Originally Posted by Eagleflyer
Letīs face it, there wonīt be any change to the existing chaos anytime soon. Nobody wants to hold his head out of the window with a decision that flying jet aircraft 1000 miles away from an errupting volcano is indeed safe.
Thirty years ago we simply didnīt have the computer power available to forecast (or should I say estimate) the amount of ash particles in far-away airspaces. Everyone (except for BA and KLM if I recall correctly) kept his distance from visible ashclouds and that was it. Since no accidents happened in the 50+ years of jet airliners aviation before last and this yearīs chaos I conclude that todays chaotic regulations are not based on common sense or scientific research but on lawyers` opinions.
Originally Posted by DA50Driver
This is all cooked up because of the lawyers.
I will be going to work on Thursday night flying from NY to Europe. If I start seeing St. Elmo's fire on my windscreen I will change altitude and or direction.
I am sick of some pencil-d..k nerd telling me how to do my job. Let's throw CRM and MCC and all that back at them as well.
In case you think I am writing this tongue in cheek, I am not.
Originally Posted by Icepack
Well said Eagleflyer.
So have any of these things erupted in the last 37 years. If they have how come I have not crashed or heard of any engine problems.
Funny the techno becomes available suddenly danger danger. I'm with DA50Driver hear.
Originally Posted by Pace
We are talking about invisible ash Ie not in cloud or mist form.
Take the fact that No One has lost their lives due to Volcanic ash in more than 50 years and you have to question an overreaction.
As a pilot I take the view that if I cannot see it there is no threat!
Threat to me is something which will endanger my flight Ie stop my engines!
Ash which is of such low density that it is not visible will not stop or fail an engine!
Long term there may or may not be a shortening of the egine life but that is a financial decision not a safety decision.
I repeat there has NOT been a fatality due to ash in over 50 years of aviation.
The same cannot be said for Bird strikes or thunderstorm incursions,
Double standards ?
There is proven risk and perceived risk. Birds and thunderstorms are proven risk with a track record.
Invisible ash has no track record and is perceived unproven risk.
If we are so safety aware why not close masses of airspace in the bird migration season or ground aircraft when there is thunderstorm activity?
The billowing ash clouds are a different matter. They are as visible as a large CB but invisible ash ? Come on ! Press hype and liability fear based on nothing.
long term and engine life a vague maybe but a financial decision not a safety one.
Originally Posted by Pace
James my car was covered in sand in the south of England before the eruption! A week ago!
What we need are density levels that are a threat to the flight not to long term engine life.
What density level of ash causes ash to be visible to the naked eye ? How does that compare with the existing maximum permitted levels.
Regardless the proven track record over 50 years shows that volcanic ash is not a major threat to life and certainly far less rhan many proven threats that we accept and live with.
Let it be clear: I'm with all these guys I've quoted (Especially the underlined parts.) All incidents in the past occurred in thick, high-density ash clouds. NOT in nice VMC weather. And even then, when the KLM and BA crews (with hindsight) did many things wrong ( no engines immediately to idle, no 180° turn, no wing + eng A/I on) they didn't crash.
Aviation is not absolutely safe. Crashes occur every year, but not one crash or incident has occurred due to volcanic ash while flying outside ash concentrations visible to the naked eye. A/C manufacturers can't guarantee that it's safe to fly in areas with concentrations >4000 microgrs/m2. Why is that, do you all think? Based on scientific data or experiments? NO: IT'S A LIABILITY ISSUE. Would you really expect RR, GE, Boeing or Airbus
NOT to cover their ass, just in case somebody flew into some high density ash cloud?
So what should be done now?
Well, military A/C should be flying in the red zone by day VMC, actively looking, but avoiding visible ash concentrations. Make a post-flight inspection of the A/C + engines. No damage? Take-off again and go look for some visible (pollution-like) ash and examine the A/C after the flight.
Until now there's NO evidence that ash > 4000mgrs/m2 but still invisible to the eye has
ANY safety impact on an A/C.
The decision to close airspace (or rules to same effect) is nothing but a bureaucrats' "cover-your-ass"-policy!
Believe me. As an airline captain I have safety on my mind all the time. I'm looking out of the window as I'm writing this and looking at severe CAVOK conditions but with low ash concentrations forecast. Maybe, just maybe flying my A320 in those conditions might have a long term negative impact on the engines maintenance, but I'm sure it's not going to kill me!
Until there's any proof or valid doubt that flying outside visible ash is dangerous, airlines should have the possibility to operate in daylight VMC-conditions regardless of the forecast ash concentrations.
Regards,
Sabenaboy