Yes, but you can’t expect all pilots to do this. To avoid chaos, using feet is still the best choice, I think.
Chill man, look people will eventually convert, it takes time.👌
Thanks for this. I was looking at charts one day and had to do the conversion. This helps.
Interesting. I didn’t know China, Russia, and North Korea used meters instead of the imperial foot. What a headache for pilots flying in and out of those airspaces.
Also most central Asian states (the “stans”)
I mean in real life, it is also a chaos. Say Delta Airlines DL129 Seattle-Beijing. They do get confused sometimes as well, especially when the traffic in PEK is very busy. When they are confused by meters, the tower just instead tell them descend to FL250.
Also, it is a good idea to make it hard, and you as the controller in expert server can ghost more users. In another request, people say the rules in expert server aren’t strict enough. Metric and imperial unit conversion is a good way to kick some of the not-fully-trained pilots back to the training server.
Turning these regions into metre RVSM does make the game more realistic. My point is that it will cause confusion for pilots, and even controllers. Remember, the purpose of ghosting is not punishing, but a lesson for pilots to learn. Strict rules do have benefits, but its disadvantages are obvious as well. I personally don’t agree with changing the unit in certain regions, but I will listen to your advice as well. Thanks for discussing!
Thanks for the info.
Now I understand why Simbrief/FplToIF gave me cruise altitudes 33100 ft and 35100 ft in chinese airspace when doing a flight from London to Hong Kong.
glad to see that many people are starting to convert to a more realistic altitude when flying in the CAAC airspace
Interesting! So then the system of flying at odd FL in feet 1 degree to 180 and even FL 181 to 360 goes out with the metric system; or do pilots fly at 10668 mts when they need to be at FL53 for example?
Convert 10668m to ft and compare it to 5300, you’ll eventually get the chart.
No I mean if you are flying toward the east you need to fly at odd FL in cruise. So if one is flying at FL35 is 35000ft then the metric system will ask you to fly at 10668mts
35000’ is FL350 not FL35, but I get you. In CAAC airspace you’ll have to fly an additional 30m or 100ft higher to make it 10700m instead of 10670m. Refer above chart before commenting.
So wait, it seems like they are doing it terribly inefficiently. Reading it out in Meters, and converting to feet for all aircraft? They eaven mention how that means aircraft will always be at a sum what inaccurate altitude… 🤔
Thanks for the details.
True, but not exactly the point…
The point is, every country has its own gig for aviation regulation. When it comes to China, the central Asian states, and Russia, consider most of these countries were once upon a time hard core communists, so that’s the way to differentiate from the western rules, which they carried till now. The Chinese rules, if you look closely, was amended, published, and enforced by the CAAC in 2009. Being fairly recent (in terms of aviation history), the document is one giant leap towards the western aviation regulations (ICAO), and as a pilot from the west, now you can adjust to the Chinese airspace very easily, just simply add or minus 100 or 200ft to your assigned altitude you’re done. You know what it was like before this is implemented? Western pilots had to use pen and paper (it’s a saying, it’d be dumb if you literally take it) for conversion calculations into solid hundred-multiple metric flight levels so they don’t violate rules and worse, collide into oncoming traffic.
Rule of thumb, IF is only a computer simulation.
I think it’s a good idea to put this topic in to the “features category” where people can vote if they want to enforce meter system in IF for China, Russia, central Asia Region, and maybe North Korea. This could be done by changing ATC communication panel for these regions.
Maybe mods can consider it. @Chris_S