|
Home > Archive > Flight simulator > October 2005 > destination QNH
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
|
| Can anyone kindly tell me if it is possible to determine the QNH at one's
destination aerodrome when using dynamic real world weather in fs2004, when
there is no ATIS available.
TIA.
| |
| Beech45Whiskey 2005-10-23, 2:31 am |
| cw <cw.bus.removethisbit@ntlworld.com> wrote:
quote:
> Can anyone kindly tell me if it is possible to determine the QNH at one's
> destination aerodrome when using dynamic real world weather in fs2004, when
> there is no ATIS available.
On the ground it is possible. When parked, set your altimeter to the known
airport elevation. The QNH (barometric pressure) will then be revealed in
the Kohlsman window (the small window inside the altimeter).
In the air and when approaching an airport without an ATIS or an ASOS/AWOS
(automated weather reporting equipment), there is no accurate method for
determining your destination's QNH. This is the way it is in the real
world, too.
If the airport were an airport with an instrument approach, then lacking an
on-airport ASOS/AWOS, most likely the instrument approach plate would
instruct the pilot to retrieve the QNH from a specific nearby airport.
--
Peter
----== Posted via webservertalk.com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.webservertalk.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
| |
| Quilljar 2005-10-23, 5:31 am |
| Before take-off, why not go to the destination airfield for a couple of
mintes and get all the information you require?
Sincerely,
Quilljar
| |
| Crash Lander 2005-10-23, 7:34 pm |
| Wouldn't that be a waste of time though? The QNH could easily have changed
by the time you got there.
Crash Lander
"Quilljar" <wykehill-flightsim@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:djfga0$9g7$1@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
quote:
> Before take-off, why not go to the destination airfield for a couple of
> mintes and get all the information you require?
>
> Sincerely,
> Quilljar
>
>
>
| |
|
|
"Beech45Whiskey" <pjricc@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ig3r54bxn3i6$.dlg@ID-259643.user.individual.net...
quote:
> cw <cw.bus.removethisbit@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
.. This is the way it is in the real
quote:
> world, too.
>
Thanks for the reply but that's rubbish.
I am a real world pilot - you simply call the FIS or destination and ask
them.
| |
|
|
"Crash Lander" <here@there.com.au> wrote in message
news:djfp79$c61$1@news-01.bur.connect.com.au...
quote:
> Wouldn't that be a waste of time though? The QNH could easily have changed
> by the time you got there.
It is not possible to do a safe approach under IFR without the aerodrome
QNH. You would be given it on first contact with the destination and also if
it changes during the approach.
| |
|
| Thanks for the effort people, but, please, are there any RWP's out there who
know a way around this problem.
"cw" <cw.bus.removethisbit@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:cDA6f.10323$6i4.2050@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net...
quote:
> Can anyone kindly tell me if it is possible to determine the QNH at one's
> destination aerodrome when using dynamic real world weather in fs2004,
> when there is no ATIS available.
>
> TIA.
>
| |
| Crash Lander 2005-10-23, 7:34 pm |
| "cw" <cw.bus.removethisbit@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:65L6f.11284$65.9898@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
quote:
>
> "Crash Lander" <here@there.com.au> wrote in message
> news:djfp79$c61$1@news-01.bur.connect.com.au...
>
> It is not possible to do a safe approach under IFR without the aerodrome
> QNH. You would be given it on first contact with the destination and also
> if it changes during the approach.
That's exactly what I mean. Pointless really worrying about it until you are
at least 3/4 of the way there.
Crash Lander
| |
| Gregory 2005-10-23, 7:34 pm |
| On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 00:16:08 GMT, "cw"
<cw.bus.removethisbit@ntlworld.com> brought the following to our
attention:
quote:
>Can anyone kindly tell me if it is possible to determine the QNH at one's
>destination aerodrome when using dynamic real world weather in fs2004,
>when there is no ATIS available.
>
>TIA.
>
How about a suggestion from a certified `desk jockey'? : )
When your weather update (RWW) is retrieved from the web, pull down
the Weather Menu in FS2004. Click on the LOCAL Tab and then pan
(w/zoom controls) over to the destination field. Zoom back in and
click on the field. The local weather should be displayed, and likely
the barometer. It's also useful for getting winds at destination. I'll
check [it out] in FS2002 on the next start-up. Of course.. it would be
a LOT easier with a floating app such as WxAnalyzer! { grin }
-Gregory
| |
| Simon Robbins 2005-10-23, 7:34 pm |
| "cw" <cw.bus.removethisbit@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:56L6f.11285$65.1920@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
quote:
> Thanks for the effort people, but, please, are there any RWP's out there
who
quote:
> know a way around this problem.
RWPs would have different ways around this problem than are required in the
sim.
Firstly, a radio call to a Flight Information Service en-route could yield
you that information. If it's not available then on approach into your
destination airport a radio call to local traffic should get you the info if
anyone's about if there's no ATC. (Otherwise Approach or Tower will tell you
QNH.) If not then on VFR approach you should be able to guage your height
above ground level and stick roughly to the prescribed circuit height, as
published in the aerodrome information. If you know you're 1000 ft off the
ground and you know the aerodrome height ASL then you can adjust your
altimeter until it reads accordingly.
In the sim, the easiest option is just to press b and it'll set your
altimeter automatically.
Si
| |
|
| > That's exactly what I mean. Pointless really worrying about it until you
quote:
> are at least 3/4 of the way there.
> Crash Lander
can't argue with that - so how do you get it if there's no ATIS?
| |
|
|
"Simon Robbins" <simon@NOSPAMsjrobbins.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:djg6po$8rs$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk...
quote:
> In the sim, the easiest option is just to press b and it'll set your
> altimeter automatically.
Thank you for that. Does that set it to the QNH where you are?
| |
|
|
"Gregory" <flightsim.maps@bkwds.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ih1nl1h8bjgolbikm2lqebp1fvg8p8tqm0@4ax.com...
quote:
> On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 00:16:08 GMT, "cw"
> <cw.bus.removethisbit@ntlworld.com> brought the following to our
> attention:
>
>
> How about a suggestion from a certified `desk jockey'? : )
>
> When your weather update (RWW) is retrieved from the web, pull down
> the Weather Menu in FS2004. Click on the LOCAL Tab and then pan
> (w/zoom controls) over to the destination field. Zoom back in and
> click on the field. The local weather should be displayed, and likely
> the barometer. It's also useful for getting winds at destination. I'll
> check [it out] in FS2002 on the next start-up. Of course.. it would be
> a LOT easier with a floating app such as WxAnalyzer! { grin }
>
Thanks for that - but it only shows wind velocity. Prhaps the programmers
could think about including the QNH - the data must exist because it's
included in ATIS when available.
| |
|
| For those who haven't tried it yet, get hold of an instrument approach
chart, say r/w 09 at Liverpool (available from the UK Aeronautical
Information Service on line - can't remember the URL off-hand), set the
weather to 0/0 and try flying an instrument let-down to land without knowing
either the QNH or QFE. For something even more exciting, try doing the same
at Salzburg or Innsbruck.
| |
| Bill Leaming 2005-10-23, 7:35 pm |
| On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 12:11:45 GMT, cw wrote:
quote:
> Thanks for the effort people, but, please, are there any RWP's out there who
> know a way around this problem.
You got a reply from a RWP, then promptly called his effort "rubbish..."
You need to brush up on your people skills.
Bill
| |
|
|
"Bill Leaming" <n4gix@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1cowzdk6t58ug$.h74w6c1ixquf.dlg@40tude.net...
quote:
> On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 12:11:45 GMT, cw wrote:
>
>
> You got a reply from a RWP, then promptly called his effort "rubbish..."
> You need to brush up on your people skills.
I'm sorry Bill, he said there was no way when approaching an aerodrome of
obtaining the QNH. That's just not true unless you're non-radio. One simply
asks the controller/information service for the QNH/QFE. If he's a RWP I
don't understand why he would have given me such erroneous advice.
| |
| Crash Lander 2005-10-23, 11:31 pm |
| Well, in the sim, you simply press the b key, but in real life, I guess if
you can't get in radio contact with anyone, and there is no ATIS, I'd
probably suggest a VFR approach and visually gauging whether you are about
to hit the ground or not. I'm not a RL pilot, but I imagine that once you
are close enough to the ground for it to be a worry, you'd be flying with an
eye on the ground anyway, rather than trusting your life entirely to the
a/c. (not that you'd know it from my nick!)
Crash Lander
--
I'm not always right,
But I'm never wrong!
"cw" <cw.bus.removethisbit@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:NDN6f.11332$65.3110@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
quote:
> can't argue with that - so how do you get it if there's no ATIS?
>
| |
| Gregory 2005-10-23, 11:31 pm |
| On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 15:08:36 GMT, "cw"
<cw.bus.removethisbit@ntlworld.com> brought the following:
quote:
>
>"Gregory" <flightsim.maps@bkwds.comcast.net> wrote in message
>
>
>Thanks for that - but it only shows wind velocity. Prhaps the programmers
>could think about including the QNH - the data must exist because it's
>included in ATIS when available.
>
All of the weather info seems to be there for any location. In the
LOCAL Wx tab.. click on the destination field (on map) and click
Advanced Weather button. Then Temp/Pressure panel will have a
variety of data. It works as such in FS2002. Didn't try it in FS2004.
Hopefully there will be a graphic Wx utility of some sort coming
along where it would be EASY to view SimWx information.
-Gregory
| |
| Beech45Whiskey 2005-10-23, 11:31 pm |
| cw <cw.bus.removethisbit@ntlworld.com> wrote:
quote:
> For those who haven't tried it yet, get hold of an instrument approach
> chart, say r/w 09 at Liverpool (available from the UK Aeronautical
> Information Service on line - can't remember the URL off-hand), set the
> weather to 0/0 and try flying an instrument let-down to land without knowing
> either the QNH or QFE. For something even more exciting, try doing the same
> at Salzburg or Innsbruck.
If Liverpool does not have automated weather, then the approach plate
should state in the notes where the pilot should retrieve the QNH (I hope
that I am using this term correctly as I am used to stating "barometric
pressure").
Assuming UK IFR is similar to US IFR, there has to be some nearby
ATIS/ASOS/AWOS frequency listed on the approach plate for retrieving the
QNH. Otherwise there would not be a published approach for that airport,
and certainly not one that would allow a CAT III landing (0/0 with no
minimum altitude).
In fact, when an approach requires the use of a nearby QNH, the approach
minimums will be higher (visibility and ceiling) for that approach.
--
Peter
----== Posted via webservertalk.com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.webservertalk.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
| |
|
|
"Beech45Whiskey" <pjricc@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1kgfo624zf96u.dlg@ID-259643.user.individual.net...
quote:
> cw <cw.bus.removethisbit@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>
> If Liverpool does not have automated weather, then the approach plate
> should state in the notes where the pilot should retrieve the QNH (I hope
> that I am using this term correctly as I am used to stating "barometric
> pressure").
>
> Assuming UK IFR is similar to US IFR, there has to be some nearby
> ATIS/ASOS/AWOS frequency listed on the approach plate for retrieving the
> QNH. Otherwise there would not be a published approach for that airport,
> and certainly not one that would allow a CAT III landing (0/0 with no
> minimum altitude).
>
> In fact, when an approach requires the use of a nearby QNH, the approach
> minimums will be higher (visibility and ceiling) for that approach.
>
> --
> Peter
The QNH or QFE is always available from ATC and from en route services, just
by asking for it. It is not dependent on there being an ATIS or whatever. In
fact, I can remember a time when ATIS etc was not at all common. Approach
procedures existed then as they do now. They do not all have to be Cat 3c.
| |
| Beech45Whiskey 2005-10-24, 7:33 pm |
| cw <cw.bus.removethisbit@ntlworld.com> wrote:
quote:
> The QNH or QFE is always available from ATC and from en route services, just
> by asking for it. It is not dependent on there being an ATIS or whatever.
Ahh, but the ATC-delivered QNH could be for a slice of his entire
controlling sector, and there could be a favorable discrepancy between this
QNH and your destination airport's QNH.
quote:
> In
> fact, I can remember a time when ATIS etc was not at all common. Approach
> procedures existed then as they do now.
Perhaps, but I am relating to you what the current IFR procedures are now
(at least in the US). There would not be an official, published instrument
approach to an airport if that airport did not at least have barometric
pressure (QNH) available to the pilot, either reported at that airport or
from a nearby automated weather station.
quote:
> They do not all have to be Cat 3c.
You were the one who introduced CAT III C first. :-)
--
Peter
----== Posted via webservertalk.com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.webservertalk.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
| |
| Beech45Whiskey 2005-10-24, 7:33 pm |
| cw <cw.bus.xx@ntlworld.com> wrote:
quote:
> One simply
> asks the controller/information service for the QNH/QFE. If he's a RWP I
> don't understand why he would have given me such erroneous advice.
Apparently you are not a RW instrument P. If you were, you would
understand that the controller's QNH most likely is for an entire slice of
his sector. That slice could literally be a few hundred miles wide, so a
local airport's QNH could be dramatically different than that offered by
ATC.
As a RW instrument P, I once flew to an airport that was 165nm from my home
airport. There was a very strong low pressure system moving in from the
west and the pressure (QNH) dropped almost an entire inch from my home
airport to my destination, a mere 165nm away.
What do all these US-specific units mean to you? It means that the
pressure drop was great enough across this relatively small region that if
one failed to update the altimeter, the aircraft's indicated altitude would
have been off almost 1,000 feet from the actual altitude at the destination
airport.
Additionally, the barometric pressure (QNH) that was issued by the approach
facility controlling the middle region of this particular flight was
dramatically different than the barometric pressure reported at airports
on the fringe of this controlled sector's western or eastern most portion.
Additionally, I am not sure why you are so hostile to those who are trying
to help you with your dilemma.
--
Peter
----== Posted via webservertalk.com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.webservertalk.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
| |
|
|
"Beech45Whiskey" <pjricc@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:vu8p9hfep0e4$.dlg@ID-259643.user.individual.net...
quote:
> cw <cw.bus.xx@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>
> Apparently you are not a RW instrument P. If you were, you would
> understand that the controller's QNH most likely is for an entire slice of
> his sector. That slice could literally be a few hundred miles wide, so a
> local airport's QNH could be dramatically different than that offered by
> ATC.
>
> As a RW instrument P, I once flew to an airport that was 165nm from my
> home
> airport. There was a very strong low pressure system moving in from the
> west and the pressure (QNH) dropped almost an entire inch from my home
> airport to my destination, a mere 165nm away.
>
> What do all these US-specific units mean to you? It means that the
> pressure drop was great enough across this relatively small region that if
> one failed to update the altimeter, the aircraft's indicated altitude
> would
> have been off almost 1,000 feet from the actual altitude at the
> destination
> airport.
>
> Additionally, the barometric pressure (QNH) that was issued by the
> approach
> facility controlling the middle region of this particular flight was
> dramatically different than the barometric pressure reported at airports
> on the fringe of this controlled sector's western or eastern most portion.
>
> Additionally, I am not sure why you are so hostile to those who are trying
> to help you with your dilemma.
I'm sorry if I appear impatient - I sometimes get frustrated because people
often offer answers or opinions that were not requested in the initial
post - as my school teacher always used to tell me at exam time: "answer the
question".
I asked for information as to how to get the a/d QNH for an instrument
approach. I understand fully the concept of lowest forecast pressure for
FIRs etc, transition altitudes and transition levels. I did not ask how to
set the destination QNH whilst en route - as you have all pointed out, that
would be wrong. Before commencing a procedural approach it is necessary to
set the aerodrome QNH or QFE, depending on your own operating practice. Is
it possible that some people have misunderstood the expression 'procedural
letdown'? This does not refer to descent from cruising altitude - it means
the instrument approach procedure as defined on an ICAO instrument approach
chart.
| |
|
|
"Beech45Whiskey" <pjricc@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:10bqghc3pb07j.dlg@ID-259643.user.individual.net...
quote:
> cw <cw.bus.removethisbit@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>
> Ahh, but the ATC-delivered QNH could be for a slice of his entire
> controlling sector, and there could be a favorable discrepancy between
> this
> QNH and your destination airport's QNH.
>
No you misunderstand me - I'm aware of the difference between a regional QNH
and an aerodrome one.
|
| |
|
|