Altimeter Question

Andy Hawkins wrote in
:

Hi,

In article ,
Bertie the wrote:
They don't use any of the Q codes in the US. QNH is one of the few
still in use around the rest of the world, the rest are pretty much
archaich. You stil occasionally hear QFE in the UK, but no airlines I
know of are using it anymore since modern airplanes aren't designed
around their use (QFE settings on the altimeter **** up the computers
since the computer is anticipating a QHN setting to run a bunch of
other devices in the airplane, of which pressurisation is the most
relevant) Very occasionally you hear QSY which is "see you, I'm going
to talk to someone else" and QDM almost never nowadays, but it used
to be relatively common and it's Mag direction to a station. And even
less used QDR which is the Mag radial from a station. I think the
Maritime world might use a lot more of them still, though.

The UK PPL syllabus still teaches QNH, QFE (the military use it here,
and some civil airfields will give it in the initial response). QDM,
QDR and QTE (true bearing) are also taught. QDM is on the R/T
'practical' test generally.


But, like sticking to imperial measurements, I think you stand alone.
Britain is still clinging to a number of archaic aviation terms (you
still gotta know which direction to go whatever you choose to call it!)
One of my favorites is the "Pan" call. Nobody uses that anymore except
you guys. I had an entertaining few minutes in Germany listening to some
Nigel making one of these a few years back. It went something like this.
The Nigel Skipper is played Terry Thomas and the German controller by
Hardy Kruger in this re-creation.

Boffo Air 2234 "Rhine, Boffo 2234, PAN PAN PAN"
ATC "Station calling?"
BA 2234 "Rhine this is Boffo 2234, PAN PAN PAN"
ATC. "Boffo 2234, pass your message"
BA 2234 "Rhine, this is Boffo 2234, PAN PAN PAN"
ATC, "Boffo 2234, say again?"
BA2234 "Rhine, this is a PAN call from Boffo 2234"
(at this point you can almost hear the Boffo skiper thinking "bloody
foreigners"
ATC, "Boffo 2234, are you declaring an emergency?"
BA2234 "Negative Rhine, Boffo 2234 is making a PAN call"
ATC, -silence-
BA 2234, Rhine, we have a pasenger having a heart attack, we're mkaing a
PAN call"
ATC, "Boffo 2234, do you wish to declare an emergency?"
BA 2234 "Nega- Oh, yes, yes, we're declaring an emergency, we'd like to
divert to Frankfurt immediatly. "
ATC, roger 2234, fly heading 330 and descend now to FL 150"

No ****, this really happened. I think it actually took longer than
this. The Brit captain just wouldn't let go....

I'm not sure but I think it was Thomas Cook.



Bertie

WingFlaps wrote in news:cba00260-0bfd-4ac5-8b46-
:

On Apr 18, 3:04*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

I wasnt aware you dont use the QNH term in the States. *So what do
you

call the number you dial up to make the altimeter read airport
elevation?

They don't use any of the Q codes in the US. QNH is one of the few
still
in use around the rest of the world, the rest are pretty much
archaich.

How come the US doesn't adopt ICAO? I thought it had to -isn't that
what ICAO is all about?


They have Nukes and won't be told anything. AFAIK, they're the only
place left that uses in/hg, and the weather reporting format is also
unique. ATC phrasology is also peculiar to the US.
Actually, there are a lot of anomolies around the world. Eastern Europe
and Russia doggedly cling to using windspeed in Meters/second and have
reluctantly accepted using feet for altitude, though there are still a
lot of published platform altitudes of something like "2746 feet" The
Brits still have some oddball notions and can't understand why the rest
of the world doesn't want to do it their way and the middle east is
pretty much close your eyes and ask Allah for guidance. Semicircular
rules are different alsmot everywhere. Theyr'e qudrantal in the UK, in
fact. In Sweden it's N/S instead of E/W because that's the way most of
the traffic goes. Spain is the same.
Africa doesn't have any rules at al as far as I can tell, though it's
ostensibly ICAO
Haven't been to China yet, but it's gotta be interesting too.




Bertie

On Apr 18, 4:43*am, Stefan wrote:
WingFlaps schrieb:

I see you don't know. In fact an altimeter is calibrated to the
standard atmosphere so if the temp. is not standard it will not read
field elevation when local QNH is applied.

Wrong.

*From The ICAO Manual of Radiotelephony (ICAO Document 9432) Glossary:
QNH: Altimeter sub-scale setting to obtain elevation when on the ground

So an altimeter set to local QNH will always read field elevation *by
definition*.

* Pretty basic knowlege for a PPL

Indeed.

Yes it may say that but it's being loose because it forgt to include
the "barometric pressure reduced to MSL by application of the ISA".
Alltimeters are calibrated for the standard atmosphere. -right?
Think about it, if an ARFOR gives QNH how could it be correct for all
terrain if local temperatures differed? I covered this in my PPL tech
course -was this not covered in your manuals?
just in case you still don't see it, from Wiki:

"The altimeter is calibrated to show the pressure directly as an
altitude above mean sea level, in accordance with a mathematical model
defined by the International Standard Atmosphere (ISA)... An altimeter
cannot, however, be adjusted for variations in air temperature.
Differences in temperature from the ISA model will, therefore, cause
errors in indicated altitude."

OK?

Cheers

On Apr 18, 4:56*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Andy Hawkins wrote :





Hi,

In article ,
* * * * * *Bertie the wrote:
They don't use any of the Q codes in the US. QNH is one of the few
still in use around the rest of the world, the rest are pretty much
archaich. You stil occasionally hear QFE in the UK, but no airlines I
know of are using it anymore since modern airplanes aren't designed
around their use (QFE settings on the altimeter **** up the computers
since the computer is anticipating a QHN setting to run a bunch of
other devices in the airplane, of which pressurisation is the most
relevant) Very occasionally you hear QSY which is "see you, I'm going
to talk to someone else" and *QDM almost never nowadays, but it used
to be relatively common and it's Mag direction to a station. And even
less used QDR which is the Mag radial from a station. I think the
Maritime world might use a lot more of them still, though.

The UK PPL syllabus still teaches QNH, QFE (the military use it here,
and some civil airfields will give it in the initial response). QDM,
QDR and QTE (true bearing) are also taught. QDM is on the R/T
'practical' test generally.

But, like sticking to imperial measurements, I think you stand alone.
Britain is still clinging to a number of archaic aviation terms (you
still gotta know which direction to go whatever you choose to call it!)
One of my favorites is the "Pan" call. Nobody uses that anymore except
you guys. I had an entertaining few minutes in Germany listening to some
Nigel making one of these a few years back. It went something like this.
The Nigel Skipper is played Terry Thomas and the German controller by
Hardy Kruger in this re-creation.

Boffo Air 2234 "Rhine, Boffo 2234, PAN PAN PAN"
ATC "Station calling?"
BA 2234 "Rhine this is Boffo 2234, PAN PAN PAN"
ATC. "Boffo 2234, pass your message"
BA 2234 "Rhine, this is Boffo 2234, PAN PAN PAN"
ATC, "Boffo 2234, say again?"
BA2234 "Rhine, this is a PAN call from Boffo 2234"
(at this point you can almost hear the Boffo skiper thinking "bloody
foreigners"
ATC, "Boffo 2234, are you declaring an emergency?"
BA2234 "Negative Rhine, Boffo 2234 is making a PAN call"
ATC, -silence-
BA 2234, Rhine, we have a pasenger having a heart attack, we're mkaing a
PAN call"
ATC, "Boffo 2234, do you wish to declare an emergency?"
BA 2234 "Nega- Oh, yes, yes, we're declaring an emergency, we'd like to
divert to Frankfurt immediatly. "
ATC, roger 2234, fly heading 330 and descend now to FL 150"

No ****, this really happened. I think it actually took longer than
this. The Brit captain just wouldn't let go....

I'm not sure but I think it was Thomas Cook.


I was taught PAN PAN format for urgency in my R/T. AsI far as I know
it's an ICAO standard. Are you saying there are controllers out there
who don't know this?

Cheers

Actually, there are a lot of anomolies around the world. Eastern Europe
and Russia doggedly cling to using windspeed in Meters/second and have
reluctantly accepted using feet for altitude, though there are still a
lot of published platform altitudes of something like "2746 feet"

I learned to fly in France in the 1980s and they used a weird combination of
feet and meters. Altimeters read in feet,and minimum safe altitudes were
charted in feet. But charted obstructions and airspace restrictions were in
meters. Everyone set QFE (altimeter reads zero on the ground) for takeoff,
then reset the altimeter to QNH if leaving the traffic pattern. Flight levels
began at 3500 feet.

Can any Europeans out there tell me if it's still like that?

WingFlaps wrote in news:fdf0b97d-aac6-4ac1-a936-
:

On Apr 18, 3:58*am, Stefan wrote:
WingFlaps schrieb:

That's a good question as Eurocontrol recognises QNH as the correct
local barometric setting (they also state that it means Query:
Newlyn
harbour). I thought the ICAO agreed with Eurocontrol on these
things?

Actually, it's the other way round: Eurocontrol adheres to the ICAO
phraseology.

*From The ICAO Manual of Radiotelephony (ICAO Document 9432)

Glossary:
QNH: Altimeter sub-scale setting to obtain elevation when on the
ground

Example:
Fastair 345, descend to 4000 feet, QNH 1005, transition level 50,
expect
ILS approach runway 24

WTF are the Americans doing not using ICAO standards or is it just
Gig601 being wrong?


Mostly just that it evolved into what it is and there would be a lot of
resistance to change. For one thing it would mean changine every
altimiter in the US for ones who's Kollsman windows were in mb ( or Hpa
if you prefer) It would also mean a complete revamp of airspace, though
there has been some moves towards international harmonisation there in
the last 15 years or so. Likewise with ATC, there has been some movement
towards harmonisation. I think it's a case of softly softly catchy
monkey in regards the FAA's approach. Introducing too much "furrin"
stuff all at once would raise an outcry and probably dash any chance of
harmonisation completely. Imagine, if you will, Jay hineck whining about
lefties form Europe making him change his altimeter on his "Pathfinder"
Whatever the **** that is, and you will see what I mean.

Bertie

Stefan wrote in news:680f0$48077e23$54497f6b
:

WingFlaps schrieb:

I see you don't know. In fact an altimeter is calibrated to the
standard atmosphere so if the temp. is not standard it will not read
field elevation when local QNH is applied.

Wrong.

From The ICAO Manual of Radiotelephony (ICAO Document 9432) Glossary:
QNH: Altimeter sub-scale setting to obtain elevation when on the
ground

So an altimeter set to local QNH will always read field elevation *by
definition*.


No, it will read the elevation where you are. UIt will read field
elevation at the reference point.


Pretty basic knowlege for a PPL

Indeed.


Indeed indeed.


Bertie

"Barry" wrote in
:

Actually, there are a lot of anomolies around the world. Eastern
Europe and Russia doggedly cling to using windspeed in Meters/second
and have reluctantly accepted using feet for altitude, though there
are still a lot of published platform altitudes of something like
"2746 feet"

I learned to fly in France in the 1980s and they used a weird
combination of feet and meters. Altimeters read in feet,and minimum
safe altitudes were charted in feet. But charted obstructions and
airspace restrictions were in meters. Everyone set QFE (altimeter
reads zero on the ground) for takeoff, then reset the altimeter to QNH
if leaving the traffic pattern. Flight levels began at 3500 feet.

Can any Europeans out there tell me if it's still like that?




I fly in Eurpoe a lot an dmercifully tht doesn't seem to be the case,
but having said that, I only use insturment charts in France...

Bertie

WingFlaps wrote in
:

On Apr 18, 4:56*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Andy Hawkins wrote
innews:slrng0ev04.7lo.andy@gently.
org.uk:





Hi,

In article ,
* * * * * *Bertie the wrote:
They don't use any of the Q codes in the US. QNH is one of the few
still in use around the rest of the world, the rest are pretty
much archaich. You stil occasionally hear QFE in the UK, but no
airlines I know of are using it anymore since modern airplanes
aren't designed around their use (QFE settings on the altimeter
**** up the computers since the computer is anticipating a QHN
setting to run a bunch of other devices in the airplane, of which
pressurisation is the most relevant) Very occasionally you hear
QSY which is "see you, I'm going to talk to someone else" and *QDM
almost never nowadays, but it used to be relatively common and
it's Mag direction to a station. And even less used QDR which is
the Mag radial from a station. I think the Maritime world might
use a lot more of them still, though.

The UK PPL syllabus still teaches QNH, QFE (the military use it
here, and some civil airfields will give it in the initial
response). QDM, QDR and QTE (true bearing) are also taught. QDM is
on the R/T 'practical' test generally.

But, like sticking to imperial measurements, I think you stand alone.
Britain is still clinging to a number of archaic aviation terms (you
still gotta know which direction to go whatever you choose to call
it!) One of my favorites is the "Pan" call. Nobody uses that anymore
except you guys. I had an entertaining few minutes in Germany
listening to some Nigel making one of these a few years back. It went
something like this. The Nigel Skipper is played Terry Thomas and the
German controller by Hardy Kruger in this re-creation.

Boffo Air 2234 "Rhine, Boffo 2234, PAN PAN PAN"
ATC "Station calling?"
BA 2234 "Rhine this is Boffo 2234, PAN PAN PAN"
ATC. "Boffo 2234, pass your message"
BA 2234 "Rhine, this is Boffo 2234, PAN PAN PAN"
ATC, "Boffo 2234, say again?"
BA2234 "Rhine, this is a PAN call from Boffo 2234"
(at this point you can almost hear the Boffo skiper thinking "bloody
foreigners"
ATC, "Boffo 2234, are you declaring an emergency?"
BA2234 "Negative Rhine, Boffo 2234 is making a PAN call"
ATC, -silence-
BA 2234, Rhine, we have a pasenger having a heart attack, we're
mkaing a PAN call"
ATC, "Boffo 2234, do you wish to declare an emergency?"
BA 2234 "Nega- Oh, yes, yes, we're declaring an emergency, we'd like
to divert to Frankfurt immediatly. "
ATC, roger 2234, fly heading 330 and descend now to FL 150"

No ****, this really happened. I think it actually took longer than
this. The Brit captain just wouldn't let go....

I'm not sure but I think it was Thomas Cook.


I was taught PAN PAN format for urgency in my R/T. AsI far as I know
it's an ICAO standard. Are you saying there are controllers out there
who don't know this?

Cheers




Yep, that's exactly what I'm saying.. It's fallen from use completely.
I've never used Mayday either, though I would if I was in real trouble
to punch through the traffic. always just declared an emergency. That
incident I posted above happened just like I posted it. The idiot wasted
several minutes "trying to get Jerry to see some sense"

Bertie


Bertie

On Apr 18, 5:36*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
WingFlaps wrote in news:fdf0b97d-aac6-4ac1-a936-
:







On Apr 18, 3:58*am, Stefan wrote:
WingFlaps schrieb:

That's a good question as Eurocontrol recognises QNH as the correct
local barometric setting (they also state that it means Query:
Newlyn
harbour). I thought the ICAO agreed with Eurocontrol on these
things?

Actually, it's the other way round: Eurocontrol adheres to the ICAO
phraseology.

*From The ICAO Manual of Radiotelephony (ICAO Document 9432)

Glossary:
QNH: Altimeter sub-scale setting to obtain elevation when on the
ground

Example:
Fastair 345, descend to 4000 feet, QNH 1005, transition level 50,
expect
ILS approach runway 24

WTF are the Americans doing not using ICAO standards or is it just
Gig601 being wrong?

Mostly just that it evolved into what it is and there would be a lot of
resistance to change. For one thing it would mean changine every
altimiter in the US for ones who's Kollsman windows were in mb ( or Hpa
if you prefer) It would also mean a complete revamp of airspace, though
there has been some moves towards international harmonisation there in
the last 15 years or so. Likewise with ATC, there has been some movement
towards harmonisation. I think it's a case of softly softly catchy
monkey in regards the FAA's approach. Introducing too much "furrin"
stuff all at once would raise an outcry and probably dash any chance of
harmonisation completely. Imagine, if you will, Jay hineck whining about
lefties form Europe making him change his altimeter on his "Pathfinder"
Whatever the **** that is, and you will see what I mean.


In the spirit of reciprocation, I can tell you that Pathfinders
dropped flares on targets for bombers during WW2.

Cheers