Bad science from Met Office
 

There is a common theme developing on this thread and outside - the lack of scientific information on the CONCENTRATION of ash

The Met office has obviously reacted to this by publishing this update at 12:36 titled "Science underpins ash cloud advice".
Met Office: Icelandic volcano eruption

Here is my comment emailed to their pressoffice

"I am increasingly concerned about postings on your website have a bias against aviation and contain 'bad science'
I refer to the article titled above Last updated: 1231 BST on Tuesday, 20 April 2010
Clearly this is in response to critiscms but it does not answer the key questions:

the first is for the Met Office
1) what are the actual and forecast concentrations of ash at different location and altitudes (g/m3) and other data such as particle size distribution and composition.

the second is for the aviation industry and regulators
2) what is a safe concentration
there is no doubt there is a concentration which is damgaging but equally there will be a level where the risk of damage is statistically insignificant (not zero)

All the information at present states whether ash is present or not but gives no information on concentrations.
This has caused the present problem because ICAO have not defined an acceptable concentration for IFR flight
It is bad science to refer to absence of ash or zero concentration. This is a physical and mathematical impossibility.
Every aircraft flies in the presence of ash on every flight. The concentration may be below the limit of detection of the sensor but it is not zero.
The limit of detection needs to be stated.

The bias is in referring to damage to F16 aircraft while not referring to the very large number of General Aviation flights that have taken place over the past few days without any known damage and at various altitudes and some with turbine engines. Neither is a Met Office matter.

Lets have figures and proper scientific reporting please."

Well I think the Eurocontrol image speaks for itself, what excuses do they need if their own tests show no problems at all on the aircraft performance, their airspace and (the UK's) is clear on the Eurocontrol charts, and they will just revise their mainteinance schedule in future to keep an close eye on any long term damage to their aircraft.

Is NATS where authorised by someone ( nobody really know who is in charge here...) to use the same chart as the Eurocontrol use, the UK airspace would be open right now. It is a matter of politics now. Eventually Mr Brown will do something about it (2 days late) and be hail as a hero....

Thanks Neil

I can see the conflicting info now.

regards
Howie

Hello JetII

The French and Dutch probably declared the contamination de minimis and used their common sense!

Regulations not published??

EUR Doc 019
INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION
VOLCANIC ASH CONTINGENCY PLAN
EUR REGION
Second Edition
September 2009

Explains the process nicely :ok:

Quote from BA today
 

A bit rich coming from BA considering they, along with other major carriers own part of NATS

Statement on Icelandic volcanic eruption: Tuesday April 20, 1500 The situation regarding the volcanic eruption in Iceland remains dynamic and the latest information from the Met Office shows that the situation will continue to be variable. Based on the latest Met Office information, part of Scottish and Northern Irish airspace including Aberdeen, Inverness and Edinburgh airports will continue to be available from 1900 today to 0100 tomorrow, Wednesday 21 April, and also south to Newcastle Airport. Glasgow and Teesside airports will additionally become available in this time period. Restrictions will remain in place over the rest of UK airspace below 20,000ft. Flights above the ash cloud are now permitted in the UK; between 1900 today and 0100 tomorrow, this will enable aircraft movements above 20,000ft in UK airspace. We will continue to monitor Met Office information and the situation is likely to change during the course of the day. We will make a further statement at approximately 2100 today. NATS is maintaining close dialogue with the Met Office and with the UK's safety regulator, the CAA, in respect of the international civil aviation policy we follow in applying restrictions to use of airspace. We are working closely with Government, airports and airlines, and airframe and aero engine manufacturers to get a better understanding of the effects of the ash cloud and to seek solutions.

pressure on pilots
 

Companies are not allowed to decide for themselves if a flight can or can not be done in closed airspace. Its up to the national authorities to define which parts of their own airspaces are closed for flights.

I think that each country should define the portions of national airspace that can be used for a certain period of time and Eurocontrol should gather that information and define routes (like NAT organized tracks) to be used for (lets say) a 6 hour period of time. Companies should organize themselves to bring their passengers to (open) aerodromes closer, as much as possible, of their passenger destinations. (This could be a great test to Star Alliance, One World and others, to coordinate efforts in a crisis like this one).
Indeed, this is a great opportunity for the airlines to join efforts and to talk about cooperation issues, because this is only the very first one, of future world crises.
EU should lead and learn from its ineptness and lack of preparation, for catastrophes like this. Almost a week without any idea how to deal with this drama is not a good "business card" for the European Union. Paranoia is the enemy of common sense and all that the "authorities" have done so far, was to take flight safety to its "zero risk detent". Flight safety however, is the compromise of taking an operation under acceptable risk levels. The no fly decision leaves us without risks but, without operations also...:sad:

Nats have been adding the highlighted line above since last night's update. Things will change very soon, I think

Downloadable here, no login required :

Monumental Farce!
 

The disparity between the two published ash cloud charts from the UK Met Office & Eurocontrol combined with NATS's and Eurocontrol's respective differing interpretations of flying in what essentially amounts to the same contaminated air warrants causing this entire event to descend into a monumental farce.

If NATS's so called "zero tolerance" interpretation of the ICAO regulations regarding flying in volcanic ash is correct then I trust they are taking down the registration details of all aircraft currently being flown within the contmainated area over mainland Europe prior to issuing future bans on them ever entering UK Airspace.

After all we wouldn't want these entirely unsafe aircraft to enter UK airspace risking multiple engine failures and randomly descending onto the heads of the very unsuspecting citizens which they are currently going to such extreme lengths to protect!

Ash Cloud Simulation
 

While surfing the web I found this piece of information:

Rheinisches Institut für Umweltforschung - EURAD-Projekt

Shows some neat films and predictions at various altitudes.

Regards,
FR

All of the inbound BA longhauls will be going to BCN and MAD, no plans to go to Scotland.

Diedtrying

The reason why they are flying in over UK airspace is because they are above the altitude in which ash clouds are this allows them to avoid the ash clouds to some extent.

However most UK mainland airports are closed because the climb to that altitude would encounter in going through the ash clouds hence this factor is the most dangerous.

Simonpro,

Was it? is that why the UK airspace is closed because they have found ash contaminant in the atmosphere?

Is it that simple ?

The aircraft that have been operating VFR don't seem to have encountered it to a level that has been detrimental to flight.

If the UK airspace has been closed due to contaminants, at what concentration are those levels and where and at what levels ?

Please, do tell.. the UK avaition industry would appreciate you imparting that knowledge, perhaps NATS too.

Are the MET office using some s**tty model, that doesnt seem to gel with what the rest of the EU airspace models are and what the actual facts are ?

... kind of like that whole manipulation of data, AGW, Bullcr@P model to support global warming thing that harks back to CRU/Jones "hide the decline" thing ?

Is our industry in the UK facing yet another kick in the cajones becuase the MET office is relying on B/S models that are not fit for purpose ?

Or the failure of our politicians to deal with a situation with a foot in reality.. hmm.. rather like doubling APD due to global warming.. only to tell us that the money from APD is being used to prop up the banks ??

That exactly what I am doing, you dont need any help on being discredited, you continue to do a fine job of that yourself on the Global Warming thread.

That fact is Simonpro, our politicians are useless, they stand around politiking, instead of dealing with a situation and indeed "fiddle* while rome burns" and fail to gather factual data, or even any data, meanwhile, everybody else picks up the pieces and foots the bill.

If I pay for a dog, I don't expect to bark myself.



*Not just their expenses

The reason why they are flying in over UK airspace is because they are above the altitude in which ash clouds are this allows them to avoid the ash clouds to some extent.

Yeah thats all well and good, until they have a engine our or a de-pressurisation then have to decend into the ash concentration !!!

Idiotic comment manofman.

Concemtration etc
 

Guys,
The Statistically Safe concentration needs to be determined with specifics to Particle size and composition.

The particle size would be easy: similar to suspended dust and smoke found often over Africa/ Asia.

The composition would be trickier esp regarding quality of toxins and effect on breathing.

However, considering that even with deposits on cars etc, there are no widespread issues of running eyes, short breath etc,

It may be prudent to assume that the flight is possible in the plume.

Also it is one thing to fly into the cloud when released because concentrations are high, the time bound dissipation will always reduce the threat.