Just in case you fancy making a VATSIM controller sweat and reach for the code book. Here are a few obscure ones:http://www.kloth.net/radio/qcodes.phpAl

There is also QNE (pressure altitude), but it is only used for performance planning usually.

Hi!Actually, QNE is the pressure altitude set with the standard pressure ISA of 1013.25HPa (or milibars).In Europe (and other regions) you set the STD pressure above the transition altitude, that, unlike US territory (18000'), may vary from region to region.For ex. in Portugal (continent) the TA is 4000' and the Transition Level also may vary according to the pressure at MSL. Normally is FL50 or by ATC. Other example is Madrid, Spain, the TA is 13000'. That is because of high ground on the north area of the Barajas airport.The "N" and the "E", I dont know what it means.Hope that helps (and that I'm not wrong)Best, :(

Hi!Actually, QNE is the pressure altitude set with the standard pressure ISA of 1013.25HPa (or milibars).In Europe (and other regions) you set the STD pressure above the transition altitude, that, unlike US territory (18000'), may vary from region to region.For ex. in Portugal (continent) the TA is 4000' and the Transition Level also may vary according to the pressure at MSL. Normally is FL50 or by ATC. Other example is Madrid, Spain, the TA is 13000'. That is because of high ground on the north area of the Barajas airport.The "N" and the "E", I dont know what it means.Hope that helps (and that I'm not wrong)Best, :(

That's what happens here in Australia. Passing 10000' on QNH, 1013 is selected on the altimeter. Descending through FL110, QNH is set. Certain FL's starting from 110 may be unavailable on a given day depending on what the QNH is. No level flight is allowed between 10000' and FL110 (or the highest FL available on the day) to keep the QNH aircraft and the 1013 aircraft atleast 1000' apart.David

Some countries have transition 'altitude' i.e. 18000. Other countries have transition 'levels' e.g. 11000ft to 13000ft.

I think you got something backwards there. I was under the impression that all regions have TAs and TLs they're just at different heights. Transition Levels (TL) are used for when ascending and Transition Altitudes (TA) for when descending. Right?Cheers,

I think you got something backwards there. I was under the impression that all regions have TAs and TLs they're just at different heights. Transition Levels (TL) are used for when ascending and Transition Altitudes (TA) for when descending. Right?Cheers,

Transition "altitude" "level" are one and the same. The correct term is "altitude". "Level" is reserved for "flight level" so as to avoid confusion

At Amercican (until late '80's), Eastern, and Pan Am one of the altimeters for landing and takeoff was set to QFE and one to QNH.When the altimeter is below 29.92/1013 the initial Flight Level is always unusuable for ATC purposes. For example if the Transition Altitude is FL180 at 29.92, the Transition Altitude becomes FL190 when the altimeter is at 29.91, but 18,000 would be usable.Bill Bridges

I like the sailboat :(

Yeah, me too. I want that sailboat.Al

Transition "altitude" "level" are one and the same. The correct term is "altitude". "Level" is reserved for "flight level" so as to avoid confusion

TA and TL are both correct terms and can't be the same by definition. Find more details here http://academy.ivao.aero/node/303Rgds,Torsten

TA and TL are both correct terms and can't be the same by definition. Find more details here http://academy.ivao.aero/node/303Rgds,Torsten

Quite correct, or certainly here in Australia anyway. TA is 10000 feet and TL is FL110 - two different beasts. Climbing through TA you change to 1013, descending through TL you change to QNH.David

Gee, I wonder what percentage of world flying is done in N. America? More to the point, we don't use regional QNH. While enroute below FL180, center will provide an altitmeter setting from an airport within 50 nm and that ususally doesn't change until handoff to the next controller; however, we always use airport altimeter (ATC, ASOS or ATIS) for terminal operations, not regional settings.The transition height works just fine, we are allowed VFR rules below it and not allowed above it. No way would we be happy about having to fly IFR at levels below 18000.

I quite agree, the Euro transition altitudes are a complete mess, not only varying from each country but also varying depending on the airport within the country as well. It would make sense to have it as a clearance above a minimum say 8000 or a clearance above the countries highest point.I reckon the hardest thing would be to get the governments to agree on that as they've only just agreed to let you sell non-straight cucumbers and carrots lol.John Ellison

I quite agree, the Euro transition altitudes are a complete mess, not only varying from each country but also varying depending on the airport within the country as well. It would make sense to have it as a clearance above a minimum say 8000 or a clearance above the countries highest point.I reckon the hardest thing would be to get the governments to agree on that as they've only just agreed to let you sell non-straight cucumbers and carrots lol.John Ellison

They are NOT "a complete mess" and function perfectly well. Perhaps that's why European airspace is so safe!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They are NOT "a complete mess" and function perfectly well. Perhaps that's why European airspace is so safe!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Not that Transition Levels or Altitudes had anything to do with it, but as I recall, You guys had a pretty ugly mid-air in the supposedly "safer" European skies not long ago. So I don't think that argument holds up too well.And yes, it is a "mess". I'm fairly competent at flight planning, yet navigating that retarded web of one-way airways with daily destination restrictions, and the inability to go "direct" to points more than 20nm apart is a nightmare.Even on the WORST day in the states with MIT, CDR's, EDCT's, and AFP's doesn't come CLOSE to tangled web of restrictions of planning an international flight on a CAVU day through Europe.Nick

Not that Transition Levels or Altitudes had anything to do with it, but as I recall, You guys had a pretty ugly mid-air in the supposedly "safer" European skies not long ago. So I don't think that argument holds up too well.And yes, it is a "mess". I'm fairly competent at flight planning, yet navigating that retarded web of one-way airways with daily destination restrictions, and the inability to go "direct" to points more than 20nm apart is a nightmare.Even on the WORST day in the states with MIT, CDR's, EDCT's, and AFP's doesn't come CLOSE to tangled web of restrictions of planning an international flight on a CAVU day through Europe.Nick

Do you really think the European system is more complex, or is it simply that you are less familiar with it? I certainly don't find it that difficult. I was always under the (possibly mistaken) impression that the higher transition altitude in the US was motivated by industry rather then terrain as it allowed private aircraft to go much higher, faster and further under VFR rules which in turn would help sales. European airspace is much more congested and therefore must be more tightly controlled. We simply don't have the vast open spaces that the US enjoys. We have an average population density of 134 people per square mile compared to america's 32 people per square mile so here, flying for pleasure here is a local activity under (typically) 5000ft.