No more QFE
 

Hey Guys,

Am i being the most dumb PPL or was i the last to know that QFE is never to be used at a CAA Aerodrome as of May 10th.

Did i miss something here, i dont remember anything coming up on Pprune or any details from the CAA being sent out apart from atsins.

I do realise that it is relatively easy to do QNH/ Elevation but diverting to an aerodrome, joining a busy circuit looking for 5 other aircraft doing all your checks, i could quite easily see how you could screw up all your circuit and approach heights. Especially an inexperienced PPL

If im just being simple, just shout it out

DBB

DEB,

I hadn't heard about the change, but I would just like to say that using QNH is no big deal. Thousands of students in the US and Canada learn this method and never give it a second thought. They would however be mystified by the term QNH since Altimeter Setting is used across the pond.

It's amazing how this has been blown out of all proportion.

All that is happening is current practice has been made "official". Previously the documents said that QFE was to be given to all aircraft on final approach - but the big operators don't want it, so it wasn't done.

So - expect service as before. QFE is still there, and is available if requested. I can only speak for where I work, but it looks like our unit policy will be QNH to IFR aircraft (QFE if requested) and QFE to VFR aircraft (as our based flying schools use it).

I agree with CM that it is no big deal. The change was published both in an ATSIN and in the most recent AIP amendment.

Where I work we will pass QHN to everyone, with QFE available on request and also airfield elevation available on request. Previously we had a mixture of QHN and QFE in the circuit depending upon who was flying the aircraft.

When the ATSIN first came out I checked with the CFI at the flying school and the instructors had already discussed the change and were all in favour of using QNH only.

Give it a few weeks and no one will bat an eyelid.

DBB, When did they last use QFE at the big airfield with the shiny new control tower where you work?

That's what millions of non UK pilots (IFR & VFR) around the world have been doing for ages and it hasn't been that hard; trust me.

Another CFI has me there, would like to attempt to ask for circuits in a 747 though :}

I realise that the use of QNH is not a massive problem, the thing which i was trying to get across (not very well) was the lack of communication to pilots about things like this especially PPLs who may own their own aircraft and not come into contact with flying clubs.

Im probably clutching at straws more than anything but this is the place to say it!!!

DBB

Up in Aberdeen the nice controllers usually give us little GA planes both if we've been out and about for a bimble on the way back in - nice and handy since egpd is at 213ft and the circuit is higher on one side due to a big hill, but not the end of the world. On a bimble I have a habit of setting the 2nd Alt to the QFE before take off anyway (but I do check on the way back that the QNH hasn't changed), but you hardly ever get into the circuit at Aberdeen anyway, just end up orbiting before a downwind or base join :)

The handy thing about Florida at least is that the airport elevations are pretty much at sea level anyway ;)

Try flying in mid America. Where I was at Meadowlake, near Colorado Springs in Feb/March, threshold elvation is 6,700 and circuits are flown at 7,700 ft. To get QFE, you'd need to set the altimeter to 1236.5 on an ISA day.

DGG

DGG, The QFE in your example would be 789, but your point is well made.

I once tried (in vain) to explain to a UK reg Piper that using QFE was not much help when he asked for it prior to departure at my airfield last summer.
With AD elevation of 250 odd feet and terrain peaks at 5000 feet 5 miles from the field kinda makes QNH the sensible option.

I have seen a good reason to use QFE, ever. Not as a controller or pilot :rolleyes:

QFE will still be needed & taught, otherwise MATZ or zone transit would become a mystery to a low hours pilot

Either I've misunderstood the point of this thread or the ATSIN (? I think that is what it was called).

Nothing has changed, QFE is still standard practice now where it was standard practice prior to the ATSIN. The ATSIN just reflects current practice for those ATS units that, until this point, unofficially dropped QFE unless requested (mostly IFR arrivals I presume) .

Nail on the head, tangovictor.

quote :QFE will still be needed & taught, otherwise MATZ or zone transit would become a mystery to a low hours pilot :unquote.

MATZ/Zone Transit is of course RAF territory and separation with local traffic is still achieved with altitude clearances on QFE.

Seems the RAF is the only agency to insist on use of QFE in UK.



btw, wrt high altitude airfields, is the use of QNE still current ? eg Nairobi etc( Reason being normal altimeter scales cannot be adjusted to cover.) :ok:

Sleeve, If you fly on QFE, you get a height clearance, not an altitude clearance. Or so I was taught. It sounds very picky but if you get it wrong the consequences can be severe.

QFE -> height
QNH -> altitude
QNE -> flight level

I've never done a MATZ transition because I don't fly in the UK (often). Does theory here indeed match practice? In other words, do the MATZ controllers use "height" consistently when talking QFE? And do pilots get this correct too?

BackPacker,

Mostly yes, though I have heard occasionally 'not above altitude 1500 B***e QFE 1005'...

The RAF insistence on QFE does make some sense. It makes all approaches the same - particularly talkdowns - with the same heights at the same distances, ILS markers in the same places, &c. Jolly handy when it's your first (night IMC, naturally) approach to Baghdada, or Basra. One less thing to worry about.

Kyprianos,

You may be right - but in the USA I have also regularly heard controllers pass the pattern altitude over the radio to inbound and even outbound traffic, so there are clearly enough confused pilots to need that information...

Tim

No it's not, yet we see this written so many times. This may sound pedantic but:

QNE is NOT 1013.2mb / 29.92 inches. That pressure setting is, has been, and always will be, the STANDARD ALTIMETER SETTING

QNE is the level, indicated on an altimeter, when 1013.2 / 29.92 is set on the altimeter. Normally used at high altitude strips where there are no means of obtaining an accurate QNH, and where the altitude of the strip is unknown.

QFE
 

The mention of QFE sends be back to WW2 - was it asking for altitude or barometric pressure? I remember asking for a QDM - course to base but I have forgotten the rest.

Chilli, so if I ask for the QNE at a high-altitude strip, what would the proper response be? Clearly, with what you're saying "1013.2 hectopascal" is incorrect. "Flight Level such and such" would be correct but too inaccurate (rounded to 100 feet). Or do they respond with "pressure altitude such and such feet"?

QFE makes perfect sense to my simple little brain and I use it all the time when bimbling around in the local area.

When you're on the ground, your altimeter says zero. What could be simpler than that?

My only problem with the ATSIN was the original wording, which initially implied that it would be mandatory for ATCOs to pass QFE AND Elevation if the setting was requested by the pilot, thereby increasing RT load and the potential for confusion. Pedantic, I know, but symptomatic of how the relevance of our National guidelines has been gradually eroded in respect of GA and operations outside CAS. A few emails later, the wording was changed.

Before I get flamed by the members of Bogota Flying Club and everyone else who thinks QFE is the work of satan, I do think it remains useful in some parts of UK airspace and its use is still prevalent amongst a fair chunk of the industry. Maybe I should join the Flat Earth Society, I bet they use QFE:)

Backpacker - response would be "QNE is such and such feet" (given as if you were reading it off an altimeter).