Brookes:
Meantime, we still have no quick, accurate means to locate and measure volcanic ash in the atmosphere, and therefore depend on computer modelling, which in turn depends on accurate data from forecasts and actual weather in the recent past. As was demonstrated last week, modelling can fail and each time it does the unnecessary financial cost to the industry is very large and/or aircraft could be damaged.
Not much of a moment for congratulations. And to say that we're 'better armed' only applies to defensive reaction time when ash is predicted, with little improvement in prediction accuracy or avoidance of the problem. There must be potential improvements in sensors and other detection strategies but little evidence at the moment of any concerted effort being applied.
Sorry to rain on the parade but that's the way it is.
If you want to attempt to forecast where ash is, then your industry can pay for it.
Meanwhile, in Two weeks from the start of the event, the airframe manufacturers, engine manufacturers, airlines, regulators, lawyers, vulcanologists, meteorologists and insurers of many nations worked together to produce a set of operational protocols that worked.
I'm sorry if they weren't to your liking, but the fact is that they are an achievement and can be deployed again if necessary.
Bear in mind that the consequences of a major part of the Transatlantic fleet, for want of a better word, getting their engines seriously damaged by Ash ingestion would have been months of cancelled flights as there is not enough engine overhaul capacity on this planet to deal with an emergency workload of that magnitude.
We cater for the odd bird strike, not 200+ airliners needing four overhauled engines at five minutes notice. Please try and understand that that is the logistical nightmare behind the need for regulation and prohibition.