discredited precautionary principle?
Another two years of this might induce someone to find out if there is actually a problem....
The government may become 'boxed in' by this if they are not careful ....
If it lasts much longer .... and eventually it is decided that it is infact ok to fly at these very very low contamination levels then the question will be how was the precautionary advice allowed to stand for so long.... at such a high cost.
It will be uncomfortable for a government to declare it is now ok to fly at these levels... leaving them open to be liable should that advice be wrong (they may have to 'underwrite' that green light for the sake of the economy?)
If this lasts much longer and it is discovered that there is a problem then mitigation measures will need to be developed..... what? Filters ... at those flow rates ... unlikely. Maybe mandatory inspections per flight in the 'red area' ?
50m quid spent finding out is cheap and it needs to have been done yesterday....
Didn't the 747 with the 4 flameouts fly through the dense main plume - millions of times greater concentration than this 8/8 ths blue sky. Totally different to this situation?
Maybe a SVFR in class A controlled airspace will allow airliners to 'see and avoid' dense volcanic ash plumes and thus alleviate the impossible task of controllers to provide separation from this hazard which is invisible to them.... ?
ICAO will be setup as the 'fall guy' if someone does positively determine that htere is no problem.