Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
User avatar
By Rob P
#1893824
JAFO wrote: ... no matter what level I choose, I am rarely actually at it.


Absolutely, nor do I agonise about it unless under a control service or below / above CAS.

I think the main danger is for those with autopilots.

Rob P
User avatar
By Sir Morley Steven
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1893826
Be careful in low pressure days if you elect to fly above the transition altitude on QNH.
Let’s say the QNY is 993 and you have class A above you at FL65, above the TA.
By the time you reach 6000ft you will have infringed.
AndyR liked this
By PaulisHome
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1893828
BoeingBoy wrote:...

There is no requirement for you to use the semi circular rule +500' when VFR, but it's no bad thing to to.



Actually, flying using the semi-circular rule will increase your risk of collision. Much better to pick a random altitude.

The semi-circular rule works if you're going to fly in airways under air traffic control. For otherwise random traffic it just concentrates aircraft in small bands - thus increasing collision risk.

Paul
A4 Pacific, Ibra, ls8pilot and 2 others liked this
By A4 Pacific
#1893830
Flying VFR in Class G airspace at any level, doesn’t even require you to have a radio or a transponder, never mind receiving any ATC service. VFR deconfliction is simply ‘see and be seen’. That’s why we don’t need or use, rigid cruising altitudes below the transition altitude where frankly the skies are often more congested. If you don’t need to reference your altitude to a flight level, why would you need 1013 set? What if you are manouvring? Do folks fly aerobatics with 1013 set?

IFR flight is different, and is catered for. Mixing IFR and VFR traffic always comes with additional risk, which is why we have controlled airspace.
Last edited by A4 Pacific on Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Rob P
#1893831
A4 Pacific wrote:Do folks fly aerobatics with 1013 set?


Personally, yes.

But only if 1013 has been set on the Dynon for a previous flight.

Rob P
By A4 Pacific
#1893837
The full quote:

If you don’t need to reference your altitude to a flight level, why would you need 1013 set? What if you are manouvring? Do folks fly aerobatics with 1013 set?
User avatar
By PeteSpencer
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1893859
Sir Morley Steven wrote:Be careful in low pressure days if you elect to fly above the transition altitude on QNH.
Let’s say the QNY is 993 and you have class A above you at FL65, above the TA.
By the time you reach 6000ft you will have infringed.


QNY :

Had to look that up:
“What is the state of weather and intensity thereof? “

Had no idea there were so many ‘Q’ codes - they start at QAx….. , fahsends of ‘em :lol:
By Ibra
#1893864
PaulisHome wrote:
Actually, flying using the semi-circular rule will increase your risk of collision. Much better to pick a random altitude.

The semi-circular rule works if you're going to fly in airways under air traffic control. For otherwise random traffic it just concentrates aircraft in small bands - thus increasing collision risk.


Yes “random level & route is good” to reduce encounters, if you start assigning levels you need to assign routes and provide “some slots” !

Still, I have flown low level procedural routes while in Morroco (VFR & IFR traffic are restricted to published airways: VFR flies in 4kft-10kft band, procedural IFR fly: 10kft-20kft and IFR on radar > 20kft), there is not much VFR flying in 200nm*300nm*10kft volume, once, I did spot two aircraft on the same day: I found it scary given that there are max 10 GA aircraft in the whole country that would fly on a given day…even more scary when the another traffic reports opposite route with 2kft delta and you cross each other without even making visual contact

You don’t have those worries when flying random as there is no way you will ever get that close to each other !
By chevvron
#1893869
Fellsteruk wrote:Hey,

Firstly sorry if this is a stupid question I’m trying to recall my airlaw and find an answer online and thought I’d ask.

So when your in uncontrolled airspace flying VFR can you fly above the transition level whilst VFR? And if so do you then have to fly on flight level and change to 1013 or can you stay on regional pressure setting?

Thanks

I think you mean 'transition altitude'.(TA)
User avatar
By Rob P
#1893891
chevvron wrote:I think you mean 'transition altitude'.(TA)


He did. But then he's known that since Irv pointed it out twenty-four posts ago.

Rob P
By Ibra
#1893894
Fellsteruk wrote:So where I fly the transition altitude is 6,000ft so if I want to fly up, say 8,000 ft, I could stay on local QNH or RPG then no consideration on the way down through the layer to go onto QNH.


You would rarely fly in the days where flight levels and altitudes differ by +/-500ft or +/-1000ft if you are rated to “fly in the layers”, as far as terrain awareness is involved it’s best to stay on QNH !

Unless you are in the hands of ATC in controlled airspace, I suggest you always fly on aerodrome QNH
- TA: is shown on airports IFR plates it goes from 3kft to 6kft depending in UK
- TL: is calculated by ATC and you may hear it in nearby ATIS (you can calculate one for yourself in Golf)

None of this is PIC business it’s all done by ATC for you when flying in controlled airspace but if you feel uncontrolled flight is boring you can swap STD/QNH/QFE/RPS anytime you wish? bear in mind the biggest risk out there is CFIA: controlled flight into airspace (not traffic collision or terrain accident), so sticking to one single altimeter setting like QNH and not fiddling with altimeter would allow you to keep the licence for another two years, you can read FL on your GTX transponder, it is shown near the squawk code…

The semi-circular rule allow some sort of traffic separation in Golf but it’s too ideal for UK airspace and terrain, things are too crampy, sparse and constrained already and altimetery procedures already sucks
Last edited by Ibra on Sun Jan 16, 2022 5:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By JAFO
#1893896
PeteSpencer wrote:Had no idea there were so many ‘Q’ codes - they start at QAx….. , fahsends of ‘em :lol:


I had to learn a lot of them, and Z codes too, when Her Majesty paid for me to learn di-dah-di-dits and all that jazz. My favourite was QRM but I never had the opportunity to use it.
User avatar
By kanga
#1893898
PeteSpencer wrote:..

Had no idea there were so many ‘Q’ codes - they start at QAx….. , fahsends of ‘em :lol:


any standard ATC (and other, eg marine radio, weather, .. as well as basic frequency and audibility, etc) questions (and answers thereto) which can be spoken can also be (and once were usually , by radio-equipped aircraft, especially those with radio operators) sent in Q codes (in Morse, often in HF). Morse is or was even more international than 'spoken aviation English'!

One of my work colleagues in '70s had been a pre-war Flight Radio Officer; his commercial radio career started as the FRO on a single pilot Rapide doing ad-hoc passenger and freight charters. He handled all the air-ground communication on HF Morse alone, standard communications being entirely in Q codes. The intercom was dodgy, and communications with the pilot were typically by scribbled notes on pages torn from a pad passed both ways through the open cockpit door. Although not formally qualified, he also effectively acted as Navigator, plotting bearing lines on a chart rather than merely passing QDMs to the pilot.

During WW2 he was a WOp on RCM Liberators, so flying every night that any bombers were. :salut:
JAFO liked this