Question for ATC controllers out there

[peevee]

One cause of near miss is different altimeter setting for planes in close proximity when transitioning thru FL180. Above FL180 the pilot should adjust the baro setting to 29.92" but below FL180 it should be the setting called by ATC. Often the controller clears traffic down thru FL180 without mentioning the altimeter setting. This can cause an indicated altitude discrepancy between traffic coming down thru FL 180 and traffic below FL180. At these altitudes minor alt setting differences can lead to significant altitude differences. In remote or oceanic areas the setting is 29.92" at any altitude. Always double check.

José

wow, below 180 we're supposed to use something other than 29.92? Who knew!?!

[Andy95W]

. Often the controller clears traffic down thru FL180 without mentioning the altimeter setting.

Sorry, in all of my flights I cannot ever recall this happening to me when transitioning from the flight levels.

[Marauder]

Chris I can't be sure I honestly thought I read back 2-7 in 10. Based on habit I guess...but after I queried Buffalo approach re: altitude change he told me Kiag should have given me 7000..and I replied I was given 2-7 in 10 he did not make a big deal out of it and I was the one who initiated the conversation...his voice was kinda curt so I then looked over my clearance notes and for sure I was given 7000..as filed...I've never filed a nasa so it appears no down side to do it but who knows I was under there control and it was only about 5-6 min. But I saw I going directly over Buffalo at 2000 when I asked..thanx for the input..I'm considering starting a post with this question, file the nasa or not, if I have no down side I should file it?

Thanx

Dan

Dan - I flew out of 9G0 back in the early 90s. Unless the boys have changed their MO, it sounds like they didn't make a big issue of it. I am still curious how the read back error wasn't caught at Niagara Falls. Since Buffalo's Class C is really close to KIAG, they would have needed to coordinate with Buffalo to enter the Class C and if your route was direct to the VOR, at 2000' you would have been in the flight path of the arrivals on 23 or the departures on 5.

Either way, I would file the NASA form just because the read back error wasn't caught.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Danb]

Chris your synopsis is correct, plus I'm not sure I read back 2-7-in10. Or as filed 7000....out of habit I most likely stayed at 2000 and was wondering when you guys letting me up, I'm surprised they said nothing the correspondence was from me...it all depends on there protocol on reporting, another reason to to fill out the form, is there any reason I should call the fsdo, or tower or would that screw it up?

[Marauder]

Chris your synopsis is correct, plus I'm not sure I read back 2-7-in10. Or as filed 7000....out of habit I most likely stayed at 2000 and was wondering when you guys letting me up, I'm surprised they said nothing the correspondence was from me...it all depends on there protocol on reporting, another reason to to fill out the form, is there any reason I should call the fsdo, or tower or would that screw it up?

I would file the paperwork and keep quiet. Regardless of whether you read it back correctly or not, everything is on tape and if they raise an issue, the truth will come out. I don't think anything will since I didn't hear you say anything about Buffalo making you do an urgent climb or turn suggesting no compromise of separation.

Depending on when this happened, Buffalo can be a really slow place...

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[peevee]

I would file the paperwork and keep quiet. Regardless of whether you read it back correctly or not, everything is on tape and if they raise an issue, the truth will come out. I don't think anything will since I didn't hear you say anything about Buffalo making you do an urgent climb or turn suggesting no compromise of separation.

Depending on when this happened, Buffalo can be a really slow place...

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

it was really probably just the controller going "man this guys climbing slow"... "wait, is he climbing, lemme check"

[Danb]

Peeve..your probably right I just looked at flight aware and departed at Kiag at 12:42:00

Started climb to 7000 ft at...12:45:11

Was established at 7000 ft at 12:53:29

Retrieving theses from flight aware makes me feel a little better since it felt like an eternity but looking at the flight record I was at 2000 ft

For 2 blips..

Now I'm confused..should I shouldn't I?

A good friend and client does a lot of check rides for FAA. I may ask him he works with the Philly Fsdo guys.

[DonMuncy]

If you are asking about sending in the report; there is no downside. You can file as many of them as you like. They are only used if they call you on it, and that is when you are glad you filed it.

[Marauder]

Peeve..your probably right I just looked at flight aware and departed at Kiag at 12:42:00

Started climb to 7000 ft at...12:45:11

Was established at 7000 ft at 12:53:29

Retrieving theses from flight aware makes me feel a little better since it felt like an eternity but looking at the flight record I was at 2000 ft

For 2 blips..

Now I'm confused..should I shouldn't I?

A good friend and client does a lot of check rides for FAA. I may ask him he works with the Philly Fsdo guys.

Like Don said, there is no downside. Your information is kept confidential and it can help if an enforcement action is taken.

Back in the 90s I file a few of them. Some of them at Wilmington because of one, not to be named controller, who would hold me on downwind for 32 so long that I was convinced I was in Philly's airspace without a clearance.

I remember another time I filed one when I departed a satellite airport within an ATA and I wasn't sure if I was supposed to talk to the tower. I didn't, but the rules weren't clear back then about the procedure (at least not to me)

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk