Who's flying out of the higest elev airport?

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!

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,
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.

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.

In article k.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

"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

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" 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.

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

"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