UK Airspace closure
Beady Eye
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Funny that in the last few posts nobody has mentioned ICAO! NATS did not make this decision single-handed. It was as a result of ICAO guidelines... "Several air navigation service providers and Eurocontrol's Central Flow Management Unit restricted or suspended air traffic in line with ICAO guidelines."
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BDiONU said,
I'll have you know my Star Trek knowledge is extensive. I'm still trying to master the mind-meld, and my wife has issues with the Pon Farr.... 
How do you know that, are you a volcanologist in your spare time? 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Southampton
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OA32 its not just the UK its most of Western Europe and CAA/NATS has no influence over them. I know I would rather stay safe than risk flying through the ash which you can't see and is difficult to predict where it is.
More than just an ATCO
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Up someone's nose
Age: 75
Posts: 1,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
assuming, worst case scenario, the volcano explodes and the airspace remains shut for several months. Traffic counts approach zero, productivity likewise, Who would be prepared to accept a reduction in salary?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by OA32
Also this being an un-precedented event means there is bound to be chaos and uncertainty amongst all parties involved...
All in all, operationally it seems to have been handled surprisingly well. As for how it's been presented to the media by senior ATS people and subsequently reported is another matter. Still, it's good to see Eric Moody still looks well....
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: South West England
Age: 73
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I reckon (from my old age person's home) that this is one occasion when NATS ought to take a serious back seat. As BD said, NATS are simply service providers. They do not "close airspace" nor do they refuse a clearance within airspace for any reason other than safety. They do apply a zero flow rate when appropriate (no staff available is an example) but unless things have changed since I stopped working for a living, that only applies to aircraft originating within the area governed by the CFMU.
I believe that there is an ICAO guideline that an ATC clearance should not be given if that clearance is for flight within airspace where there is a known risk of volcanic ash. I suspect that this guideline has triggered the present situation where HMG in the shape of the Department for Transport (or whatever it is called these days) has told the CAA that aircraft must remain on the ground and the CAA has told NATS to apply a zero rate.
Hence my first sentence. The people in front of the cameras and being quoted in newspapers should be those who firstly predicted where the ash will be and those who made the decision to stop all traffic. Unfortunately in the middle of an election campaign, there will not be a politician available to comment (good timing Gordon) and normally DTp people don't make public appearances. In the meantime, if it's not too late, NATS should tell people who told it what it had to do and carefully check its insurance policy for loss of income caused by an act of God.
A I
I believe that there is an ICAO guideline that an ATC clearance should not be given if that clearance is for flight within airspace where there is a known risk of volcanic ash. I suspect that this guideline has triggered the present situation where HMG in the shape of the Department for Transport (or whatever it is called these days) has told the CAA that aircraft must remain on the ground and the CAA has told NATS to apply a zero rate.
Hence my first sentence. The people in front of the cameras and being quoted in newspapers should be those who firstly predicted where the ash will be and those who made the decision to stop all traffic. Unfortunately in the middle of an election campaign, there will not be a politician available to comment (good timing Gordon) and normally DTp people don't make public appearances. In the meantime, if it's not too late, NATS should tell people who told it what it had to do and carefully check its insurance policy for loss of income caused by an act of God.
A I
Last edited by A I; 16th Apr 2010 at 18:30.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: EGGD KFXE EGBJ
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone have any thoughts about the mass exodus of heavy departures from LFPG to all points around the globe this afternoon.
according to CFMU the airspace was closed and in the middle of the red zone.
make a mockery of the whole thing LOL
according to CFMU the airspace was closed and in the middle of the red zone.
make a mockery of the whole thing LOL
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The effect on piston-engined aircraft would certainly be reduced, in part due to their lower speed, though the biggest issue is altitude. As per Eric Moody's experience, volcanic ash tends to be pretty high up until it dissipates. Capt Moody's 747 suffered a 4-engine flame out twice, but in the lower air they managed, twice, to restart the engines.
Were a piston-powered aircraft to encounter that level of volcanic ash, my opinion is that it would eventually clog up the air intakes and some would enter the engine causing severe wear on pistons, valves, etc. I would imagine there would be a loss of power before engine failure though, which a good pilot would take as a warning to get on the ground asap. There would still be wear on the windscreen (though not as bad as at jet speeds), and likely wear on the skin of the aircraft. Any fabric-covered airframe could be in real trouble!
Were a piston-powered aircraft to encounter that level of volcanic ash, my opinion is that it would eventually clog up the air intakes and some would enter the engine causing severe wear on pistons, valves, etc. I would imagine there would be a loss of power before engine failure though, which a good pilot would take as a warning to get on the ground asap. There would still be wear on the windscreen (though not as bad as at jet speeds), and likely wear on the skin of the aircraft. Any fabric-covered airframe could be in real trouble!
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Mighty 8th land
Age: 75
Posts: 37
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who decided it...
Surely, it was not NATS who "closed" its airspace; wouldn't this, and all other "closures" have been decided after the National Administrations and CFMU/EUROCONTROL had discussed and agreed a co-ordinated plan of action. After all, it is CFMU who has the overall picture of air traffic in and out of European airspace......
Andy eMACaRe
Andy eMACaRe
Join Date: May 2007
Location: swanwick carp lake
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BDIONU:
nanoo nanoo
The government are guided by the advice from the scientific (vulcanologists) community and pressure is no doubt being applied to them not to be so pessemistic/conservative in their calculations of where the ash cloud is.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
eMACaRe,
I think you have got your logic the wrong way round - CFMU plan and issue slots and routes on the flow rates given to them by the ANSPs, they do not dictate how much traffic each centre or sector can take (as they do not know the precise staffing levels). If someone tells them they have a zero rate then they cannot plan traffic through that airspace.
Yes, they may have the overall picture but if someone says they cannot take any traffic then CFMU has to plan accordingly!! They can only work wih the flow rates given
I think you have got your logic the wrong way round - CFMU plan and issue slots and routes on the flow rates given to them by the ANSPs, they do not dictate how much traffic each centre or sector can take (as they do not know the precise staffing levels). If someone tells them they have a zero rate then they cannot plan traffic through that airspace.
Yes, they may have the overall picture but if someone says they cannot take any traffic then CFMU has to plan accordingly!! They can only work wih the flow rates given
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Samsonite
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The government are guided by the advice from the scientific (vulcanologists) community and pressure is no doubt being applied to them not to be so pessemistic/conservative in their calculations of where the ash cloud is.
Anyway, why don't you folks just temporarily declare all airspace G (since you've essentially eliminated all controlled traffic anyway). Or are you still concerned about us running into the IFR traffic?
Any chance of a discount on landing fees at Heathrow for us pistonpushers?
More than just an ATCO
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Up someone's nose
Age: 75
Posts: 1,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any chance of a discount on landing fees at Heathrow for us pistonpushers?
Thanks Millerman, I was trying to post that earlier but my computer went TU