Originally Posted by
possibleconsequences
The airspace closure was done by NATS, not HMG, and only to IFR flights in class A airspace. Several jets (private / small charter) left U.K. airspace on Thursday and Friday VFR, low level. By Friday evening CAA (the governing body) were still advising that NATS closure was recommended and that if people tried to circumvent it a more general closure would be put in place.
Presumably, sometime over the weekend, CAA took charge? Otherwise , how did it become the case that it was the CAA spokeswoman outside of the DFT on Tuesday evening rather than a NATS spokesperson?
NATS are an ANSP (the only privately owned ANSP in Europe) and operate on a licence issued by HMG (well CAA). The government are signed up to the ICAO guidance previously refered to in this thread which states ANY ash, no fly. NATS complied with the conditions of the licence and closed the airspace it operates (on behalf of HMG), as did most of the North European ANSPs. The ball was then in governments courts to change the guidance in consultation with various other bodies. This it eventually did once they'd gathered more facts/data and it was then up to HMG to announce the changes.
Cynics amongst us may say that HMG hid behind NATS skirts so as to make it appear that NATS were the baddies of the piece and HMG rode the white charger to 'save' the airline industry. In reality everyone did exactly what they were supposed to do.
BD