Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Why do the RAF still use QFE?

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Why do the RAF still use QFE?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 14th Jul 2014, 13:28
  #181 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ah, this is still on-going.
Suppose you were going to a point on the ground that was the same elevation as your departure point, it was not very far away, isobars nice and spread out that day in the immediate region, and there is no really close station to give you QNH at that point you are going to/by? - well what better could you use than the setting that gives you zero at your departure point? - the QFE?
Funnily enough, ZD576 had one subscale set to the QFE at Aldergrove and the HLS at waypoint A on the Mull had the same elevation Oh and the RADALT idea wouldn't have been much good with a sudden rise up the cliff from the sea to that HLS.
walter kennedy is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2014, 15:16
  #182 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The radalt works perfectly in the context of my post, Walter. Such procedures are carried out hundreds of times every day in all kinds of weather around the world. The baro alt, with no exceptions that I know of, is set to QNH. I accept a radalt won't stop you flying into a cliff if you're intent on doing so.

Other than that I can't follow your logic. Sure, a QFE could be used as you describe. But so could a QNH without the requirement of being the same level. And this would also give your level relative to any spot ht (or cliff top!) on your chart.
ShotOne is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2014, 17:28
  #183 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
<< The baro alt, with no exceptions that I know of, is set to QNH.>>
It is indeed a requirement that it is set to QNH when low flying en route, the exception being when you are imminently approaching a point at which you want to land or pass closely, then you may have the QFE set.
One of the settings was for the correct QNH but the other was appropriate for a QFE at the point in question.
walter kennedy is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2014, 18:12
  #184 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't entirely follow that, Walter but in my sentence that you quoted I was referring to low-vis (CAT 2/3)approaches.
ShotOne is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2014, 19:11
  #185 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: UK SE
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why don't we all just use QFE for accuracy when looking to land.
AOJM is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2014, 19:22
  #186 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: uk
Posts: 1,016
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
ShotOne. Not sure the RAF does a lot of low-vis approaches. Ssuspect the post referred to poor wx/low ceiling/less than ideal vis rather than the formally defined cat 2/3.
deltahotel is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.