Ash clouds threaten air traffic
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: italy
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
20 years hahaa
I think we run into a more safety related problem by taping up the ports and engines. Remember BirgenAir B757. And countless others over the years.
The damage done to the industry is very bad. We need drones flying off RN ships into the cloud to gather real data.
I think we run into a more safety related problem by taping up the ports and engines. Remember BirgenAir B757. And countless others over the years.
The damage done to the industry is very bad. We need drones flying off RN ships into the cloud to gather real data.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: KUL
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yawn
The Pacific ring of fire is continuously active, as are Etna and Vesuvio. Still the world has not been shrouded in a unpenetrable volcanic ash clouds and the Pacific and Med seafloor are not littered with jet airliner wrecks. Even if Ejzkzjlzjyzjklz@klzjokul continues to belch, burp and fart for two years like it did last time, airlines and authorities will adapt and plan around it.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,812
Received 137 Likes
on
64 Posts
The damage done to the industry is very bad. We need drones flying off RN ships into the cloud to gather real data.
Incidentally, the Navy is not established and funded to support Civil Aviation ... but I guess you knew that anyway
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Cyprus
Age: 76
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Brooksig" suggested that he had complete faith in the Met models.!!!
Why then do we dept from JFK to LHR with a fcast on limits and a suitable Alt, which on arrival has a Metar which makes the approach feasable. All I am suggesting that to canx flts on a computer ash model however accurate is daft. We need a method of actually finding the ash level at an airport on arrival, just as we find out the RVR or w/v at the airport just before making the approach.
Why then do we dept from JFK to LHR with a fcast on limits and a suitable Alt, which on arrival has a Metar which makes the approach feasable. All I am suggesting that to canx flts on a computer ash model however accurate is daft. We need a method of actually finding the ash level at an airport on arrival, just as we find out the RVR or w/v at the airport just before making the approach.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,812
Received 137 Likes
on
64 Posts
@ Walnut ... Nail/Head/Hit. Unfortunately, nobody has yet come up with a credible, wide-ranging, affordable detection system that will allow every airfield/airport in Europe to have the equivalent of a Metar.
In fact, there's almost no data gathering capability at all, especially when considering the 3-dimesional, multi-layered threat from ash.
The last few miles on final approach [related to landing minima] is different from having every airway, holding pattern, TMA and airfield accurately measured for ash at every intermediate level up to FL360.
In fact, there's almost no data gathering capability at all, especially when considering the 3-dimesional, multi-layered threat from ash.
The last few miles on final approach [related to landing minima] is different from having every airway, holding pattern, TMA and airfield accurately measured for ash at every intermediate level up to FL360.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Brooksig" suggested that he had complete faith in the Met models.!!!
In the absence of any alternative I just asked you for your evidence of inaccuracy, within the limits of the modelling as offered. I have absolutely no doubt that the models ARE less accurate than 'spot' measurements using a probe on an aircraft but erring on the side of safety.
As has been pointed out already, actual measurement of all the FLs and all areas surrounding any particular airport just cannot be done. For a start, you can't easily add extra (recce) aircraft to the traffic already there!
And, finally, what use would 'the equivalent of a METAR' be at the start of a 7 hour flight? Modelling should give a usable forecast of the VA situation on arrival at (eg.) LHR - actual measurements from 7 hours ago would be useless. The key problem is how often does the actual track of an ash cloud vary from the prediction: in other words, how often is the short-term weather forecast incorrect? You can see an example of the model being 're-trimmed' during today for 0600 tomorrow: the southern boundary is now further south than predicted 8 hours ago.
In practice, what improvement of accuracy / sensitivity could be achieved or is needed?
Last edited by brooksjg; 16th May 2010 at 20:08.
Last time one of these Icelandic things went pop, I can't remember the airspace being closed, so what's changed. Also Anyway Catania is usually covered in ash, so can we still go there. I'm with the this does not make sense brigade.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmmm okay, so what do make of the two research planes finding a 'distinct' layer today ?
"Two dedicated atmospheric research aircraft, one from the UK and another from Germany, flew on Sunday to investigate the volcanic ash plume moving over the UK. Both aircraft found an extensive area of ash generally between 15,000ft and 20,000ft covering central and northern UK, drifting south. In many areas the cloud was clearly visible to the naked eye and was described as ‘a grey-black layer’. The pilots of the DLR aircraft reported that ‘one should not fly into this layer’."
This is the quote from the met office site, is the bearded wierdie advocating flying through the middle of that then
"Two dedicated atmospheric research aircraft, one from the UK and another from Germany, flew on Sunday to investigate the volcanic ash plume moving over the UK. Both aircraft found an extensive area of ash generally between 15,000ft and 20,000ft covering central and northern UK, drifting south. In many areas the cloud was clearly visible to the naked eye and was described as ‘a grey-black layer’. The pilots of the DLR aircraft reported that ‘one should not fly into this layer’."
This is the quote from the met office site, is the bearded wierdie advocating flying through the middle of that then
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Belfast
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Irish Aviation Authority ran two flights looking for ash today, one went South and the othe Went North and West, the North flight encountered ash visible to the naked eye and was describied as bad in places, special filters on the aircraft had ash in them when the plane landed. The other flight found nothing.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: EGGW
Posts: 2,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the problem maybe that the no fly zone is because the ash cloud was forecast outside of the new limits between 0 and 20000 ft. The test a/c seem to show the forecast is incorrect and that it might be safe to fly below 15000 ft, say up to 10000 ft, thus keeping the airports open.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Icepack
Last time one of these Icelandic things went pop, I can't remember the airspace being closed, so what's changed.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
an extensive area of ash generally between 15,000ft and 20,000ft
The extent to which VA forms 'distinct' layers only a few thousand feet thick, or more diffuse layers covering 'generally' FL150 to FL200 is a bit academic anyway. For practical purposes, any VA between ground level and FL200 in (say) a 50 mile radius around an airport should be suffiicient to close it. ATC cannot realisitically factor-in the presence of VA in a particular set of levels and small area(s ) when directing traffic. How could that possibly work in practice. The resolution of the cloud model predictions looks to me pretty much as small as you're likely to get, combined with safe margins of error, in flying and control, AND coping with unexpected manoeuvres caused by an aircraft suddenly appearing in the wrong bit of sky!
Last edited by brooksjg; 16th May 2010 at 21:43.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's quite simple really
It's quite simple really, the Met-office are the experts in forecasting both weather and ash. The CAA are responsible for identifying the no-fly zones. Just cos weird beard, BA and a bunch of airline accountants don't like it, that doesn't make the experts wrong.
What the airlines need to do is get a hell of a lot better at acting on the information IN ADVANCE to avoid passengers waiting for hours at airports needlessly. The met-office forecast this ash cloud hitting us a couple of days ago, the research aircraft have validated their projections today. There really is no excuse for the airlines allowing their pax to turn up for flights that any idiot could tell 24 hours in advance weren't going to run. They seriously need to get their finger out and stop messing their customers about like this.
If you believe the charts this evening it looks like airports like SOU, BOH etc are out for tomorrow, so why can't the airline ops people save people the trouble of turning up and waiting around for flights that almost certainly aren't gonna go...
Head in the sand and dodo spring to mind I'm afraid. Passengers understand that the ash cloud isn't the airline's fault - what is their fault is not being up front about what is going on and that is only going to make the passengers more annoyed.. Nobody wants to waste a day hanging round an airport - better to reschedule and fly another day.
Desk-pilot
What the airlines need to do is get a hell of a lot better at acting on the information IN ADVANCE to avoid passengers waiting for hours at airports needlessly. The met-office forecast this ash cloud hitting us a couple of days ago, the research aircraft have validated their projections today. There really is no excuse for the airlines allowing their pax to turn up for flights that any idiot could tell 24 hours in advance weren't going to run. They seriously need to get their finger out and stop messing their customers about like this.
If you believe the charts this evening it looks like airports like SOU, BOH etc are out for tomorrow, so why can't the airline ops people save people the trouble of turning up and waiting around for flights that almost certainly aren't gonna go...
Head in the sand and dodo spring to mind I'm afraid. Passengers understand that the ash cloud isn't the airline's fault - what is their fault is not being up front about what is going on and that is only going to make the passengers more annoyed.. Nobody wants to waste a day hanging round an airport - better to reschedule and fly another day.
Desk-pilot
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You'll find most if not all, airlines will tend to wait for the NOTAM shutting airfields/airspace to be issued before pulling the plug on any operation. Unfortunately NATS don't play to the same lead-time as most airlines and trying to "do the decent thing" by giving passengers early notice before a NOTAM is issued has back-fired recently. I refer to the last closing of Scotland a few weeks ago, airlines cancelled late the day before only to find out when the NOTAM was issued it was only the west coast ie, GLA/PIK that was affected.
Sims Fly Virtually
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Used to be 3rd Sand Dune from the Left - But now I'm somewhere else somewhere else.
Posts: 704
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GF007 "delayed"
Just been bumped from GF007 BAH-LHR, "Due WX", so I guess LHR has been closed, or is expected to be before 06:00 tomorrow.
Anyone know what the preditions are? Could it clear in the next couple of hours? Or should the pax be demanding hotac? Last time I had a GF delay, the @delay@ (tech aircraft) went on until 05:00 from a ETD of 01:00, and then by the time they got us into hotels it was only an hour before getting back on the bus for the next flight went out so hardly worth it
Anyone know what the preditions are? Could it clear in the next couple of hours? Or should the pax be demanding hotac? Last time I had a GF delay, the @delay@ (tech aircraft) went on until 05:00 from a ETD of 01:00, and then by the time they got us into hotels it was only an hour before getting back on the bus for the next flight went out so hardly worth it