Embraers booted out of RVSM airspace
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lets see - would I rather suffer in the small, quiet, smooth flying, leather seated baby jet or in the spacious luxurious brain addling noise filled turboprop - particularly the Beech 1900D rear seat center, hmmm thats a hard choice isn't it. It is no secret why several of the US regionals are going all jet - the customers love them. Having spent many an hour in the J31, J41, 1900C & D, Dash 8 and even Twin Otter I can say that I'll take the jet everytime - except for Twin Otter - a better small workhorse has not been seen since this gem from deHavilland.
The Guv can have all of the rattletrap clapped out turboprops - more baby jets for the rest of us
The Guv can have all of the rattletrap clapped out turboprops - more baby jets for the rest of us
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QNH1013, you don't need GPS to be RVSM-certified. There are lots of planes around without GPS which are certified so far. You need to have an airplane which has the required vertical navigation performance capability required for RVSM operations in compliance with the MASPS. But that should be in your RVSM-Training/Ops-Manual. The main things are two independent altimeter systems, an automatic altitude control system (aka autopilot) and at least TCAS/ACAS version 7.0.
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,692
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
nitefiter : for your info 290 is an RVSM level so it will be 250-270 easbound....
and at 250 on an RJ or an Embrajet is not so nice....
For the others on GPS : not only GPS is not necessary for RVSM but you do not even need to carry the GMU suitcase ( GPS Monitoring Unit) to get approval : just overfly one of the HMU a couple of time using your good old VOR and if your altimetry is according what your mode C says, you,re on ( providing you carry the additional hardware as mentiooned already )
and at 250 on an RJ or an Embrajet is not so nice....
For the others on GPS : not only GPS is not necessary for RVSM but you do not even need to carry the GMU suitcase ( GPS Monitoring Unit) to get approval : just overfly one of the HMU a couple of time using your good old VOR and if your altimetry is according what your mode C says, you,re on ( providing you carry the additional hardware as mentiooned already )
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: LATCC
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an air traffiker let's clarify what this means.
In UK airspace the E145 and E135 will still be allowed access to RVSM airspace but will require 2,000 vertical separation from other traffic, or 5nm lateral separation.
So, depending on the traffic situation, they may still operate at levels above FL280.
It appears that only the UK CAA has acted so far so the ban applies to all UK-registered E145 / E135. European operators are still RVSM approved.
It's a crazy world !!
In UK airspace the E145 and E135 will still be allowed access to RVSM airspace but will require 2,000 vertical separation from other traffic, or 5nm lateral separation.
So, depending on the traffic situation, they may still operate at levels above FL280.
It appears that only the UK CAA has acted so far so the ban applies to all UK-registered E145 / E135. European operators are still RVSM approved.
It's a crazy world !!
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: midlands
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe it has something to do with Euro Control having changed the accuracy limits for RVSM and the E145 falls just outside it. Anyone know what the limits are.
Since Mode C gets its info from the acfts Altimeter then it should compare all the time. Unless the test box you mention can measure pressure out side the acft I can't see how it can test the accuracy of the Altimetry. All the altimeters would have been bench tested and can also be tested on the acft.
Since Mode C gets its info from the acfts Altimeter then it should compare all the time. Unless the test box you mention can measure pressure out side the acft I can't see how it can test the accuracy of the Altimetry. All the altimeters would have been bench tested and can also be tested on the acft.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: LGW/UK
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was reading the NOTAM yesterday on the A1 UK Notams which does say that due to poor height keeping, the EMB 135/145 and the 146/RJ family are not approved to fly above FL290 and operators should plan accordingly.(A1871/01). How come BAeSystems haven't done anything about it especially when RVSM has long been planned and most of the 146/RJ's are in the UK.What are (ex)Flyer and British European going to do now? It's not exactly the best time to start increasing fuel burn? Or am I talking totally out of tune-do most of these flights ever operate above 290? 
