Author Topic: ZOA testing the patience of Cathay 870 pilot  (Read 30836 times)

Cap747

  • Guest
Re: ZOA testing the patience of Cathay 870 pilot
« Reply #25 on: April 28, 2010, 04:24:10 PM »
QNH is for atmospheric pressure in millibars. Technically if I request QNH I would have to receive an answer like "QNH 1013".
Altimeter is for atmospheric pressure in inches. If I request altimeter I'd have to receive an answer like "Altimeter 2992".

Each country decides which measure to use, millibars or inches, but ATC should be able deal with both. For ex, in my country we officially use QNH, but we have a conversion charts next to the mike in case some pilot requests it.

Regards!

Is QNH in millibars? or in Hpa (Hecto Pascal)?

Offline gtavc_03

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Re: ZOA testing the patience of Cathay 870 pilot
« Reply #26 on: April 29, 2010, 11:03:41 AM »
Well, I'd say, both controller and the pilot can do better. As for the pilot's side, he should be aware that he's in America where altimeter is used over QNH. (But! most CX pilots are British and Aussies, so.. tho most of those dispatched on US routes based in US )

About the controller, as mentioned, QNH is an ICAO language, so controllers so be aware with that. (not quite sure what FAA requires) Ofcourse she is not required to issue the converted pressure setting in hpa.

No offense, but QNH is rather common in the world, i guess it's the US and Japan still using altimeter, while Japan includes QNH setting in METAR.


Is QNH in millibars? or in Hpa (Hecto Pascal)?

They can be in either one.
Jason Choi

Hong Kong Feed Provider
http://d.liveatc.net/vhhh3.m3u

Feed not only covers Hong Kong, but MACAU also.

Offline lfertall

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: ZOA testing the patience of Cathay 870 pilot
« Reply #27 on: May 04, 2010, 03:01:48 PM »
QNH=Question Nautical Height--Millibars or hectopascals
QFE=Question Field Elevation--Millibars or hectopascals
QNE=Question Nautical Elevation--millibars or hectopascals
Now you can win a beer at the bar when they ask you what it means!
As for adopting ICAO phraseology......ie. "line up and wait"
they have another nasty habit over there of saying"line up and wait, behind arriving traffic". I hope I am not a witness the day when they give that clearance and someone blocks the "behind arriving traffic part". Maybe then the FAA will grow a backbone and not adopt ICAO unsafe practices. They also say "cleared for take off, behind arriving traffic.  ish

Offline Blackbird78

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: ZOA testing the patience of Cathay 870 pilot
« Reply #28 on: July 21, 2010, 07:58:07 PM »
As for adopting ICAO phraseology......ie. "line up and wait"
they have another nasty habit over there of saying"line up and wait, behind arriving traffic". I hope I am not a witness the day when they give that clearance and someone blocks the "behind arriving traffic part". Maybe then the FAA will grow a backbone and not adopt ICAO unsafe practices. They also say "cleared for take off, behind arriving traffic.  ish

When using conditional clearances: always say condition first -- "ABC123, behind next landing (type), line up and wait" (can be followed by an extra 'behind')  However, in ICAO world there is nothing such as "cleared for take off, behind ...". Even no "Number x, cleared to land".

Btw, I was a witness several days when pilots mistook 'hold position' for 'position and hold' ...