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

Master Altimeter Allocation on Instrument Approaches

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.

Master Altimeter Allocation on Instrument Approaches

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 21st Oct 2016, 08:46
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Shawbury
Age: 40
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Master Altimeter Allocation on Instrument Approaches

I have, since Shawbury, been taught to conduct a final Altimeter Cross-Check at 1000' and allocate a Master Altimeter (lowest) for use at DH(DA)/MDH(MDA). However, I cannot find any UK documentation Military or Civil that requires it. Does anyone know where this requirement is laid down (if at all)?
SIXTYRULEOK is offline  
Old 21st Oct 2016, 10:01
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Among these dark Satanic mills
Posts: 1,197
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Shouldn't your handle have changed to SIXTYRUEOK in August?
TorqueOfTheDevil is offline  
Old 21st Oct 2016, 10:29
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
An interesting idea, but too late ?

Your aircraft altimeters should not be such that any error take you outside the safety limits for an IFR approach.

Picking up altimeter errors should be part of your SOP but I would argue that 1000 ft be it QNH or QFE is too low to do anything but discontinue the approach and sort the problem out above the MSA.

We have a robust altimeter checking system, with a check on the ground before engine start, a check when setting STD in the climb, a check in the cruise ( that is recorded for RVSM reasons ) a check when setting QNH and another check when the RAD ALT comes alive at 2500 ft AGL.

There is also a check at the final approach fix ( usually at about 1000 ft AGL ) any significant error at this point would result in a go-around if not VMC, in my view nominating a master altimeter at this high workload point would only distract from far more vital things to do and compromise the safety of the aircraft for the so called safety advantage of going around a few feet higher.

In short your altimeter checking and troubleshooting should be done long before you get to 1000ft on an approach and the check at 1000ft should be a simple go/no go decision on continuing the approach.
A and C is offline  
Old 21st Oct 2016, 12:28
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Den Haag
Age: 57
Posts: 6,276
Received 338 Likes on 190 Posts
ICAO Doc 8168 Part 1 makes no such references, and I've not heard of the term 'master altimeter'. As said, the master is the one the PF is using! Eurocontrol, Skybrary and the Flight Safety Foundation have lots of useful documents about altimeter checking, and best-practice procedures, and none mention doing what you suggest. Typically, the only formal checks done at low altitude are the Outer Marker (or equivalent) crossing height and the "500 feet above (DA/MDA)" call.

As an aside, some operators suggest doing the OM crossing height check thus: "passing the OM at xxx ft - that's correct". I would suggest the safest way to do it is "passing XXX ft - and overhead the OM". Think about it.....
212man is offline  
Old 21st Oct 2016, 12:50
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Richard Burtonville, South Wales.
Posts: 2,341
Received 62 Likes on 45 Posts
What the OP describes was always the case back as far as the 80s on the SH fleets.
charliegolf is offline  
Old 21st Oct 2016, 13:00
  #6 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,578
Received 435 Likes on 229 Posts
It was also the case in the 1970s.

It came under "airmanship" rather than rule following per se.. "Master altimeter" is certainly a military (RAF) term, at least I've never heard it used/written in the civilian world in the last twenty two years since I handed back my blue uniform.

For those who haven't experienced it before, remember that just because you have been used to one way of doing things, it doesn't mean to say all the other ways are wrong, eh?
ShyTorque is offline  
Old 21st Oct 2016, 16:19
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good point well made, shy torque, although in this instance the change seems very much for the better. 1000ft is very late in the day to be deciding which altimeter you should be looking at!
ShotOne is offline  
Old 21st Oct 2016, 16:36
  #8 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Shawbury
Age: 40
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ShotOne
1000ft is very late in the day to be deciding which altimeter you should be looking at!
Just to confirm, this is the last of a number of altimeter cross-checks (top-of-drop, every 5000' above 10,000' and every 1000' below). If the opposite Altimeter reads lower, you don't start flying a cross-cockpit scan, you mentally adjust for the discrepancy whilst flying on your own. You could not do this much earlier because the errors between altimeters can increase with height (hence the absolute requirements for an altimeter cross check before entering RVSM airspace).

E.g. On an ILS with a DH of 200'. At 1000' I compete a cross check and find that the other Altimeter reads 960' (within limits). If I were to ignore this and the other Altimeter is correct I would erode my safety factor by 10%. Instead, I mentally adjust my Altimeter indications to make my decision at 240' (200' on the other Altimeter and, for all I know, agl):
SIXTYRULEOK is offline  
Old 21st Oct 2016, 20:26
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Richard Burtonville, South Wales.
Posts: 2,341
Received 62 Likes on 45 Posts
In ShyTorque's case, he'd usually have to be going up to see a 1000', not down!
charliegolf is offline  
Old 21st Oct 2016, 21:09
  #10 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,578
Received 435 Likes on 229 Posts
Originally Posted by ShotOne
Good point well made, shy torque, although in this instance the change seems very much for the better. 1000ft is very late in the day to be deciding which altimeter you should be looking at!
Gents, in no way was 1,000 feet intended to be the first time the altimeter check was carried out! Rather more of a final cross check that both are serviceable and together before final descent on the approach. Bear in mind that military operate under a different set of requirements and priorities and that approaches in helicopters don't always end at an airfield.

I still do the check to this day, as I suspect a large number of other military trained pilots do.
ShyTorque is offline  
Old 21st Oct 2016, 22:46
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Same procedure on the Herc J fleet in the 2000's.

Descending though transition a cross check was done with whichever altimeter showing low becoming the master. Usually a comment along the lines of "20 low, mines the master". If the monitoring pilots altimeter was the master then you just called your own heights during an approach. If the flying pilots altimeter was the master then the monitoring pilot would just take 20', or as needed, off their indications.

Worked well and I still make note of it today.
juliet is offline  
Old 22nd Oct 2016, 00:28
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 322
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Was still standard on SH a couple of years ago, but of course that might be a result of the Shawbury training. I disagree that it is too late in the approach for helicopters; all our current platforms have good APs and we hardly go fast down the approach so workload really isn't that high at all. It could also be argued that due to type specific helicopter type allowances that an earlier check before you were in on an approach profile would be a waste of time.
As an IRE I would have expected altimeter cross checking every time they were changed, and a cross check at 1000 ft, but provided they pretty damned close then you're good to just fly off what is in front of you. My type didn't actually have any prescribed altimeter cross check limits, but if it was greater than 30 ft between them I would be using the lower one on the approach as a matter of good airmanship. I'm pretty sure the 1000 ft check was in SOPs, but again, there was no guidance on what to do if they disagreed or how accurate they should actually be, nor a requirement to nominate a 'master'. There are less and less outer markers these days, so a cross check then is getting less likely; personally I think a check at FAF would be best.
Aynayda Pizaqvick 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.