"Descend to flight level 300"

[Toumal]

So you approach a planetary outpost, you're about to drop your landing gear and come in for touchdown and the dude/gal/robot says "Descend to flight level 100".

...wait what?

I should go to 10.000 feet altitude above sea level?! (Well actually, altitude measured relative to standardized sea-level QNH 1013, but my point still stands)
Or do you mean altitude? The sad truth is, "flight level" is not the same thing as altitude, and having written plenty of software that deals with this I can appreciate that it might be initially confusing to a layman.

I appreciate the attempt to improve realism, and it is a minor quibble. But it's still wrooooong.


Suggestion: Don't mention flight levels at all. Even for saying things like the minimum FSD altitude, you're just not getting anywhere near any sort of transition altitude (which is the altitude at which you stop using AGL and start using FL).

 

[lysan]

Lol, don't they say 300 meters? If they say FL300 we need to clime lmao, oh I give them the slack but may consulting a pilot before recording the voice. However I didn't notic the FL thingy.

 

[obsidianuk]

Yes, as a 20th century pilot, it drives me crazy!

Frontier- don't use the term flight level. It's wrong on so many levels (what a pun!), use the term height or altitude!

 

[777Driver]

I guess you are getting confused with standard flight level call outs in feet - US, UK, most of the world. For some reason ED uses the metric system in meters, Russia converted a few years back, China and many other countries in the East still use metric. A call out of Flight level 300 means 300 hundred meters.

Edit - Lol, transition altitudes won't apply on airless planets.

 

[Jake Savage]

I guess you are getting confused with standard flight level call outs in feet - US, UK, most of the world. For some reason ED uses the metric system in meters, Russia converted a few years back, China and many other countries in the East still use metric. A call out of Flight level 300 means 300 hundred meters.

Edit - Lol, transition altitudes won't apply on airless planets.

^^^^
What he said.

 

[Jukelo]

Can't equate contemporary procedures and terminology with those being used in 3302.

 

[lysan]

I guess you are getting confused with standard flight level call outs in feet - US, UK, most of the world. For some reason ED uses the metric system in meters, Russia converted a few years back, China and many other countries in the East still use metric. A call out of Flight level 300 means 300 hundred meters.

Edit - Lol, transition altitudes won't apply on airless planets.

I'm confused, but altitude are in feet right? It used to be, I haven't been in international airspace for years so maybe I need to catch up with the info.

 

[Lucius-Darcia]

3,00 meters


To enable docking clamps

Edit
Did you mentioned that you need to get much closer to the pad on planets before getting secured on the pad than at starports?
I don't know the reason for this but the securing process enables at planets always between 5,00 meters and 3,00 meters but at starports it feels on the large pads like 20,00 meters

 

[Deleted member 38366]

Yeah, gets me all the time...

Acc. ICAO standards FL 300 is 30000 feet MSL (QNH).
Of course, in 3302.a.d. all of this could be obsolete - and obviously is. Still gets me

PS.
Approach towards Station, ATC :
Prepare for Precision Approach
Approach is good, maintain current vector

Oki, close positive Control, following your Vectors.
10 sec later *uhm* Radio check, I'm about to crash into the Station at this current Vector, request new Vector!

10 sec later... Sry ATC. Lakon Foxtrott Alpha Lima, Starport in sight, Canceling IFR, switching Tower.

PS.
Would be fairly cool if ATC actually gave us a full PAR. Would feel like old times
(minus the missing Heading/Attitude System that is... No Gyro-approach would still work thou to some extent)

 

[Kitfox]

Ugh, this is probably the only one thing that I find silly about the verbal comms.

Even if I accept there's been a unit change in the future and FL300 is 300 metres, I can't get over the fact it's issued as a clearance in what has effectively been uncontrolled airspace up to that point*. It's also often late - I've usually already descended through that level a few seconds ago.

 

[obsidianuk]

Edit - Lol, transition altitudes won't apply on airless planets.

Lol - neither would flight levels... Be it meters or feet it's still a reference to a pressure setting - for such, you need some sort of atmosphere!

 

[777Driver]

I'm confused, but altitude are in feet right? It used to be, I haven't been in international airspace for years so maybe I need to catch up with the info.

Never been to an airless world, it's on my todo list before I die

On Earth, pressure altitude is in feet or meters. In the OP's case Flight level 100 would be 10,000 ft (in the US/UK) In Kazakhstan or wherever, FL100 would be 100 meters (328ft)

A lot of interesting crash reports over the years from the confusion and resulting CFIT, most of the nation's still using metric are quite mountainous & terminology used depends on the controllers mood! I'll try to find a link to a famous crash (think it was in Baku) a crew descended into mountains at night, completely misunderstood the descent clearance.

 

[777Driver]

Lol - neither would flight levels... Be it meters or feet it's still a reference to a pressure setting - for such, you need some sort of atmosphere!

Trying to wrap my head around how it would work if ED was real and we flew around on airless planets. I guess flight levels would still be used? Take level flight at 300 meters for example, you would use QFE instead of QNH. I've had a few beers and should be nowhere near a computer

 

[lysan]

Never been to an airless world, it's on my todo list before I die

On Earth, pressure altitude is in feet or meters. In the OP's case Flight level 100 would be 10,000 ft (in the US/UK) In Kazakhstan or wherever, FL100 would be 100 meters (328ft)

A lot of interesting crash reports over the years from the confusion and resulting CFIT, most of the nation's still using metric are quite mountainous & terminology used depends on the controllers mood! I'll try to find a link to a famous crash (think it was in Baku) a crew descended into mountains at night, completely misunderstood the descent clearance.

Lol, it's on my list too, however actually never heard it was in meters, even in Europe they always said feet, gallons per hour and nautical miles. But that was some years back

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Trying to wrap my head around how it would work if ED was real and we flew around on airless planets. I guess flight levels would still be used? Take level flight at 300 meters for example, you would use QFE instead of QNH. I've had a few beers and should be nowhere near a computer

Same way as the space program do it today. I'm on a phone and waiting in an airport so my goggle powers are limited.

 

[Toumal]

Ugh, this is probably the only one thing that I find silly about the verbal comms.

Even if I accept there's been a unit change in the future and FL300 is 300 metres, I can't get over the fact it's issued as a clearance in what has effectively been uncontrolled airspace up to that point*. It's also often late - I've usually already descended through that level a few seconds ago.

Yeah and again, I totally understand that "flightlevel" probably means something else in the future. Then again, it does sound like someone at Frontier remembered having heard that word and thought "oh cool, I'm just gonna say that then because it sounds like something air traffic control would say"

Just be glad they don't give you a SID before you take off

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Trying to wrap my head around how it would work if ED was real and we flew around on airless planets. I guess flight levels would still be used? Take level flight at 300 meters for example, you would use QFE instead of QNH. I've had a few beers and should be nowhere near a computer

There is, by definition, no QNH on airless planets. Oh well there might be, but it's probably below 1

 

[CMDR Aengus]

Overthinking.
Relax.
Just land.

 

[Toumal]

I... I CAN'T!

 

[DragoonKnight]

I wouldn't mind if Elite had a lot more true to life air traffic controller phrases. But if they did they might have to publish a guide for all the people unfamiliar with air traffic controller terminology

 

[Toumal]

Wishful thinking: park positions assigned by atc while you wait for a pad, departure sequencing, visualization of approach routes etc.


But there's tons of more important stuff. I am fine with how this works atm.

 

[Jack Schitt]

I noticed it and it gave me a "Huh?" moment the first time, but then it was obvious from context what they were referring to and I just figured it will have changed meaning in the next 1300 years. I'm sure at some point they also say something along the lines of "Vector for approach..." but don't actually give you a vector! It's just background colour.

I'd also like to see more "hands on" ATC, with managed traffic queues at space stations and holding patterns at planetary bases, but I fully understand that it would not be universally popular especially among those players who think there's enough delays in the game as it is. What we have now is a nice compromise. It doesn't make docking any slower, but it adds a level of faux-realism if you want it to.