[pplmeir]

I use QFE for Visual circuits, because that is how I was taught

I use QNH with MDA/DA for instrument approaches, because that is how I was taught.

[mick w]

I never use QFE, always QNH.

Should I assume then , that when given the QFE inbound , you don't bother with it , & just work it out from the QNH , or do you fly the Circuit with the mentally adjusted figure in mind ?.

[mmcp42]

i used to use QFE in the circuit when learning for PPL
since I did IR, where all approaches use QNH I see no reason to go back
no maths involved, you land at airfield elevation - not science[rocket]

you usually get QNH on first contact, then QFE just befor entering the circuit. easy enough to ignore it (having dutifully read it back to keep ATC happy)

[SteveC]

I never use QFE, always QNH.

Should I assume then , that when given the QFE inbound , you don't bother with it , & just work it out from the QNH , or do you fly the Circuit with the mentally adjusted figure in mind ?.

Airfield gives you QNH and QFE. I am already on QNH so you land at the airfield elevation. It's not difficult. At work we only ever use QNH as it's generally all IFR.

Once you leave the flat lands it saves an awful lot of winding on the altimeter knob!

[ianfallon]

I think the idea of QFE is that a small bit of twiddling (setting a number) is less mentally involved than adding the airfield altitude to the circuit height maths and flying a circuit at 1000ft on the altimeter is marginally less taxing than remembering and nailing 1264ft for example. Especially for students.

No big deal either way IMHO - do what you prefer - it doesn't affect anyone else (unless you mess up).

[riverrock]

Simple maths beyond you?

To be honest - yes.
My mental arithmetic is pretty poor at the best of times. I might have an A-Level in maths but I have to stop and think to be able to add two large numbers together.

Turning a knob to set a number doesn't involve any mental energy.

When my mind is on setting up the aircraft to join the circuit while keeping up lookout, I don't want to be expanding mental energy on things I don't need to.

[lobstaboy]

What's wrong with working it out before you go? I write it on my kneeboard. " Cct at 1250 on QNH" along with other useful stuff. And rounding to the nearest 25' seems ok to me.
And it's preferable when going to a non radio field to winding 275' or whatever off the altimeter which can easily go wrong.

[rf3flyer]

Simple maths beyond you?

Yeah, that'll be it.

[Paul_Sengupta]

Simple maths beyond you?

It was beyond this Thunderbirds pilot. For anyone who doesn't know the story, he got the airfield elevation wrong and started the manoeuvre too low.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaWNj-ZkADY

[riverrock]

So what height do you want to be at when turning final?
I know, because my altimeter reads the same at every airfield, no matter what the circuit height or airfield height is.

I assume you also write down the altitude of other circuits, so you know what height to look out for microlights and helicopters at?

[lobstaboy]

So what height do you want to be at when turning final?
I know, because my altimeter reads the same at every airfield, no matter what the circuit height or airfield height is.

You shouldn't be using the altimeter by the time you get to the final turn. You should be judging your approach by then entirely by eye and reference to the asi to keep the speed nailed. I'm talking about light singles here of course.

[flyingeeza]

So what height do you want to be at when turning final?

Depends on the wind, and what aircraft I'm flying.

I assume you also write down the altitude of other circuits, so you know what height to look out for microlights and helicopters at?

Indeed...on my plog...before taking off.

[davey]

I use QNH all the time now, mainly because flying the Cub from the back seat makes it impossible to reach the altimeter once strapped in

[riverrock]

If you're doing a constant aspect approach (curved) then that makes total sense. Once turned final - yes - you maintain a constant angle to land where you want to.
However when descending on base, you need a height to aim for when turning final. Otherwise you wont be able to judge how quickly to descend on base (will vary due to wind, circuit width and height). For light aircraft on non-instrument approaches, PAPI (set at 3 to 3.5 deg at most airports) are useless for this.

Very difficult to tell height visually.
That's the way I was taught.

[Dave_Ett]

RPS and QFE are anachronisms that should be made extinct. If you can't add field or threshold elevation to circuit height before you take off I despair

Then you forget (or never suffered) mental overload as a student or low hours pilot.

I do so love it when the old and bold despair at the attempts of the inexperienced, makes us feel so special!