Quadrantal Rule... why bother?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Downwind
Age: 40
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quadrantal Rule... why bother?
Just a quick question. In relation the Quadrantal Rule, 'tis a beautiful concept no doubt and something I am conscious of and aim to adhere to all times when possible. However, there is the concern firstly of getting to cruise and applying the rule - one has to climb through altitude to get to cruise so invariably you run the risk of a bang en route. Secondly, whilst it is good airmanship and as I said I aim to adhere to it as much as possible; is my flight not just a drop in ocean in comparison to seemingly many pilots out there who seem to ignore this fundamental principle? If things are going IMC way I suppose its always best to have FIS at the very least to provide additional support.
In summary I just wanted to ask how many people actually bother to adopt the QR? Maybe im completely wrong but from what I can tell most people don't. Maybe a local issue perhaps....
(The above assuming flight in uncontrolled airspace)
In summary I just wanted to ask how many people actually bother to adopt the QR? Maybe im completely wrong but from what I can tell most people don't. Maybe a local issue perhaps....
(The above assuming flight in uncontrolled airspace)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: An ATC centre this side of the moon.
Posts: 1,160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suppose its always best to have FIS at the very least to provide additional support.
The Quadrantal Rule is typically British and only to be found here and in remnants of the Empire! In most cases it is impractical, and I believe most PPLs fly below 3000 feet so they do not have to set 1013 and fly quadrantals. The concept of a 3000 transition altitude and 3 different altimeter settings in proximity to the ground is sheer nonsense and possibly contributes to CFIT but, try telling the bureaucrats that. we've always done it, so it must be right,
Very true, Whopity!
I once flew from Brize to White Waltham via the Faringdon VRP and the Benson MATZ, then back via the Kidlington overhead to the Burford VRP and inbound to Brize. This was a familiarisation trip for an FAA PPL holder....
Brize QFE, Cotswold RPS, Benson QFE, London RPS, White Waltham QFE, London RPS, Benson QFE, Cotswold RPS, Kidlington QNH, Cotswold RPS, Brize QFE.
I once flew from Brize to White Waltham via the Faringdon VRP and the Benson MATZ, then back via the Kidlington overhead to the Burford VRP and inbound to Brize. This was a familiarisation trip for an FAA PPL holder....
Brize QFE, Cotswold RPS, Benson QFE, London RPS, White Waltham QFE, London RPS, Benson QFE, Cotswold RPS, Kidlington QNH, Cotswold RPS, Brize QFE.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And only one of them is in controlled airspace so potentially has the authority to require a particular QNH to be flown 
I don't think anybody should speak to anywhere near as many units enroute. There is generally little point in calling up anybody unless they can provide a radar service.
Why call up White Waltham for example? Their QNH or QFE probably comes from an old altimeter setting on the shelf in the tower, set to read the airfield elevation.
I don't think anybody should speak to anywhere near as many units enroute. There is generally little point in calling up anybody unless they can provide a radar service.
Why call up White Waltham for example? Their QNH or QFE probably comes from an old altimeter setting on the shelf in the tower, set to read the airfield elevation.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In IMC at any reasonable height I think it is vital we all adhere to the QR. OCAS it is often not possible to receive a traffic service.The QR is the only remaining "control" available to us to avoid a collision given that most dont have TAS and a few dont have transponders.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: N/A
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I was doing my PPL training some people recommended me to cruise at odd altitudes. for example 1800 or 2200 rather than 2000 and 2800 or 3200 rather than 3000.
The basic idea behind this was that "everyone" else is cruising at 2000, 2500, 3000 etc.
On the other side, if everyone think this is a great idea, 2000 and 3000 will be virtually empty.
Whats your experience and choice when it comes to cruise altitudes?
The basic idea behind this was that "everyone" else is cruising at 2000, 2500, 3000 etc.
On the other side, if everyone think this is a great idea, 2000 and 3000 will be virtually empty.
Whats your experience and choice when it comes to cruise altitudes?
Why call up White Waltham? Because we wanted to join from Point November, fly a visual circuit, go around and depart again to Point November. The point of the trip was to show the FAA PPL holder the vagaries of UK procedures - showing him a wide variety in a short time.
Interestingly, although the Benson MATZ is partly situated in the London TMA, they still require MATZ crossings to be on the Benson QFE - I don't know about now, but back then they even insisted on a 3000 ft Transition Altitude, rather than the 6000 ft which everyone else under the TMA uses....
When I requested the London QNH, some Air Trafficker quite snottily told me "You should be on the Benson QFE!". So told him that I was - I just wanted the London QNH for the portion of the flight between Benson's MATZ and White Waltham - and that if he spoke to me like that next time, I wouldn't actually bother calling Benson at all - I'd do my own thing remaining clear of the ATZ - but not the MATZ.
He then gave us the London QNH!
I agree that too many people call up inappropriate agencies en-route - but that seems to be the NATS dogma.
Interestingly, although the Benson MATZ is partly situated in the London TMA, they still require MATZ crossings to be on the Benson QFE - I don't know about now, but back then they even insisted on a 3000 ft Transition Altitude, rather than the 6000 ft which everyone else under the TMA uses....
When I requested the London QNH, some Air Trafficker quite snottily told me "You should be on the Benson QFE!". So told him that I was - I just wanted the London QNH for the portion of the flight between Benson's MATZ and White Waltham - and that if he spoke to me like that next time, I wouldn't actually bother calling Benson at all - I'd do my own thing remaining clear of the ATZ - but not the MATZ.
He then gave us the London QNH!
I agree that too many people call up inappropriate agencies en-route - but that seems to be the NATS dogma.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reverse psychology - FIs having been telling students not to fly at 2,000, 3,000 feet etc for so long that these heights are devoid of any aircraft because everyone is at some odd height in between.
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that too many people call up inappropriate agencies en-route - but that seems to be the NATS dogma.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Yorkshire
Age: 41
Posts: 691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I was doing my PPL training some people recommended me to cruise at odd altitudes. for example 1800 or 2200 rather than 2000 and 2800 or 3200 rather than 3000.
The basic idea behind this was that "everyone" else is cruising at 2000, 2500, 3000 etc.
On the other side, if everyone think this is a great idea, 2000 and 3000 will be virtually empty.
Whats your experience and choice when it comes to cruise altitudes?
The basic idea behind this was that "everyone" else is cruising at 2000, 2500, 3000 etc.
On the other side, if everyone think this is a great idea, 2000 and 3000 will be virtually empty.
Whats your experience and choice when it comes to cruise altitudes?
I am amazed there are not more collisions, on some days there is so much traffic up there.
Apologies for the incorrect preposition. I meant 'under'!
At 'Sharespace 2000', the NATS representative said that everyone should be encouraged to talk to the various agencies around the UK when in transit. I asked if this applied to puddlejumpers in gin clear VFR and he looked astonished. "Of course", was the reply.
Sorry, but I don't agree. Only talk to people if you need to, surely?
At 'Sharespace 2000', the NATS representative said that everyone should be encouraged to talk to the various agencies around the UK when in transit. I asked if this applied to puddlejumpers in gin clear VFR and he looked astonished. "Of course", was the reply.
Sorry, but I don't agree. Only talk to people if you need to, surely?
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Dorking, England
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I always like to be in contact with an ATC unit, even with just a Basic service, so that in case of emergency they already have my details and know who I am. Maybe it's a false sense of security but I prefer it.
That's because you feel that you need to. Which is absolutely as it should be - a decision made by you!
Others feel they have no need to - again that's their decision. It's still a free country, despite nuLabor.
Others feel they have no need to - again that's their decision. It's still a free country, despite nuLabor.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Just over there....no there.
Age: 61
Posts: 364
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I flew for years in Europe (mainly Germany) and they use semi-circular rules i.e. IFR traffic at thousands 0-179 odds and 180-359 evens and VFR +500 which seems to work quite well and is not overly complicated.
Sometimes (most of the time really) the best wind is not following the rules!
We fly IFR out to the Western Isles etc alot and in winter it's not possible to follow the QR exactly due to icing conditions and or terrain (as stated in another post) so I just pick the most appropriate level and hope Scottish doesn't mind
In respect of altimeter settings the same goes for squawk codes, a new one every 20NM or so was my worst time in middle England a while back. A bit OTT.
Rick
Sometimes (most of the time really) the best wind is not following the rules!
We fly IFR out to the Western Isles etc alot and in winter it's not possible to follow the QR exactly due to icing conditions and or terrain (as stated in another post) so I just pick the most appropriate level and hope Scottish doesn't mind
In respect of altimeter settings the same goes for squawk codes, a new one every 20NM or so was my worst time in middle England a while back. A bit OTT.
Rick
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's because you feel that you need to. Which is absolutely as it should be - a decision made by you!
Others feel they have no need to - again that's their decision. It's still a free country, despite nuLabor.
Others feel they have no need to - again that's their decision. It's still a free country, despite nuLabor.