China below RVSM

[Denim and leather]

Dear All,

Probably this question has already been rised; below RVSM, descending for a landing, shall we use metric or feet indication?
Metric is convenient for me.
Thanks for your input.
B/R

[safelife]

Feet, convert from the official table. Below and above RVSM.
Metric indication is not to be used in China.

[GlenQuagmire]

The problem is that the levels are separated by 300m which is obviously not quite 1000feet. To make it all work in RVSM airspace you always need to fly on the Chinese table. Below the RVSM you are also supposed to fly on the converted table but you are never out by more that 60 feet or so and the improvement in flight safety is huge if you simply fly metres. Our aircraft displays both once we have selected metres so we usually select metres and cross check the feet if cockpit workload allows. Once you dial in a few thunderstorms and a couple of incomprehensible ATC transmissions the last thing you want is to accidentally read back an altitude in feet and confuse the crap out of them and yourselves. Each to his own but there are a lot less mistakes if you just use metres near the ground.

[wiedehopf]

After first asking a question i should have searched the answer for and deleting it, here the post on the topic i found:

https://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-560928.html

Scroll all the way down and you find:

Outside of the RVSM FL band, metre altimeters may be used.


Now i would have guessed that maybe your SOP would dictate using feet to keep it consistent with charts in feet you may have?
Anyway maybe the old thread answers your question.

[typhoonpilot]

Once you've done it a lot it's pretty easy to remember 9 to 8900; 8 to 14,800, 7 to 21,700; 6 to 27,600.