BDiONU
Hitting your head against a brick wall I think. After all, some so called 'professionals' on here seem to think that a 747 suffering total engine failure, but manageing to relight them after a 20,000' drop is OK
.
Fortunate and lucky - yes... but a basis on which to resume flying
It has been mentioned many times - I'll say it once more, data stating what density in PPM of vocanic ash it is deemed safe fo Jet engines to fly through is woefully lacking.
Without such hard data it is very difficult not to impose a blanket ban, certainly in the early stages, and believe it or not, 5 days can be considered early.
This blanket ban may be lifted after lots of test flights, but the FACT of the matter is, if, as requested and mentioned in a post by a VAAC employee above, the manufacturers of the engines had tested and produced VA limits, the the blanket ban would not have been imposed. There would still have been restrictions to flying, but far less debilitating than we have at the moment.
The FACT that there are no such figures means that an industry that has safety as its number one priority - ATC ANSPs - can do noting else other than impose the restrictions.
It is the duty of the Government, with appropriate advisors, to step in and allow a variance on what are internationally accepted procedures.
The 'experts' on here (you know the ones who rubbish scientists etc) do not have a clue if they think that the buck stops with the ANSP.