Dear Marcus, I just found this letter on my old computer - unsent!
It was written on 2002-07-23 at 11.23 Cheers, Pat Naughtin LCAMS Geelong, Australia -- Dear Marcus, Although I know little about flying, I have interspersed some remarks about angles. I apologise in advance if I have taken too many liberties with your thoughts. on 2002/07/23 04.52, Ma Be at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Sat, 20 Jul 2002 11:06:29 > Gene Mechtly wrote: > ... >> Air-pressure altimeters will soon be replaced entirely by GPS devices >> even in small private aircraft at very low cost. Vertical separation >> of corridors does not have to depend on altitude for safety. >> > Indeed! I'm really looking forward to the day when these instruments will be > "standard" in all aircraft! And, hopefully, these will NOT carry the hideous > "option" for the nautical mile crap! :-( > >> I would like to see proposals from Baron and Marcus (and from any other >> experienced pilots) on their recommendations for altitudes and bearings >> for a new set of corridors, optimized in rounded m and km, of course, >> with *no* consideration of present corridors in feet and kilofeet. >> > Thanks, Gene, for the opportunity you're giving us, pilots, to have some say > on the issue. > > While I haven't thought about this thoroughly yet, please find here enclosed > some sparse ideas for a few things. > > Bearings: > > I'd use 00-09 for the first quadrant (the fundamental unit to use here would > be the grade/gon), and I'd use 000-999 for the first quadrant (the fundamental unit to use here would be the quadrant itself, however I would suggest that the unit name be shortened to quad with q as its SI symbol. > 10-19, for the second, 1000�mq -1999�mq, for the second, > 20-29, for the third, and 2000�mq - 2999�mq, for the third, and > 30-39 for the fourth. 3000 mq - 3999�mq for the fourth. > The first number would indicate the quadrant in question, Agreed > evidently, 0 for NE, 1 for SE, 2 for SW and 3 for NW. evidently, 000 for NE, 1000 for SE, 2000 for SW and 3000 for NW. > Easy, to the point. Agreed > This bearing would be placed in all airports runways and would replace the > current 00-35 ones. > > Amateur navigational charts would be produced with the new spherical > cartographic system based on gons to the centigon accuracy (0.01). Amateur navigational charts would be produced with the new spherical cartographic system based on quads to milliquad accuracy (0.001�q). > Altitude flight levels would still use the convenient "halves", i.e. 000-199, > 200-399 gons. Altitude flight levels would still use the convenient "halves", i.e. 0000�mq�-�1999 mq, 2000�mq - 3999�mq. > Altitude separations would be in 250 m increments or 500 m (the former > definitely around busier air traffic areas). After 5000 m we'd use the 1013.5 > hPa air pressure setting (as opposed to 18000 ft). Separations would be every > 500 m upwards of that. > > There would obviously be more "rules" to define, but I'd have to go back to my > manuals and all to try to come up with the equivalent metric ones. However, > one alternative to this tedious job would simply be for us to adopt either the > already-in-use Chinese or Russian model and make it official everywhere else. > >> If there is agreement, we might want to promote them to world aviation >> authorities as a new standard, say, for 2005 implementation. >> ... > Indeed. But, perhaps the more sensible thing to do, again I repeat, would be > for us to simply look at the present metric flight rules options and request > that one of them be adopted by everyone. > > Marcus > > > Is your boss reading your email? ....Probably > Keep your messages private by using Lycos Mail. > Sign up today at http://mail.lycos.com > > Cheers, Pat Naughtin CAMS Geelong, Australia
