johnh wrote:
To me as a US-trained pilot, the only conclusion to be drawn from this debate is that the whole business of transition altitudes in Europe – and certainly in the UK – is terminally confusing
There was a consultation to change the UK’s TA to FL180 a few years ago. I think it generally got positive responses but was dropped anyway.
This thread started about busting airspaces and I agree with Mooney, pilots bust airspace everywhere. The significant point is what happens after. There most of Europe seems to differ from the UK. I believe the USA also penalises quite heavily from reading US flying mags.
But now we seem to have transitioned to TAs and TLs. I really do not see the problem here. The system used in France is the ICAO system and I have been flying with/under it for nearly 40years now.
In flying IFR it has never entered the equation. The controllers tend to do all the work, if there is to be a change from altitude to FL and I think most of us have at least 2 altimeters and should know how to use them. It is not hard. In France it is also quite difficult to bust airspace under IFR conditions if you stick to your flight plan and only diverting from it at or on request of an air traffic controller.
I can sympathise with pilots who were taught differently such as in the USA, having to learn new things. But for IFR TAs and TLs is not complicated and inside CAS I rarely if ever need to concern myself with them other than changing the main altimeter setting plus that on the AP. The other always reads QNH. With modern systems such as the G1000 even that is simple press of a button to go STD BARO in 1 direction and QNH (which may need a slight alteration in another.)
As for VFR flight I have already posted about how it is in France and that is tha same as I learnt 40years ago on ICAO based exams.
Personally I don’t want to go the American 18000ft before FLs kick in. Once on route I would rather stick the altimeter on 1013 and continue with that until I descend rather than altering the altimeter setting up and down as pressure changes over different terrain.
I realise that this might be controversial on this forum and possibly with pilots in general ie everything USA great everything European is bs.
@johnh have you read this it might simplify your VFR flying in France and under IFR just stop complicating things. There is a reason that TAs and TLs don’t figure much in prectical IFR training.
Memo_pilote_VFR_09_10_2023_pdf
@Peter I will just say flying the South Coast of France including Nice CAS is done everyday in small aircraft and even ULMs.
It is done legally by pilots who plan, fly and communicate properly. The idea that ATS turn a blind eye or give the Gallic shrug is absolute bs, as you are so fond of calling everything.
TA and TL is no part in the UK pilot busting system. As I keep posting over and over 
you get busted if you bust the airspace as depicted on the VFR chart. Simple!
The TA/TL stuff has been dug up by somebody and I don’t know why, particularly as in Europe very few people care about the semicircular levels etc. and modern altimeter setting procedures disregard these also – as posted above.
French ATC tends to clear traffic through any maze of CAS with “proceed” or “radar contact”.
have you read this it might simplify your VFR flying in France
To be honest I’ve never really worried about it. The UK looks like a scary place but France isn’t. IFR, you’ll always be cruising in the FLs so set 1013 as soon as you’re cleared to an FL, and set QNH when told on the way back down. Simple. VFR bimbling is always QNH. Long distance VFR might be harder (one reason I don’t like doing it) but if the Info service says “FL” set 1013, and if they say “feet” set QNH.
I confess that on a recent flight I forgot to set 1013 for quite a while and was consequently significantly off the “correct” altitude. Nobody said anything. But the airspace wasn’t exactly teaming with traffic.
@Peter – the Nice area looks terrifying on the VFR chart but once you get used to it, it’s straightforward. IFR is easy, you file something that files, and do what you’re told once in the air – which will almost certainly be a lot simpler than what you filed. I will say though that for VFR “bimbling”, you do need to be very familiar with the way things work locally. Otherwise you will be tearing your hair out trying to find stuff that is guaranteed to work. Possible, but much simpler if you know e.g. that Le Luc will always clear you through their restricted area when you call them on 122.2.
Although I can understand @Peter’s sensitivity that the system appears to potentially lack accountability: at the end of the day this is the UK and democratic checks and balances operate. AOPA UK or your local MP surgery should be able to intervene and ensure there is no Kafkaesque rabbit hole where you disappear into :)
A lot of postmasters and postmistresses would take issue with that. Dozens of British doctors wouldn’t, because they already killed themselves whilst being investigated by their regulator (and at least some had convincing defenses against the allegations). The UK doesn’t have a good record here.
@kwif UK is my adopted country, and I have lived in some exotic locations/regimes. I regard our country, warts and all, as home, and with a tradition of fair play and non Orwellian totalitarian practices. One daughter is a NHS consultant, but checking relevant statistics, not sure that Prof Spiegelhalter would conclude there was a pattern of state repression and mis carriage of justice.
There was a consultation to change the UK’s TA to FL180 a few years ago. I think it generally got positive responses but was dropped anyway.
I cannot imagine why it was dropped, other than (as @Dan says) irrational politics. The concept of transition altitude is a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist now for 99% of flying, if it ever did. The only situation in which it makes sense is when flying with ATC separation for very long distances, very fast (through multiple weather systems) at very high altitudes where it would be impossible to hit terrain anywhere.
The connection to airspace busts is that the first thing needed to prevent them is that everybody in a given area flies an unambiguous and easily determined single altimeter setting. And the only one that makes sense is the local setting that orients them at a known height above sea level, consistent with all the charted terrain heights and all charted airspace limits.
Yesterday I went for a two hour sight seeing flight, from 500 ft at my base up to 9500 ft outbound and 8500 feet after turning back for home. Eventually I descended to land through the terminal airspace. I talked to nobody on the radio except at my Class D home base. As I flew along I looked at ‘Nrst Baro’ (with the associated airport) on the iPad screen in front of me every so often to verify that my altimeter was still accurate, meaning I knew how high above terrain I was, and when in the terminal area how far from Class B I was. This is nothing like the intrinsically confusing brain damage required to deal with mandatory altimeter twiddling going up and down, planes announcing their own particular altimeter setting to ATC, mental gymnastics with charts en route to figure out the airspace altitude limits in relation to my altimeter display and so on. That is archaic nonsense.
I regard our country, warts and all, as home, and with a tradition of fair play and non Orwellian totalitarian practices
I do too, exactly, but the CAA is not within that system. They have an exemption to run their own scheme.
Peter wrote:
I do too, exactly, but the CAA is not within that system. They have an exemption to run their own scheme.
… unless you refuse and prepare to fight in court.
Yes, and then you are looking at – at a minimum – a 6 month removal of your license, because the CAA suspends your license immediately upon refusal of your co-operation, and then wait for ~ 6 months to bring it to a court. In fact – not sure about this – they can just not bring it to a court and then you are suspended permanently, in limbo.
