Markjoy - you ATCOs often instruct us to 'turn left 15 degrees' or similar. We manage to work it out without too much trouble
A point, but a different sort of procedure, insomuch as the heading selected by the controller is purely a judgement call he/she has chosen using visualisation skills to achieve a spacing that will work.
With altitude assignment there is nothing that arbitrary about it: you have the required vertical interval, or there is a loss of seperation. We can't just say " I know we need 300M here, but I think 250 will work." ie, the intervals have to be memorised and applied almost by rote. Nothing much to memorise when the intervals are 1 (x1000) units apart.
"Rebel 471 Mike, descend Level 20, cleared ILS approach." Level 20 would equate to 2000 ft or 1800 metres. The pressure altimeters would be set to QNH of course (or else altimetry derived from GPS).
You've just had a level bust.
Point to the "no metric" side.
Not because I'm particularly anti-metric. But because the transition would be a nightmare involving hundreds of incidents around the world, if the industry was lucky.
And although the above might be perceived as a cheap shot at a typo, the proponent of change should be more careful when arguing the point. So, no offence, but if you can do that when you're arguing the case, I bet I can do it at least once a shift during a random cranial pause. (brain fart).
