Wikiposts
Search
ATC Issues A place where pilots may enter the 'lions den' that is Air Traffic Control in complete safety and find out the answers to all those obscure topics which you always wanted to know the answer to but were afraid to ask.

RVSM EUR

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 15th Oct 2001, 17:29
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: luxembourg
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post RVSM EUR

How accurate has to be the cruising in the RVSM?

I believe many navigation systems do cruise at +/- 100 ft so as to have a smoother ride.

Will you get a warning for FL deviation?

Thanks
fernando is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2001, 00:12
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: EGTT
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lightbulb

Not sure of the parameters but it seems that the kit on the Embraer 135's and 145's isn't up to the job as their RVSM compliant status has been revoked.
Any pilots/techies care to let us know exactly what's wrong.
Are we all to be suspended by SRG for 6 months worth of separation losses???#
Ahh-40612 is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2001, 11:30
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Hants, UK
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

I'm not a techie either, but I think 100 ft will be far too much deviation. That gives you only 800 ft in a worst case situation. I think it will have to be far less than that.
eyeinthesky is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2001, 23:24
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Question

Not being a techie myself, either, I have no idea if this is accurate, but, doesn't secondary radar interrogate the transponer which get's it's altitude reading from the altimeter? If so, and the altimeter is inaccurate, what on earth can ATC do to ensure a minimum of 1000ft separation?

Just a thought.
SWMAE03 is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2001, 23:42
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: North of Birmingham by a lot
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

Guys,
You're forgetting that the verified Mode 'C'limit is +/- 200ft. As I recall, the 1000ft for standard separation is purely to ensure that with one aircraft reading +200ft 'C' and an aircraft above it reading -200ft 'C'(ie the maximum permissable discrepancies) then a 'safe' margin of >500ft is kept. I much prefer "Negative RVSM"!!

Cheers,
ADIS
ADIS5000 is offline  
Old 19th Oct 2001, 00:53
  #6 (permalink)  
NextLeftAndCallGround
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

SWMAE03, encoding altimeters normally use a separate 'altimeter' which is always set to 1013.25mb. Conversion to altitude on a radar display is done by the display processors. Although I don't know what it is, I'm sure that there is an accuracy requirement specified. As some of the other posts have mentioned ATC procedures allow a bit of 'slack'. If you've listened to ATC radar frequencies (particularly departure frequencies) you'll have controllers asking pilots to report their level or passing level. If the radar readout is within 200 ft of what the pilot says all is well. If after trying again (ideally when the aircraft is in level flight) the readout is still not within 200 ft the pilot should be told to switch off the mode C (altitude) reporting.
 
Old 20th Oct 2001, 00:06
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thumbs up

ADIS,NextLeft,

Thanks for that, clears it up for me.
SWMAE03 is offline  
Old 22nd Oct 2001, 21:39
  #8 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: luxembourg
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

What I am talking about has nothing to do with the Xponder.

The aircraft I fly has two modes for cruising, one does a very good job on maintaining the FL and Mach Number but it needs alot of throttle adjustment
the other mode allows the aircraft to cruise at FL +/- 100 ft requiring less throttle movement hence less fuel burn.

What I will like to know is how accurate has to be the level keeping?

P.S. Does PPRUNE has a Regulator Forum?
fernando is offline  
Old 23rd Oct 2001, 06:11
  #9 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
PPRuNe Radar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

For level occupancy, the aircraft has to fly at +/- 200 feet accuracy.

However, for system performance the RVSM MASPS require that the aircraft type Altimetry System Error, for the basic flight envelope (JAA TGL6 §7.3) should meet the following:

(a) At the point in the envelope where the mean ASE reaches its largest absolute value that value should not exceed 25 m (80 ft);

(b) At the point in the envelope where absolute mean ASE plus three standard deviations of ASE reaches its largest absolute value, the absolute value should not exceed 60 m (200 ft).

Full information here:

http://www.eur-rvsm.com/
PPRuNe Radar is offline  
Old 23rd Oct 2001, 06:48
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Over The Hills And Far Away
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

One thing I was wondering about is, when entering British airspace the controller have on several occasions asked wether or not we were RVSM equipped, we answered no because we had no information from our company that we were. The controller then said that according to his info we were??.

Another operator was asked the same, and answered yes. The controller then said according to my info you are not.

But who's info is it that is "legally binding" so to speak. I suspect it is the controllers, but if that is the case why ask?.
Techman is offline  
Old 23rd Oct 2001, 12:35
  #11 (permalink)  
ZIP250
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

On the legally binding bit it is quite clear. Apart from E135 and E145 aircraft where we have a specific instruction to treat them as non compliant regardless of what the pilot says, the pilot's word is law. If he says he is compliant then we use RVSM separations after changing things in NAS to stop the alerts going off and vice versa.

Also if the flight plan says you are compliant then we assume you are unless you tell us otherwise. The only time we ask your status is if we think that our data is inaccurate (eg a transatlantic flight which has filed RVN.

Regards

Z

[ 23 October 2001: Message edited by: ZIP250 ]
 
Old 23rd Oct 2001, 23:49
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Over The Hills And Far Away
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

Well, we were actually below 290 and with the UK as destination, thats why it struck us as a bit odd.

Anyway, thanks for the reply Zip.

[ 23 October 2001: Message edited by: Techman ]
Techman is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2001, 00:28
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lightbulb

Techman, maybe he was thinking of asking you to take a higher level to resolve a traffic problem, but had a 'gut feeling' that despite your company filing you as compliant, you weren't. Just a thought/guess.
Bigears 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.