Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

New eruption starting in Iceland? (merged)

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

New eruption starting in Iceland? (merged)

Old 24th May 2011, 14:31
  #141 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Europe
Age: 52
Posts: 409
BA appear to be flying to Aberdeen

According to Flightradar24 anyway.

Airline: British Airways
Flightnr: BA1312
From: London Heathrow (LHR)
To: Aberdeen Dyce (ABZ)
Aircraft: Airbus A321-231 (A321)
Reg: G-EUXJ
Hex: 4010DA
Altitude: 35150 ft (10714 m)
Speed: 375 kt (695 km/h, 432 mph)
Track: 340
Squawk: 1401
Pos: 55.61215 / -3.31479
Vortex what...ouch! is offline  
Old 24th May 2011, 14:41
  #142 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Farnham, UK
Posts: 323
Vortex

The forecast ash is in a band across central & southern Scotland. This leaves ABZ in the clear.

BA have announced services to GLA, EDI & NCL cancelled to 1900. Flights to ABZ are operating.
Thunderbug is offline  
Old 24th May 2011, 14:43
  #143 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 7,997
in more than fifty years of aviation not one life has been lost due to ash ingestion.
There's been a couple of close calls though:

British Airways Flight 9 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

KLM Flight 867 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 24th May 2011, 14:47
  #144 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dublin
Posts: 951
When one thinks of the recent and greater Merapi eruption many airlines continued to operate with no evidence of damage. Indeed the likes of Yogyakarta being only 19NM east of Merapi only closed when ash falls created limited visibility. Other airports in the vacinity such as Solo, Surabaya and to some extent Jakarta suffered cancellations but not a blanket no fly zone. Many did fly and there was no damage to aircraft.
Sober Lark is offline  
Old 24th May 2011, 15:08
  #145 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 824
With respect Sober Lark, I know these Indonesian airports pretty well and, as you say, they have to live with the constant rumblings of Merapi and all the other active volcano's in the vicinity.

But, when Merapi erupted last year, it was not on the scale of Iceland and although there was disruption, most of the ash was blown away from the area. In addition, you are talking about some quite small airports in an area of low density overflights.

Finally, the attitude to risk within Indonesian aviation, although vastly improved on the past, is not quite the same as that in Western Europe.

As a western airline working out there for the Hajj season, we took pretty much the same view as people are here. IE don't fly in the red zone on the met chart and know your Volcanic Ash Encounter SOP's well!
macdo is offline  
Old 24th May 2011, 15:44
  #146 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: on the beach
Age: 64
Posts: 2,023
I might, just might, consider flying in the affected areas if MoL filled a plane with himself and all his loved ones, then flew round and round and up and down and landed safely. Nah, I wouldn't really.

I'll bet the pilots who flew today were not volunteers, well not in the true sense of the word, volunteer. It was probably put to them that if they didn't undertake the flight, the door would him them on the way out.

Does anyone really listen to anything MoL says?
Evanelpus is offline  
Old 24th May 2011, 16:02
  #147 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 65
Posts: 2,846
Originally Posted by dash6 View Post
If RYR check in flights "Intending to fly" and are then denied clearance,will they still have to compensate their passengers? Jut a thought....
Regulation 261/2004 requires the airline to care for and compensate their passengers regardless of the reason the flight was cancelled.

The Regulation does "envision" that nothing in it prevents the airline from seeking redress from third parties. To my knowledge this has never been attempted, nor (obviously) successful with government bodies or NATS. Perhaps Cryanair may do so in this case, and I wish them luck - they will need it.
ExXB is offline  
Old 24th May 2011, 16:09
  #148 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,999
There's been a couple of close calls though:
I am not disputing there have been close calls but those have been flying into visible ash clouds or not so visible at night.

The fact is in millions of flights over a 50 year period NOT ONE DEATH!
Volcanos are not a new thing!

Compare that to aircraft lost flying into a CB? do we close big chunks of airspace because there are thunderstorms around? No we as pilots deal with them.

Do we ground aircraft in the bird migration season? No we dont yet both hold demonstrable risk.
Ash in invisible form is a percieved risk.

Ok we may have increased the accepeted levels from one thimblefull in a four bedroom house to 20 thimble fulls in a four bedroom house but still very low levels and still levels which would be invisible in ash cloud form.

Well done RyanAir for making a point!

Pace
Pace is offline  
Old 24th May 2011, 16:25
  #149 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: norn iron
Posts: 1,127
Pace, surely if the manufacturers could come up with what is definitively safe (and I'm not talking about what MO'L was saying earlier), then it would take the argument away from the CAA. What's actually happened during the year since the last ash disruption? Seemingly, not a lot.

As for CB avoidance........slightly easier than avoiding barely perceptible by eye amounts of ash. Furthermore, it's much easier for Met authorities to issue SIGMETs/forecasts for CBs than for ash.
cuthere is online now  
Old 24th May 2011, 16:40
  #150 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Uranus
Posts: 450
Pace

Does your weather radar pick up ash? Mine doesn't but I can see and avoid CB's.........

Honestly, how can you say well done to Ryanair?

Theres more to aviation than profit.
StressFree is offline  
Old 24th May 2011, 16:52
  #151 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 482
I think MoLs rant just says to the public that while all other airlines are prepared to accept the advice of people who know far more about the subject than an airline CEO, Ryanair would rather just crack on with the schedule and take a chance. He may well be right but how many of us would put our children and partners on a test flight at 25000' over Scotland today. Sadly i feel his outburst just shows what his priorities are.

As for the Cb comment, i have never come across a Cb that was over half the size of Scotland. They are easily avoidable with the radar.
stalling attitude is offline  
Old 24th May 2011, 16:54
  #152 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Uranus
Posts: 450
stalling a

Well said sir, absolutely spot on!

StressFree is offline  
Old 24th May 2011, 17:05
  #153 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 141
As a (relatively) young BA 747 co-pilot, we had a pod slung underneath with a spare engine for XH. We dropped it off enroute to Perth.

Next to our glider at Jakarta was a SIA 747 which had also been sandblasted a week or so later.
Count Niemantznarr is offline  
Old 24th May 2011, 17:28
  #154 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: In the sun
Posts: 129
Those quoting EU Reg 261, whether it be the media, govt ministers or forum members saying the airlines have to care for and compensate passengers should read the whole regulation. In particular para 14 which says:

14) As under the Montreal Convention, obligations on operating air carriers should be limited or excluded in cases where an event has been caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken. Such circumstances may, in particular, occur in cases of political instability, meteorological conditions incompatible with the operation of the flight concerned, security risks, unexpected flight safety shortcomings and strikes that affect the operation of an operating air carrier.
I would suggest the volcanic ash situation is covered by "meteorological conditions incompatible with the operation of the flight" thus absolving the airlines from having to care for and compensate passengers. One occasion where Mr O'Leary is right to complain?

Doesn't help if you are stuck at an airport away from home, but that is what the reg says.
WetFeet is offline  
Old 24th May 2011, 17:38
  #155 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: retirementland
Age: 75
Posts: 767
Yet again airlines fail to maker the safety case

The British CAA say their airspace "is not closed, and it will not be closed" and "all airports remain open".

They go on that an airline could:

..operate a flight in an area judged to be affected by high-density ash if it had submitted a safety case to operate in this type of ash, but no UK carrier has done so.


Again the travelling public suffer because airlines have failed to implement a safety management system
Shell Management is offline  
Old 24th May 2011, 17:48
  #156 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 824
pace,
you can barrel roll a 737, but we're not allowed to do it, now work out why?
macdo is offline  
Old 24th May 2011, 17:51
  #157 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,154
@S M

I don't think you can conclude lack of a safety management system from a failure to submit a safety case for operations in "red zone" ash.

It may well be that the reason no airline has submitted such a case is that they are unable to do so - because they cannot make the case that it is safe.
Mad (Flt) Scientist is offline  
Old 24th May 2011, 17:55
  #158 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Over Mache Grande?
Posts: 563
SM

Shell,

Why do you hate pilots and airlines so much? Is a pilot goosing your wife? You add nothing to any debate you stick your oar into. You are now on my ignore list, so say what you like, I wont see it.

Edited to add: You praise Ryanair? For putting their pilots, assets and customers at risk? For telling a false story about how it is safe, when they didn't even fly through the red zone. Bravo - the biggest shot through the foot I've seen for a long time!
dwshimoda is offline  
Old 24th May 2011, 17:57
  #159 (permalink)  
pb2
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1
Wetfeet, you are quoting from the preamble to the Regulation rather than any part of the legislation itself. If you go down to the Regulation you'll see that article 5 paragraphs (1)a) and (3) together with articles 7, 8 and 9 make it explicitly clear that only the right to compensation is waived in the event of 'exceptional circumstances' like the ones you describe.

The right to care, as well as the right to refund or re-routing, persists even under these conditions.

Last edited by pb2; 24th May 2011 at 18:00. Reason: clarify paragraphs
pb2 is offline  
Old 24th May 2011, 17:57
  #160 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 58-33N. 00-18W. Peterborough UK
Posts: 3,043
SM, Didn't you read what Mad Scientist wrote?
forget is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.