in the pattern. In the States, we would think that would
> > lead to all kinds of altitude-related accidents.
> >
> > Different perspectives, but who's to say what's right and wrong?
> >
> > Shawn
>
> Hi Shawn;
>
> Your comment on using QFE in the UK brings up an interesting point that
I'm
> researching right now and perhaps you can answer for me possibly.
> Here in the U.S., our altimeters have a Kollsman range of about 27.5 and
> 32.0. This, considering an average atmosphere, denies you setting an
> altimeter to 0 on any airport runway above about 2500 to 3000 feet MSL!!!
> I'm wondering, since QFE is common in the UK, and by definition QFE is a
> station pressure setting that will produce a 0 reading on the altimeter
when
> on the ground at that station; are your altimeters in the UK equipped with
a
> wider Kollsman range in the setting windows perhaps, and if not, how can a
> QFE setting be used at airports with elevations above our limits here in
the
> U.S? It's an interesting point....or I must be missing something in my old
> age :-))
> Dudley
>
>

ShawnD2112

March 10th 04, 06:50 AM

Dudley,
Another thing that's missing here is the British attitude to the rest of the
world. They're an island in size but a continent in approach to life. And
they don't like foreigners even more than Americans don't. They don't like
things that weren't invented here and, in fact, have an entire organization,
the Civil Aviation Authority, who enforce that idea whenever possible. The
number of aircraft that are certified for aerobatics in the US, but not in
the UK is staggering. I dunno, maybe physics really IS different here.
They do things the way they want to, sod the rest of the world. The issue
of the range of the Kollman window just isn't a concern over here as
explained above, so I can see why no one would take that into account
(unless Brit Kollman windows have a greater range, I don't know)

Shawn
"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
link.net...
> BINGO!! Understanding the QFE question requires the understanding that all
> anticipated destinations are below the limit parameters of the Kollsman
> window....which is correct enough....but like most regulations, the way
it's
> written is just plain nuts!!!!
> Why the hell the powers that be would put in a QFE option without
explaining
> that it's tied directly to the Kollsman parameters on the altimeters is
> beyond me. I must know a hundred pilots who think it's an available option
> anywhere!!! :-))
>
> It's funny about things like this. I've been reading everything I can find
> on the use of QFE, even that American Airlines had tried having their
first
> officers monitoring a QFE altimeter with the Captain using a standard
> altimeter setting on final approaches, (which I understand is no longer
the
> case BTW) and there is absolutely nothing out there that specifies the
> limiting parameter for QFE due to Kollsman range limits on the instrument
> for airports outside the instrument parameters.
> It's amazing that the governing agencies who write this stuff just assume
> that sooner or later all of us will just figure out that only airports
under
> 3K feet are eligible for the QFE option. Interesting!!!
> I have to admit, it's basic enough, but for someone reading the
regulations,
> the assumption is that a QFE setting is available at all anticipated
> destinations. I haven't found a reference anywhere that explains QFE as
> available only within the Kollsman range. Understanding the regulation
seems
> to require a prior knowledge of the Kollsman limits to understand the
> situation completely, which in many cases causes much misinterpretation of
> the QFE options.
> Dudley
>
>
> "Todd Pattist" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote:
> >
> >
> > >how can a
> > >QFE setting be used at airports with elevations above our limits here
in
> the
> > >U.S?
> >
> > I bet it can't. The highest point in England is 3210' and
> > Scotland only goes to 4400'.
> > Todd Pattist
> > (Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
> > ___
> > Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
> > Share what you learn.
>
>

John T Lowry

March 10th 04, 11:05 AM

Ah, yes, that WAS the point. And perhaps another good reason to have the
altimeter read field elevation rather than zero.
John

--
John T Lowry
5217 Old Spicewood Springs Rd, #312
Austin, Texas 78731
(512) 231-9391

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> John T Lowry wrote:
> >
> > However, I fail to see what all this fuss is about.
>
> The fuss is that you can't set the altimeter so that it reads 0 when on
the ramp
> at Leadville (or many places lower than that).
>
> George Patterson
> Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that
would
> not yield to the tongue.

Ron Parsons

March 10th 04, 01:52 PM

In article .net>,
"Dudley Henriques" > wrote:

>I wonder if having the extra raw data QFE monitor by the FO on approach was
>worth the cost of retrofitting the airplanes? I understand in the end they
>crap canned the idea anyway.

The bean counters wouldn't come up with the money to modify the 777 plus
there were some South American airports that were too high. Both the
Capt and the F/O were on QFE for take off and landing. The change over
was at about 6000 AFL. There was a 3rd altimeter in the middle of the
panel which remained on QNH. All three went to QNE above the Transition
Altitude.

Technically, you are correct that they changed "in the end", but that
was after 75 yrs in which the 3 altimeter system kept aluminum and dirt
separated quite nicely.

--
Ron

Kyler Laird

March 10th 04, 02:09 PM

"Dudley Henriques" > writes:

>Hey, you mountain types out there :-) I'm doing some research on a safety
>issue and need your help . I need a post from someone flying out of Colorado
>somewhere, preferably Telluride or a field very close to Telluride. I need
>as close to the highest elevation in the U.S. as I can get.

Talk to the chopper pilots. Here are the high 20 landing facilities
in the US.
1 CD37, EMPIRE, COLORADO, 12442
2 CD21, TARRYALL, COLORADO, 11294
3 CD38, FAIRPLAY, COLORADO, 11104
4 CD52, MOUNT PRINCETON, COLORADO, 10858
5 CD19, IDAHO SPRINGS, COLORADO, 10672
6 CD78, WOLF CREEK, COLORADO, 10634
7 CD41, GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO, 10603
8 CD70, STEAMBOAT SPRINGS, COLORADO, 10554
9 CO51, EMPIRE, COLORADO, 10400
10 CD25, BERTHOUD FALLS, COLORADO, 10340
11 01CO, LEADVILLE, COLORADO, 10175
12 CD74, VAIL, COLORADO, 10116
13 CD43, GRANITE, COLORADO, 10093
14 CO75, BRECKENRIDGE, COLORADO, 10085
15 CD44, HESPERUS, COLORADO, 10039
16 CD54, NORWOOD, COLORADO, 9943
17 1CO6, PALISADE, COLORADO, 9940
18 LXV, LEADVILLE, COLORADO, 9927
19 CD72, TRIMBLE, COLORADO, 9873
20 77CO, JEFFERSON, COLORADO, 9869

Way off topic...but perhaps amusing to those reading this thread.
http://www.startribune.com/stories/1752/3406421.html
A Red Cross supervisor said in 1993 that he didn't want to
fly anymore with an Aviation Charter pilot whom he said
ignored air traffic control advisories on how to avoid a
thunderstorm. The pilot, he said, took the plane up to
12,500 feet and told him it was a violation of Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) rules to be in an
unpressurized cabin at that height. Whether the pilot was
violating FAA regulations is unclear.

--kyler

Dudley Henriques

March 10th 04, 03:27 PM

Sounds like a nightmare to me. I've zeroed the needle on occasion for
demonstration work, but I just don't get the logic behind the QFE lobby.
It's just one more thing to worry about changing, and that can lead to
serious problems in the air. I'm a standardization buff. Making as much a
constant as opposed to a variable when it comes to flying has always seemed
to me the best way to go with things. Having several MORE ways to use an
altimeter just adds to normal altimeter confusion; it;s just one more thing
that someone can forget to set or change or figure out.
:-))
Dudley
"ShawnD2112" > wrote in message
news:GPy3c.2813$m56.1401@newsfe1-win...
> Nope, you're not missing anything, Dudley. Except maybe topography. I
> don't think there ARE any airports higher than 2,000 feet in the UK, and
> there's very little terrain that high, even in the Highlands. The
practice
> may have grown up here in Britain because high terrain isn't an issue.
Most
> alitimeters over here these days are US manufacture anyways because most
of
> the fleet were built in the US.
>
> Your understanding of QFE is correct, it's the station elevation such that
> the altimeter reads 0 at some point on the ground. It can lead to the odd
> problem now and again, but normally isn't an issue. My airport is at
about
> 500 ft MSL, so if someone hasn't set their altimeter to QFE, but flies
that
> pattern altitude as it reads on the instrument (without doing the mental
> arithmetic to ADD 1,000 ft), he'll come across the field at 500' AGL. Add
> to this that the Brits join the field at 2000 AGL on the side opposite
> downwind (known as "The Dead side"), descend to 1,000' AGL as they pass
> crosswind over the far end of the runway, then turn downwind and start
their
> descent. This means you get clowns passing the far end of the runway at
500
> ' AGL, just as you're passing through the same airspace in a climb in the
> Pitts. Normally not a problem as not many GA airplanes can be at 500' by
> the end of our runway, but it's happened to me once and is just something
I
> have to keep an eye out for when flying the Pitts. As I say, in 300 hours
> flying in the UK, that's only happened to me once, so it's not common.
>
> Different way of "approaching" the same issue (sorry for the pun).
>
> Shawn
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
> >
> > "ShawnD2112" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Dudley,
> > > Interesting that the "right or wrongness" of the issue is of such a
> > concern.
> > > Isn't it funny how different cultures view the same problem with
> different
> > > perspectives? Here in the UK, no motorcycle rider would even think of
> > > getting on a bike without a full set of leathers, helmet, and gloves.
> In
> > > the States, guys ride in shorts, sneakers, and no helmets where they
> can.
> > > On the other side of the coin, Brits "filter" through traffic on
> > > motorcycles, riding between lanes just to get through traffic faster,
> > > whether it be in the city or the highway. Most Americans think that's
> too
> > > dangerous to think about.
> > >
> > > Here in the UK, setting the altimeter to field elevation, QFE, before
> > > takeoff is not only allowed, it's taught and expected. Likewise, when
> > > approaching the airfield, you're expected to reset the altimeter to
that
> > > airfield's QFE in the pattern. In the States, we would think that
would
> > > lead to all kinds of altitude-related accidents.
> > >
> > > Different perspectives, but who's to say what's right and wrong?
> > >
> > > Shawn
> >
> > Hi Shawn;
> >
> > Your comment on using QFE in the UK brings up an interesting point that
> I'm
> > researching right now and perhaps you can answer for me possibly.
> > Here in the U.S., our altimeters have a Kollsman range of about 27.5 and
> > 32.0. This, considering an average atmosphere, denies you setting an
> > altimeter to 0 on any airport runway above about 2500 to 3000 feet
MSL!!!
> > I'm wondering, since QFE is common in the UK, and by definition QFE is a
> > station pressure setting that will produce a 0 reading on the altimeter
> when
> > on the ground at that station; are your altimeters in the UK equipped
with
> a
> > wider Kollsman range in the setting windows perhaps, and if not, how can
a
> > QFE setting be used at airports with elevations above our limits here in
> the
> > U.S? It's an interesting point....or I must be missing something in my
old
> > age :-))
> > Dudley
> >
> >
>
>

Tony Cox

March 10th 04, 04:27 PM

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> ... The whole world uses MSL! Why the Brits have a QFE as
> an option is a big mystery to most of us in the US, but apparently they
have
> it as an option for pattern and VERY local work.

Last year I came across a US pilot who was apparently
using QFE on a cross-country flight. Approaching a local
airport (2500 MSL), he added to to everyones confusion
by announcing an altitude of 800'. Turned out to be an
old fella from Louisiana. I can only assume that he was
used to setting the altimeter to 0', and his 800' was relative
to whatever airport he was last at. Nice chap, funnily enough.

Last seen taking off with a couple of friends and a dog,
uphill & with a tailwind, presumably because the runway
was pointing in the direction he wanted to go.

[email protected]

March 10th 04, 05:16 PM

On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 15:27:22 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
> wrote:

>Sounds like a nightmare to me. I've zeroed the needle on occasion for
>demonstration work, but I just don't get the logic behind the QFE lobby.
>It's just one more thing to worry about changing, and that can lead to
>serious problems in the air. I'm a standardization buff. Making as much a
>constant as opposed to a variable when it comes to flying has always seemed
>to me the best way to go with things. Having several MORE ways to use an
>altimeter just adds to normal altimeter confusion; it;s just one more thing
>that someone can forget to set or change or figure out.
>:-))
>Dudley
>> >

As for confusion, I'm from the UK but learned in USA and don't find a
problem with QNH or QFE but add to that Flight Levels and Regional
Pressure then you can really have fun.

VFR is usually flown (enroute) using Regional Pressure which is valid
for 1 hour for a specific area. It's equivalent to the estimated
lowest QHN for the next hour. I doubt it's ever more than a few
millibars different to QNH so the error is likely to be small
therefore why bother?

What is a really odd is that IFR is flown on flight levels and in the
UK that's frequently from 3000ft upwards. If you're flying VFR at any
height you can choose to use either QNH (Regional) or FL. (Note the UK
transition altitude is usually 3000ft.)

In the aircraft I fly, in the UK, I have the luxury of being able to
set the lower altimeter on QHN and the upper one on whatever I'm
flying at the time (QNH, QFE, Regional or FL). Additionally the
transponder reads FL.

It was rather nice in January to land at Death Valley (-200ft) then
back to Las Vegas at 2005ft. Made the Wife wonder why the altimeter
did not read zero when we landed!

David

Piper Warrior G-BHJO
Scotland, UK

E-mail (Remove Space after pilot): pilot

Ron Lee

March 11th 04, 01:17 AM

"Tony Cox" > wrote:
>
>Last seen taking off with a couple of friends and a dog,
>uphill & with a tailwind, presumably because the runway
>was pointing in the direction he wanted to go.

Try that at my airport in summer (00V) and you may make undesired
contact with terra firma.

Ron Lee

mike regish

March 11th 04, 02:30 AM

How do you do that? Is there weather reporting at all airports? I can see
setting to field elevation if you're returning to your original point of
departure (I did that all the time in my ultralight), but how do you set it
at a different field without knowing either the Kollsman setting or your
height above ground? Guestimate?
mike regish

----- Original Message -----
From: "ShawnD2112" >
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 2:39 PM
Subject: Re: Who's flying out of the higest elev airport?

>
> Here in the UK, setting the altimeter to field elevation, QFE, before
> takeoff is not only allowed, it's taught and expected. Likewise, when
> approaching the airfield, you're expected to reset the altimeter to that
> airfield's QFE in the pattern. In the States, we would think that would
> lead to all kinds of altitude-related accidents.

ShawnD2112

March 11th 04, 07:50 PM

Not guestimate. Most airfields have some sort of radio control or
information from the ground. Standard procedure is to give all arriving
aircraft the active runway and QFE so you've got the data and a reminder to
reset your altimeter. If there's no radio manned to give you the
information, you just stick with your enroute QNH and do the mental
arithmetic just like in the States. It sounds daft, and I thought it was
when I first started flying here, but you soon get used to it. I don't
really have a problem and, actually, since I spend most of my time in a
Pitts below 3,000 practicing sequences, I usually leave it on QFE in the
local area because I'm more concerned about my height above ground and it's
pretty flat around the airport. In fact, depending on where I'm flying to
in the UK, the land can be so flat that I just leave it on QFE enroute. I
fly around other airports and generally keep out of everyones' way so it's
not ever been a problem. I also only fly in pretty good VMC, so the actual
altimeter reading in my case isn't terribly critical in most cases.

Shawn

"mike regish" > wrote in message
news:LaQ3c.742$bP2.13474@attbi_s53...
> How do you do that? Is there weather reporting at all airports? I can see
> setting to field elevation if you're returning to your original point of
> departure (I did that all the time in my ultralight), but how do you set
it
> at a different field without knowing either the Kollsman setting or your
> height above ground? Guestimate?
> mike regish
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "ShawnD2112" >
> Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 2:39 PM
> Subject: Re: Who's flying out of the higest elev airport?
>
>
> >
> > Here in the UK, setting the altimeter to field elevation, QFE, before
> > takeoff is not only allowed, it's taught and expected. Likewise, when
> > approaching the airfield, you're expected to reset the altimeter to that
> > airfield's QFE in the pattern. In the States, we would think that would
> > lead to all kinds of altitude-related accidents.
>
>

ShawnD2112

March 11th 04, 07:59 PM

Dudley,
I agree with your statement about keeping things standardized. I like to
keep everything that way so I can save what little brain capacity I have for
handling the deviations from standard. Likewise, I apply that same logic to
trimming. I trim for nearly any condition I'll be in for more than about 30
seconds, especially on landing. Nothing to do with stick forces, per se,
but then I'm only flying the airplane away from the trim. The airplane's
flying the basic line all by itself, I'm just flying the bits that are away
from that line. Keeps life less exciting but a bit longer lasting, I
reckon.

Funnily enough, though, this QFE thing is one that you soon get used to and
find that it seldom causes a problem. A person is just as likely to get the
mental arithmetic wrong on entering the pattern as they are to forget to set
QFE/QNH. Nearly all airfields here have a manned radio most of the time.
It's standard procedure to give arriving aircraft the active runway and the
QFE, so you get the information and a reminder. Most airfields have a
standard 1,000 foot pattern, 2,000 foot overhead join (now, if you want to
talk about a stupid procedure, let's get started on THAT one!), unless
otherwise noted, so you reset QFE, shoot for 2,000 feet and Bob's your
uncle.

Interesting your input in the other thread about spinning the Mustang. When
I was volunteering at The Fighter Collection, I was assigned to Moose, a D
model, and used to spend a bit of time reading the pilot's handbook and the
maintenance manual. (Never got to fly in her, though) I seem to remember
the Mustang required something like 10,000 feet to recover from a spin.
True in your experience?

Shawn

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
link.net...
> Sounds like a nightmare to me. I've zeroed the needle on occasion for
> demonstration work, but I just don't get the logic behind the QFE lobby.
> It's just one more thing to worry about changing, and that can lead to
> serious problems in the air. I'm a standardization buff. Making as much a
> constant as opposed to a variable when it comes to flying has always
seemed
> to me the best way to go with things. Having several MORE ways to use an
> altimeter just adds to normal altimeter confusion; it;s just one more
thing
> that someone can forget to set or change or figure out.
> :-))
> Dudley
> "ShawnD2112" > wrote in message
> news:GPy3c.2813$m56.1401@newsfe1-win...
> > Nope, you're not missing anything, Dudley. Except maybe topography. I
> > don't think there ARE any airports higher than 2,000 feet in the UK, and
> > there's very little terrain that high, even in the Highlands. The
> practice
> > may have grown up here in Britain because high terrain isn't an issue.
> Most
> > alitimeters over here these days are US manufacture anyways because most
> of
> > the fleet were built in the US.
> >
> > Your understanding of QFE is correct, it's the station elevation such
that
> > the altimeter reads 0 at some point on the ground. It can lead to the
odd
> > problem now and again, but normally isn't an issue. My airport is at
> about
> > 500 ft MSL, so if someone hasn't set their altimeter to QFE, but flies
> that
> > pattern altitude as it reads on the instrument (without doing the mental
> > arithmetic to ADD 1,000 ft), he'll come across the field at 500' AGL.
Add
> > to this that the Brits join the field at 2000 AGL on the side opposite
> > downwind (known as "The Dead side"), descend to 1,000' AGL as they pass
> > crosswind over the far end of the runway, then turn downwind and start
> their
> > descent. This means you get clowns passing the far end of the runway at
> 500
> > ' AGL, just as you're passing through the same airspace in a climb in
the
> > Pitts. Normally not a problem as not many GA airplanes can be at 500'
by
> > the end of our runway, but it's happened to me once and is just
something
> I
> > have to keep an eye out for when flying the Pitts. As I say, in 300
hours
> > flying in the UK, that's only happened to me once, so it's not common.
> >
> > Different way of "approaching" the same issue (sorry for the pun).
> >
> > Shawn
> > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> > ink.net...
> > >
> > > "ShawnD2112" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > Dudley,
> > > > Interesting that the "right or wrongness" of the issue is of such a
> > > concern.
> > > > Isn't it funny how different cultures view the same problem with
> > different
> > > > perspectives? Here in the UK, no motorcycle rider would even think
of
> > > > getting on a bike without a full set of leathers, helmet, and
gloves.
> > In
> > > > the States, guys ride in shorts, sneakers, and no helmets where they
> > can.
> > > > On the other side of the coin, Brits "filter" through traffic on
> > > > motorcycles, riding between lanes just to get through traffic
faster,
> > > > whether it be in the city or the highway. Most Americans think
that's
> > too
> > > > dangerous to think about.
> > > >
> > > > Here in the UK, setting the altimeter to field elevation, QFE,
before
> > > > takeoff is not only allowed, it's taught and expected. Likewise,
when
> > > > approaching the airfield, you're expected to reset the altimeter to
> that
> > > > airfield's QFE in the pattern. In the States, we would think that
> would
> > > > lead to all kinds of altitude-related accidents.
> > > >
> > > > Different perspectives, but who's to say what's right and wrong?
> > > >
> > > > Shawn
> > >
> > > Hi Shawn;
> > >
> > > Your comment on using QFE in the UK brings up an interesting point
that
> > I'm
> > > researching right now and perhaps you can answer for me possibly.
> > > Here in the U.S., our altimeters have a Kollsman range of about 27.5
and
> > > 32.0. This, considering an average atmosphere, denies you setting an
> > > altimeter to 0 on any airport runway above about 2500 to 3000 feet
> MSL!!!
> > > I'm wondering, since QFE is common in the UK, and by definition QFE is
a
> > > station pressure setting that will produce a 0 reading on the
altimeter
> > when
> > > on the ground at that station; are your altimeters in the UK equipped
> with
> > a
> > > wider Kollsman range in the setting windows perhaps, and if not, how
can
> a
> > > QFE setting be used at airports with elevations above our limits here
in
> > the
> > > U.S? It's an interesting point....or I must be missing something in my
> old
> > > age :-))
> > > Dudley
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Dudley Henriques

March 11th 04, 09:24 PM

Power on spins in the 51 could use up a ton of altitude. You could only
recover the airplane by reducing the throttle to idle. If you didn't, you
went in, it was that simple. The nose was very high with power; actually
above the horizon. You could easily, even after going to idle, take 5 to 6
turns and 10K to get out of it.
On trim and acro. I like to fly normally with the airplane in trim as you
have stated you like to have it also. The one exception to this was in low
altitude acro work, where I always flew against nose down trim. This gave me
positive stick pressure and a 0 null in pitch, and also served as a safety
for nose up pressure inverted if something happened suddenly during a low
altitude roll.
Dudley

"ShawnD2112" > wrote in message
news:Zx34c.307$pA3.32@newsfe1-win...
> Dudley,
> I agree with your statement about keeping things standardized. I like to
> keep everything that way so I can save what little brain capacity I have
for
> handling the deviations from standard. Likewise, I apply that same logic
to
> trimming. I trim for nearly any condition I'll be in for more than about
30
> seconds, especially on landing. Nothing to do with stick forces, per se,
> but then I'm only flying the airplane away from the trim. The airplane's
> flying the basic line all by itself, I'm just flying the bits that are
away
> from that line. Keeps life less exciting but a bit longer lasting, I
> reckon.
>
> Funnily enough, though, this QFE thing is one that you soon get used to
and
> find that it seldom causes a problem. A person is just as likely to get
the
> mental arithmetic wrong on entering the pattern as they are to forget to
set
> QFE/QNH. Nearly all airfields here have a manned radio most of the time.
> It's standard procedure to give arriving aircraft the active runway and
the
> QFE, so you get the information and a reminder. Most airfields have a
> standard 1,000 foot pattern, 2,000 foot overhead join (now, if you want to
> talk about a stupid procedure, let's get started on THAT one!), unless
> otherwise noted, so you reset QFE, shoot for 2,000 feet and Bob's your
> uncle.
>
> Interesting your input in the other thread about spinning the Mustang.
When
> I was volunteering at The Fighter Collection, I was assigned to Moose, a D
> model, and used to spend a bit of time reading the pilot's handbook and
the
> maintenance manual. (Never got to fly in her, though) I seem to remember
> the Mustang required something like 10,000 feet to recover from a spin.
> True in your experience?
>
> Shawn
>
>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> link.net...
> > Sounds like a nightmare to me. I've zeroed the needle on occasion for
> > demonstration work, but I just don't get the logic behind the QFE lobby.
> > It's just one more thing to worry about changing, and that can lead to
> > serious problems in the air. I'm a standardization buff. Making as much
a
> > constant as opposed to a variable when it comes to flying has always
> seemed
> > to me the best way to go with things. Having several MORE ways to use an
> > altimeter just adds to normal altimeter confusion; it;s just one more
> thing
> > that someone can forget to set or change or figure out.
> > :-))
> > Dudley
> > "ShawnD2112" > wrote in message
> > news:GPy3c.2813$m56.1401@newsfe1-win...
> > > Nope, you're not missing anything, Dudley. Except maybe topography.
I
> > > don't think there ARE any airports higher than 2,000 feet in the UK,
and
> > > there's very little terrain that high, even in the Highlands. The
> > practice
> > > may have grown up here in Britain because high terrain isn't an issue.
> > Most
> > > alitimeters over here these days are US manufacture anyways because
most
> > of
> > > the fleet were built in the US.
> > >
> > > Your understanding of QFE is correct, it's the station elevation such
> that
> > > the altimeter reads 0 at some point on the ground. It can lead to the
> odd
> > > problem now and again, but normally isn't an issue. My airport is at
> > about
> > > 500 ft MSL, so if someone hasn't set their altimeter to QFE, but flies
> > that
> > > pattern altitude as it reads on the instrument (without doing the
mental
> > > arithmetic to ADD 1,000 ft), he'll come across the field at 500' AGL.
> Add
> > > to this that the Brits join the field at 2000 AGL on the side opposite
> > > downwind (known as "The Dead side"), descend to 1,000' AGL as they
pass
> > > crosswind over the far end of the runway, then turn downwind and start
> > their
> > > descent. This means you get clowns passing the far end of the runway
at
> > 500
> > > ' AGL, just as you're passing through the same airspace in a climb in
> the
> > > Pitts. Normally not a problem as not many GA airplanes can be at 500'
> by
> > > the end of our runway, but it's happened to me once and is just
> something
> > I
> > > have to keep an eye out for when flying the Pitts. As I say, in 300
> hours
> > > flying in the UK, that's only happened to me once, so it's not common.
> > >
> > > Different way of "approaching" the same issue (sorry for the pun).
> > >
> > > Shawn
> > > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> > > ink.net...
> > > >
> > > > "ShawnD2112" > wrote in message
> > > > ...
> > > > > Dudley,
> > > > > Interesting that the "right or wrongness" of the issue is of such
a
> > > > concern.
> > > > > Isn't it funny how different cultures view the same problem with
> > > different
> > > > > perspectives? Here in the UK, no motorcycle rider would even
think
> of
> > > > > getting on a bike without a full set of leathers, helmet, and
> gloves.
> > > In
> > > > > the States, guys ride in shorts, sneakers, and no helmets where
they
> > > can.
> > > > > On the other side of the coin, Brits "filter" through traffic on
> > > > > motorcycles, riding between lanes just to get through traffic
> faster,
> > > > > whether it be in the city or the highway. Most Americans think
> that's
> > > too
> > > > > dangerous to think about.
> > > > >
> > > > > Here in the UK, setting the altimeter to field elevation, QFE,
> before
> > > > > takeoff is not only allowed, it's taught and expected. Likewise,
> when
> > > > > approaching the airfield, you're expected to reset the altimeter
to
> > that
> > > > > airfield's QFE in the pattern. In the States, we would think that
> > would
> > > > > lead to all kinds of altitude-related accidents.
> > > > >
> > > > > Different perspectives, but who's to say what's right and wrong?
> > > > >
> > > > > Shawn
> > > >
> > > > Hi Shawn;
> > > >
> > > > Your comment on using QFE in the UK brings up an interesting point
> that
> > > I'm
> > > > researching right now and perhaps you can answer for me possibly.
> > > > Here in the U.S., our altimeters have a Kollsman range of about 27.5
> and
> > > > 32.0. This, considering an average atmosphere, denies you setting an
> > > > altimeter to 0 on any airport runway above about 2500 to 3000 feet
> > MSL!!!
> > > > I'm wondering, since QFE is common in the UK, and by definition QFE
is
> a
> > > > station pressure setting that will produce a 0 reading on the
> altimeter
> > > when
> > > > on the ground at that station; are your altimeters in the UK
equipped
> > with
> > > a
> > > > wider Kollsman range in the setting windows perhaps, and if not, how
> can
> > a
> > > > QFE setting be used at airports with elevations above our limits
here
> in
> > > the
> > > > U.S? It's an interesting point....or I must be missing something in
my
> > old
> > > > age :-))
> > > > Dudley
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

David CL Francis

March 11th 04, 11:05 PM

On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 at 16:19:25 in message
>, Todd Pattist
> wrote:

>I bet it can't. The highest point in England is 3210' and
>Scotland only goes to 4400'.

Correct but don't forget Snowdon in Wales at 3590'

Snowdon in particular is quite formidable to look at as a pedestrian! I
have walked up an easy route three times in my life and it frightened
me!
--
David CL Francis

Morgans

March 12th 04, 12:52 AM

"David CL Francis" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 at 16:19:25 in message
> >, Todd Pattist
> > wrote:
>
> >I bet it can't. The highest point in England is 3210' and
> >Scotland only goes to 4400'.
>
> Correct but don't forget Snowdon in Wales at 3590'
>
> Snowdon in particular is quite formidable to look at as a pedestrian! I
> have walked up an easy route three times in my life and it frightened
> me!
> --
> David CL Francis

Is there any one place in particular that you are talking about. I googled,
and it is really pretty.
--
Jim in NC

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.608 / Virus Database: 388 - Release Date: 3/3/2004

David Brooks

March 12th 04, 04:58 AM

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
link.net...
> Sounds like a nightmare to me. I've zeroed the needle on occasion for
> demonstration work, but I just don't get the logic behind the QFE lobby.
> It's just one more thing to worry about changing, and that can lead to
> serious problems in the air. I'm a standardization buff. Making as much a
> constant as opposed to a variable when it comes to flying has always
seemed
> to me the best way to go with things. Having several MORE ways to use an
> altimeter just adds to normal altimeter confusion; it;s just one more
thing
> that someone can forget to set or change or figure out.

Others have explained that the use of QFE works in the UK because there are
few or no airfields above 2000ft (and tropical depressions are rare). I've
flown there with instructors who knew what we do in the US, and took care to
explain what they are doing and why. Resetting from QNH to QFE *in the
vicinity of an airport* is part of the procedure when receiving the ATIS or
whatever advisory is available, just as it is for us in the US (I always
check, and reset if necessary, when hearing an ATIS - don't you?) and the
QFE is one phrase in the report so it's not easy to forget. The extra step
for a student is more than repaid by not having to do the arithmetic in the
pattern.

You're a standardization buff, and it sounds like a standard procedure to
me. It's just part of the approach checklist. And, if you count them up,
there is one more variable (twist the altimeter) and a lot more constants
(pattern-related altitudes).

Remember also that many UK pilots get pretty quickly into the flight levels,
so there's a need to twist to QNE as well.

-- David Brooks

ShawnD2112

March 12th 04, 06:46 AM

Agree with the trim conversation. My Pitts' trim is all the way forward at
cruise speed so, by definition, when I'm into entry speeds I'm always in
nose up trim. I like the feeling of positive ffeedback in the stick, so
that seems pretty comfortable to me. I haven't really done much inverted or
low level stuff yet so the noseup trim hasn't come into need. But some day
that'll be useful advice!

Shawn
"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
k.net...
> Power on spins in the 51 could use up a ton of altitude. You could only
> recover the airplane by reducing the throttle to idle. If you didn't, you
> went in, it was that simple. The nose was very high with power; actually
> above the horizon. You could easily, even after going to idle, take 5 to 6
> turns and 10K to get out of it.
> On trim and acro. I like to fly normally with the airplane in trim as you
> have stated you like to have it also. The one exception to this was in low
> altitude acro work, where I always flew against nose down trim. This gave
me
> positive stick pressure and a 0 null in pitch, and also served as a safety
> for nose up pressure inverted if something happened suddenly during a low
> altitude roll.
> Dudley
>
> "ShawnD2112" > wrote in message
> news:Zx34c.307$pA3.32@newsfe1-win...
> > Dudley,
> > I agree with your statement about keeping things standardized. I like
to
> > keep everything that way so I can save what little brain capacity I have
> for
> > handling the deviations from standard. Likewise, I apply that same
logic
> to
> > trimming. I trim for nearly any condition I'll be in for more than
about
> 30
> > seconds, especially on landing. Nothing to do with stick forces, per
se,
> > but then I'm only flying the airplane away from the trim. The
airplane's
> > flying the basic line all by itself, I'm just flying the bits that are
> away
> > from that line. Keeps life less exciting but a bit longer lasting, I
> > reckon.
> >
> > Funnily enough, though, this QFE thing is one that you soon get used to
> and
> > find that it seldom causes a problem. A person is just as likely to get
> the
> > mental arithmetic wrong on entering the pattern as they are to forget to
> set
> > QFE/QNH. Nearly all airfields here have a manned radio most of the
time.
> > It's standard procedure to give arriving aircraft the active runway and
> the
> > QFE, so you get the information and a reminder. Most airfields have a
> > standard 1,000 foot pattern, 2,000 foot overhead join (now, if you want
to
> > talk about a stupid procedure, let's get started on THAT one!), unless
> > otherwise noted, so you reset QFE, shoot for 2,000 feet and Bob's your
> > uncle.
> >
> > Interesting your input in the other thread about spinning the Mustang.
> When
> > I was volunteering at The Fighter Collection, I was assigned to Moose, a
D
> > model, and used to spend a bit of time reading the pilot's handbook and
> the
> > maintenance manual. (Never got to fly in her, though) I seem to
remember
> > the Mustang required something like 10,000 feet to recover from a spin.
> > True in your experience?
> >
> > Shawn
> >
> >
> > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> > link.net...
> > > Sounds like a nightmare to me. I've zeroed the needle on occasion for
> > > demonstration work, but I just don't get the logic behind the QFE
lobby.
> > > It's just one more thing to worry about changing, and that can lead to
> > > serious problems in the air. I'm a standardization buff. Making as
much
> a
> > > constant as opposed to a variable when it comes to flying has always
> > seemed
> > > to me the best way to go with things. Having several MORE ways to use
an
> > > altimeter just adds to normal altimeter confusion; it;s just one more
> > thing
> > > that someone can forget to set or change or figure out.
> > > :-))
> > > Dudley
> > > "ShawnD2112" > wrote in message
> > > news:GPy3c.2813$m56.1401@newsfe1-win...
> > > > Nope, you're not missing anything, Dudley. Except maybe topography.
> I
> > > > don't think there ARE any airports higher than 2,000 feet in the UK,
> and
> > > > there's very little terrain that high, even in the Highlands. The
> > > practice
> > > > may have grown up here in Britain because high terrain isn't an
issue.
> > > Most
> > > > alitimeters over here these days are US manufacture anyways because
> most
> > > of
> > > > the fleet were built in the US.
> > > >
> > > > Your understanding of QFE is correct, it's the station elevation
such
> > that
> > > > the altimeter reads 0 at some point on the ground. It can lead to
the
> > odd
> > > > problem now and again, but normally isn't an issue. My airport is
at
> > > about
> > > > 500 ft MSL, so if someone hasn't set their altimeter to QFE, but
flies
> > > that
> > > > pattern altitude as it reads on the instrument (without doing the
> mental
> > > > arithmetic to ADD 1,000 ft), he'll come across the field at 500'
AGL.
> > Add
> > > > to this that the Brits join the field at 2000 AGL on the side
opposite
> > > > downwind (known as "The Dead side"), descend to 1,000' AGL as they
> pass
> > > > crosswind over the far end of the runway, then turn downwind and
start
> > > their
> > > > descent. This means you get clowns passing the far end of the
runway
> at
> > > 500
> > > > ' AGL, just as you're passing through the same airspace in a climb
in
> > the
> > > > Pitts. Normally not a problem as not many GA airplanes can be at
500'
> > by
> > > > the end of our runway, but it's happened to me once and is just
> > something
> > > I
> > > > have to keep an eye out for when flying the Pitts. As I say, in 300
> > hours
> > > > flying in the UK, that's only happened to me once, so it's not
common.
> > > >
> > > > Different way of "approaching" the same issue (sorry for the pun).
> > > >
> > > > Shawn
> > > > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> > > > ink.net...
> > > > >
> > > > > "ShawnD2112" > wrote in message
> > > > > ...
> > > > > > Dudley,
> > > > > > Interesting that the "right or wrongness" of the issue is of
such
> a
> > > > > concern.
> > > > > > Isn't it funny how different cultures view the same problem with
> > > > different
> > > > > > perspectives? Here in the UK, no motorcycle rider would even
> think
> > of
> > > > > > getting on a bike without a full set of leathers, helmet, and
> > gloves.
> > > > In
> > > > > > the States, guys ride in shorts, sneakers, and no helmets where
> they
> > > > can.
> > > > > > On the other side of the coin, Brits "filter" through traffic on
> > > > > > motorcycles, riding between lanes just to get through traffic
> > faster,
> > > > > > whether it be in the city or the highway. Most Americans think
> > that's
> > > > too
> > > > > > dangerous to think about.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Here in the UK, setting the altimeter to field elevation, QFE,
> > before
> > > > > > takeoff is not only allowed, it's taught and expected.
Likewise,
> > when
> > > > > > approaching the airfield, you're expected to reset the altimeter
> to
> > > that
> > > > > > airfield's QFE in the pattern. In the States, we would think
that
> > > would
> > > > > > lead to all kinds of altitude-related accidents.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Different perspectives, but who's to say what's right and wrong?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Shawn
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Shawn;
> > > > >
> > > > > Your comment on using QFE in the UK brings up an interesting point
> > that
> > > > I'm
> > > > > researching right now and perhaps you can answer for me possibly.
> > > > > Here in the U.S., our altimeters have a Kollsman range of about
27.5
> > and
> > > > > 32.0. This, considering an average atmosphere, denies you setting
an
> > > > > altimeter to 0 on any airport runway above about 2500 to 3000 feet
> > > MSL!!!
> > > > > I'm wondering, since QFE is common in the UK, and by definition
QFE
> is
> > a
> > > > > station pressure setting that will produce a 0 reading on the
> > altimeter
> > > > when
> > > > > on the ground at that station; are your altimeters in the UK
> equipped
> > > with
> > > > a
> > > > > wider Kollsman range in the setting windows perhaps, and if not,
how
> > can
> > > a
> > > > > QFE setting be used at airports with elevations above our limits
> here
> > in
> > > > the
> > > > > U.S? It's an interesting point....or I must be missing something
in
> my
> > > old
> > > > > age :-))
> > > > > Dudley
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

S Green

March 12th 04, 09:19 PM

"David Brooks" > wrote in message
...
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> link.net...
> > Sounds like a nightmare to me. I've zeroed the needle on occasion for
> > demonstration work, but I just don't get the logic behind the QFE lobby.
> > It's just one more thing to worry about changing, and that can lead to
> > serious problems in the air. I'm a standardization buff. Making as much
a
> > constant as opposed to a variable when it comes to flying has always
> seemed
> > to me the best way to go with things. Having several MORE ways to use an
> > altimeter just adds to normal altimeter confusion; it;s just one more
> thing
> > that someone can forget to set or change or figure out.
>
> Others have explained that the use of QFE works in the UK because there
are
> few or no airfields above 2000ft (and tropical depressions are rare). I've
> flown there with instructors who knew what we do in the US, and took care
to
> explain what they are doing and why. Resetting from QNH to QFE *in the
> vicinity of an airport* is part of the procedure when receiving the ATIS
or
> whatever advisory is available, just as it is for us in the US (I always
> check, and reset if necessary, when hearing an ATIS - don't you?) and the
> QFE is one phrase in the report so it's not easy to forget. The extra step
> for a student is more than repaid by not having to do the arithmetic in
the
> pattern.
>
> You're a standardization buff, and it sounds like a standard procedure to
> me. It's just part of the approach checklist. And, if you count them up,
> there is one more variable (twist the altimeter) and a lot more constants
> (pattern-related altitudes).
>
> Remember also that many UK pilots get pretty quickly into the flight
levels,
> so there's a need to twist to QNE as well.
>
> -- David Brooks

Its very true about flight levels. You can into them as low as FL035 but
then our class A airspace can start as low as the surface like round
Heathrow and Gatwick.

But then that is no big deal either after encoded altitude being thrown out
by the transponder is in flight levels. It means no mental maths again for
ATC or the pilot. In the UK flying IFR means amongst other things having an
altimeter setting of 1013mb (29.92" hg) once at the transition altitude for
the airspace you are in. That transition altitude can be as low as 3000ft in
uncontrolled airspace.

sg