Danny: Report from 2000 - The "Diffuse" plume. How diffuse? What concentration? You are saying that we shouldn't resume flying because of the unscientific analysis of a few odd commercial flights. You are saying we should stop flying because of the unscientific wording of a single military report!

I am not saying that because you can't see it, it is safe. What I am saying is that without proper research, which is doable, we might just as well all give up and go home now. The "safe" solution is not to fly at all. The gungho solution is to say we can't see anything, or well, it's a bit grey, but hey, it's okay. Probably. The scientific solution, the sapient solution, is to properly analyse and manage the risk. It is only in the last 24 hours that Europe has come close to doing that, but even then as far as I can tell, it's not based on proper research, but on setting aside former assumptions about risk.

Young Paul
check page 10 of the NASA report, there are 2 graphs, one for SO2 concentration, airborne Fourier transform infrared spectrometer , one for Aerosol data; airborne Langley condensation nuclei counter, 12 nm–1 micron.

So, the KLM flew at 40,000', above the ash cloud, so their only exposure was in the climb and descent. BA spent a total of 2h45min airborne instaed of their planned 4h, and spent it at varying levels, so only a matter of minutes at the intermediate altitudes that have the highest risk. That invalidates their "tests".

No-one on here supports the apparent lack of investigation into the problem, and no-one wants the restrictions to last longer than needed. However, the continuing view from some that no engine failures means it is safe to resume normal ops is astonishing - given that the company test flights were a con trick, and that numerous military engines have been wrecked, it points to a complete cowboy attitude. Anyone supporting an immediate return to flying should have their licence permanently revoked - you're wanting to play Russian Roulette with hundreds of lives.

The simple fact is that there is not enough data to make an objective assessment whether it is safe or unsafe, and it is that research that is needed, not a resumption to ops because patience has worn out or economics are deemed more important.

Insurance companies do not have to provide cover. They asses the risk and provide cover with an automatic 10% profit. Engine and aircraft manufactures state that no volcanic dust is acceptable, so as standard no insurance company will cover flying through dust.

So its not so much a veto as an aircraft is uninsurable until its been completely inspected and repaired - probably after EVERY flight. And its not just the engines, volcanic dust screws electronics as well.

Insurance companies cannot blame authorities for opening or closing the airspace, its the airlines who would be ignoring the manufactures guidelines and the airlines a who will bear the cost if they deliberately ignored them.

BA have gone quiet
 

Interesting after BA made a lot of noise about the lack of ANY effects of the flights through the ash they've grounded their fleet, probably a good reason:confused:

On plane finder this morning Amsterdam is very busy with aircraft. So is northern France and traffic is transiting the French side of the channel at altitudes down to 20,000ft.

These areas are right in the red zone according to the latest Vaac maps, ash down to surface level. So why are these aircraft not falling out of the sky? Could it be that someone has made a huge mistake, just because "that's what the book said"?

Someone needs to have their balls felt for this, and not in a good way.

Hi,

BBC News - European airports start to reopen for flights

there is no timer on this volcano :)

INTEL101: Where you live (Charlotte NC it says here), do they trade off safety against financial considerations? If so, commiserations. We don't do that in Europe.

What I find curious is that not one of the many that have flown through "the zone" seem to have published borescope results, or oil spectronalysis results, both of which are eminently do-able.
Will the CAA require aircraft that have traversed the suspect zone perform hidden damage checks as they would, for instance, in a heavy landing incident?
What are the implications of unnoticed/unreported encounters, and the IFSD rate especially for ETOPS?

Jonty

...long term mate, think long term!

All these comments about aircraft not falling out of the sky, do none of you consider the long term prospects, just becuase it is not having an effect today does not mean that long term exposure will not have effects in weeks/months.

BASED ON THE VAAC ADVISORY TIMED 0000Z APRIL 20TH THE SCOTTISH
FIR/UIR OUTSIDE OF THE CONTAMINATED AREA WILL OPEN AT 0600Z APRIL
20TH. THE LONDON FIR/UIR REMAINS ZERO RATED BELOW FL200 UNTIL
FURTHER NOTICE.

So thats why you can see panes above FL200 over England.

GA taking advantage of this situation?
 

As we all know, contrary to what they say on the news, the airspace isn't 'closed'. Just that IFR clearances aren't being given in affected areas.

As it's VMC pretty well all over Europe I would imagine the Air Taxi operators and Biz jets that aren't stuck on the ground in Class A airspace should be doing good business. But I'm not hearing that is the case. Why is that?

Given that using the ash cloud overlay on the radarvituel picture on what basis has the rest of Europe allowed flying to continue. Is the ash density much less (all the way across the N sea!)?

French airspace
 

An ATR42 equipped with special probes took off on Monday from Toulouse-Francazal towards Montpellier to take air samples.
More flights scheduled on Tuesday further north.
A second aircraft, a Falcon 20 is due to conduct more tests.
Aircraft equipped by SAFIRE and the CNRS ( FRench national research and science center)
Reacting to national critics, according to scientists, such experiments usually take 6 months preparation and quote:
"We are not a quick response team, usually such experiments are prepared 6 months in advance".

We might know what 's up there ! ( finally...):confused:

Of the over 100 historical ash encounters only 8 involved immediate engine malfunctions. Just 8%! and that involved some pretty heavy ash.
Statistically there are not going to be that many aircraft "dropping like flies".
On the other hand there seems to be some evidence that hot section deterioration can be the result of "invisible" dust. Therein lies the proverbial rub. The implication is that there might be some compromised turbines that could fail catastrophically at a later date,100 hrs, 500 hrs, who knows?

1989 KLM sudden silence over Alaska
 

Breezy DC quotes the KLM encounter with ash in 1989 near Anchorage.

On entering cloud, ash/smoke entered cabin. Crew used MAXIMUM POWER TO CLIMB. One minute later all engines lost power.

Boeing recommends DESCENDING 180 degree turn, as maximum power climb seems to provoke failure.....

Do you not consider how an aircraft engine is maintained ?

routine oil analysis..
routine borescope inspections..
LLP limits..
hot section intervals..
engine trend monitoring...
egt reports..

etc etc

With 20 or so volcanoes active at any one time, ash clouds like this must occur all round the world especially in the area of the ring of fire. Yet in all my years flying round the world I have never seen such an over reaction. I am all for safety first but I can't help thinking this is becoming a face saving exercise by those who have made this incredible decision to close the airspace.

What I really don't understand is why manufacturers and those who are making the decisions are not pouring money and time in to getting some solid scientific data on the effect of this type of ash on the aircraft. Get some test aircraft up there instead of leaving it to the airlines.

The long term impact on the economy is going to be huge if this goes on much longer and not just for the airlines! Time the Governments got of their arses and started to get some facts instead of relying on poor science, nobody knows how this cloud will effect aircraft it appears.

They keep trotting out the same stories including the BA flight that hit the plume of a volcano some years ago but fail to mention the ash cloud they flew into was very close to the volcano and the ash was altogether different and more dense.

So my message to those in charge is get your fingers out and go get some facts instead of speculation based on poor science or worse no science. :mad:

Latest from NATS
 

Statement on Icelandic volcanic eruption: Tuesday April 20, 0900

The situation regarding the volcanic eruption in Iceland remains dynamic and the latest information from the Met Office shows that the situation today will continue to be variable.
Based on the latest Met Office information, part of Scottish airspace including Aberdeen, Inverness and Edinburgh airports will continue to be available from 1300-1900 today, and also south to Newcastle Airport. Restrictions will remain in place over the rest of UK airspace below 20,000ft.
Overnight the CAA, in line with new guidance from the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) decided flights above the ash cloud will be permitted in the UK; between 1300-1900 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 1500.
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.

And another thing aircraft are flying all over the UK without problems outside controlled airspace including gas turbine powered aircraft again without problems! :ugh:

Some people just do not listen, do they?

The vulcanologists have clearly stated that this eruption is unusual in the content of its ash and the dispersal pattern. Several aircraft have suffered clearly photographed damage that allowed the engines to run, but would have resulted in failure after cumulative exposure.

Whatever is happening in continental Europe is not necessarily appropriate for the UK - look at the dispersal pattern and you'll see the plume comes down straight over the UK before it starts to spread east and west, becoming vastly thinner in the process of that divergence - it would be reasonable to assume from that map, if it's sufficiently accurate, that the ash is far denser over the UK than over continental Europe.

How many airlines will boroscope all of their engines after each flight, or even each night? It's not likely to be the first day of operation that will see problems, but later in the week if there is a big threat. Those of you claiming that the lack of engine failures this morning are showing a complete lack of technical understanding of the issue. The experts are unanimously stating there is a risk - it is only the airline managers and the uninformed media and public crying foul.

There seems to have been very little co-ordination or political will to get on top of the situation to determine definitively if ops are safe, but in the lack of that determination, the restrictions are not unreasonable.

Bruce Wayne
Not sure that everyone does oil analysis, particularly for S, which was the only abnormal in the NASA incident.
How often are "routine" borescope checks done?
The recorded engine parameters used for ECM showed no abnormalities in the NASA incident. Surprisingly even during the event nothing abnormal showed on cockpit instrumentation. They operated for a further 68 hrs before damage was noticed.

adirondack (and other spotters),

please refer to Jetdriver's (PPRuNe Mod) post, #1754 on page 88 and stop clogging up the thread with virtual radar extracts etc.

The thread is already 90 odd pages long.....it's about time we started seeing some self-moderation and only posting if you've got something useful to say. :ugh:

Whippersnapper

Yes people do listen, this eruption is unusual but examples of the same type of ash has been produced by other volcanos in recent times. The restrictions over Europe are very unreasonable considering the evidence. I do not have the details of the damage to the fighters or what density of cloud they flew through. However, several airlines have flown aircraft in the cloud without damage so we need hard data not speculation.

I see a lot of talk from the Met office and government departments but not much action.

reply to R31
 

The problem is the airspace below 20,000ft.

British carriers cant get to 20,000 without being below it first, everyone else is overflying above that level!

not much open overflights allowed

INV have been asked about possiably taking transatlantic diverts:eek::eek:

Statement on Icelandic volcanic eruption: Tuesday April 20, 0900

The situation regarding the volcanic eruption in Iceland remains dynamic and the latest information from the Met Office shows that the situation today will continue to be variable.
Based on the latest Met Office information, part of Scottish airspace including Aberdeen, Inverness and Edinburgh airports will continue to be available from 1300-1900 today, and also south to Newcastle Airport. Restrictions will remain in place over the rest of UK airspace below 20,000ft.
Overnight the CAA, in line with new guidance from the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) decided flights above the ash cloud will be permitted in the UK; between 1300-1900 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 1500.
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.

NATS are responding to information given by the Met office and god knows who else but they cannot make a decision regarding the safety of the airspace but only react to the information they are given and at the moment that information may be floored. NATS is as much at the mercy of these people as the rest of us!

Notam B0798/10 Has Been Published Stating That Aircraft May
Overflycontaminated Areas Within Uk Airspace From 0300z 20th
April Subjectto The Conditions Stated In The Notam.
.
Based On The Vaac Advisory Timed 0000z April 20th The Scottish
Fir/uir Outside Of The Contaminated Area Will Open At 0600z April
20th. The London Fir/uir Remains Zero Rated Below Fl200 Until
Further Notice.
.
Caution, Current Forecasts Indicate That The Situation Is
Changing Through The Day And Diversion Airfields May Be A
Significant Distance From The Original Destination
.
Flights Intending To Operate In The London And Scottish Uir's
Abovefl200 That Are Still Caught In Zero Rates Should Contact
Ukfmp To Be Excluded
.
Ukfmp ++441489588150

ZQA297/30,

A LOT of operators do engine oil analysis, its a very cheap way of monitoring the condition of a very expensive engine. I have paid 180 bucks for an oil analysis.

Borescope inspections are routine, any maintenance facility will have a 4 grand Olympus borescope, again its a very cheap way of inspecting an expensive engine can be done on wing if need be and allows a visual without having to break the sections open with the time involved in the shop and often if you break a section open then you may have to perform an expensive and unneeded overhaul on disks and blades in that section.

It's understandable that perhaps non-aviation, non-pilots may have concerns through lack of knowledge, but for commercial pilots to have so little knowledge of how aircraft and their engines work and are maintained would be surprising.

Yet comparatively, is anyone that concerned about an aircraft that has been stored in a region less than 200 miles from a coastal area ?

Corrosion to blades (exacerbated by marine moisture) and disks is equally damaging (in different ways) to blades and disks, often the damage is enough to leave an engine subject to overhaul if a chemical bath and test cell run shows the damage more than superficial.

What frustrates me at the moment is how we as pilots are supposed to be the experts in our field i.e flying aircraft and jump down anyones throat on here who dares suggest otherwise and yet many on here feel that it is ok to question the competence of the experts in other fields such as Met and Nats. I am no expert on volcanic eruptions and so am more than happy to listen to those who are and are basing their decisions on the best available data and models.

Latest from NATS conference call..............

The current position is:

· The volcano is still erupting with plume up to 10000 to 15000 feet as advised by Iceland Met;
· Ash concentrations over 20000 feet are “dissipating” but “maintaining a significant risk over most of Europe”;
· UK position is “variable” but no current plans to open any more airspace other than Scotland FIR. However on current predictions by 1300 local today Inverness, Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Newcastle should remain open but Glasgow, Prestwick and Prestwick may fall in contaminated area and fall out of the able to fly zone;
· At 1200 today decisions to be taken on the status of the component parts of UK airspace for the period from 1800 to 2400 – this will be issued on NOTAM;
· There are ongoing discussions between NATS and CAA as to some agreement on flying over / around cloud contamination using “hot spots” and “caution zones” but no agreement reached so far. NATS say they are pressing for a change of policy from CAA;
· Wind direction is expected to change by the end of the week turning to a west / south westerly direction;
· The issue of VFR was raised with comments re aircraft flying VFR below 21000 feet to Frankfurt;
· Met office plane will be flying from 1230 local around the UK to gather data on actual ash concentrations / contamination.

Bruce,

I'd question the validity of Spectrometric Oil Analysis in this case, since the affected areas we are talking about on the engines aren't part of the wet system. Also Borescopes are not the be all and end all.. far from it. Yes you can check parts of the combustion chamber, and you can also check the first few compressor stages and one maybe two stages of the turbine if you are lucky, but the checks are a long way from being comprehensive.

FT

so, once again - why do the UK CAA not borescope the a/c of operators that have been regularily flying over the duration of the ban ?? as Bruce states, relatively cheap and should yield a conclusive answer as to whether any damage occurs over a sustained period or whether it is perfectly safe ?

<<why do the UK CAA not borescope the a/c of operators that have been regularily flying over the duration of the ban ??>>

Which opereators, please? Today is the first time I have seen an overflight since last Thursday, at that one seemd to be all alone in southern UK airspace. There have been some low-level light aircraft and business jets but I'd hardly call them regular...

Whippersnapper,
Most of Europe appears to have taken the bit and started flying tentatively at least, are you saying they are all reckless fools? You have now backpeddled and tried to justify closure by claiming the cloud is worse over the UK even though it is clearly shown pretty much everywhere. At this rate you will still be sticking to your guns when the dust is falling on your head alone! I admire your tenacity but not your logic or common sense.

"Test" flights
 

Given the likelihood that LHR will be closed for most of the day at least I am surprised that BA (KLM, LH etc) who conducted test flights have not been even more forceful with their comments. Surely by now they would have been in a position to state exactly what they found on post-flight inspection rather than the rather vague "all was normal during the flight".

Hello JetII

The only good news is about the weather. No clouds, blue sky, Cavok etc on most part of Europe. Important because it seems that the German airpace (and some others also) is closed for... IFR flights. Consequently only VFR for takeoff and landing. Just imagine what the situation would be if it was fog or pouring rain. The French are closed up to FL205 but we have our corridors to allow aircraft inside!

Heathrow Director,

Iceland volcano ash cloud flight risk 'blown out of proportion' airline claims | Metro.co.uk

well, for starters these guys seem to have been fairly regular - maybe not as the normal airline's on a normal day but surely a step in the right direction with regard to borescope inspection ??