Dunno if it was posted allready, but the report about the measurement flight done over germany is allready available.

Check http://www.bmvbs.de/Anlage/original_...April-2010.pdf

Blackwall Tunnel Theory.
 

While I have skipped a couple of pages because the thread was getting away from me, I would just like to reiterate my Blackwall Tunnel Theory of Authority Mind Set. Its way back in the low nineties somewhere. I suspect that the UK airspace has not been opened because nobody wants to be the person to say it can.

A couple of observations if I may, or should I say a couple more, because that was the basis of my previous post? The Research equipped Dornier D-CALM flew one research sorte on Friday was it? SInce when very little has been heard. KLM and LH flew 'test flights' local to their operations on Saturday? And both said they had found little.

BA flew a 747 for about 3 hours or a little over, basically from LHR to their deep maintenance centre in Cardiff, in an aeroplane due, presumably, for a fairly long hour overhaul? WW announced that no damage had been found, which, one has to assume, included borescoping one or more of the engines and, since their boss was standing next to them, no shortage of qualified engineers slowed them up? Am I okay so far?

One of WW main planks recently has been a degree of management honesty. Believe me, I hold British Management generically in much the same regard as I view England Football, so WW is very much an exception! If he was found to be trying to 'blag' his way back in to the air, by lying about the state of those engines, he would lose far more than he gained on both of his major problems at the moment.

I was concentrating on driving on a prickly, touchy North Circular Road this evening and I may have misunderstood, but I am sure I gained the very strong impression that whatever the Met office and everybody else is basing UK air space closures on, it is not 'areas of ash have been found'. Because no ash at all has been found because there is no-one up there looking for it?

All of the decisions are based on computer modelling? Is that right, some haunted fish tank is guessing where the ash is and hasn't the first idea how much ash there might be in any given place? Is that right? :ugh:

Finally, in reply to 'Stagger' many pages ago;

I have a very strong recollection that the two donks on the ETOPS qualifying B777 had been selected because they were the highest flying hour engines anywhere at the time. They had the most wear and were both further deliberately unbalanced to emulate poorly maintained, very average engines that might well be found in routine airline service. Is this not so? As an engineer, that's pretty much what I would do, because if the engines passed the ETOPS evaluation, I would get a really nice, warm feeling about those engines.

Roger.

Just as an aside, I'm not sure why the Met Office is taking flack here. Under ICAO/WMO agreements the MO provide VAAC coverage for northwest Europe. Is that not what they've done? Observe, then forecast, the movement of volcanic ash. Isn't that what's happened?

The information they provide is then used by NATS/CAA etc who then decide whether there can be open airspace or not.

The internationally agreed manufacturers' guidance (before this evening's events) was that there is a zero tolerance for aircraft performance in volcanic ash. Therefore, are aircraft manufacturers not to blame for not knowing what their aircraft limitations are? Where does it end?

Unprecedented is surely the word, and instead of looking to blame people, perhaps learning the lessons and keeping them in mind in the event something like this happens again, is the best way ahead.

If a ban hadn't been put in place, and something had have fallen out of the sky, then the same people claiming over-reaction would be asking why airspace wasn't shut. Lose-Lose.


Edit: Landroger, REAL observations of volcanic ash HAVE been made. By the Finnish Airforce, by KLM (near Eindhoven today), by Lufthansa (just south of Hamburg), by Loganair (this very day, at FL170 above Kirkwall), by parachutists (!!!) at FL030 near Peterborough, by the RAF at Coningsby, by an aircraft approaching Newfoundland......I could go on. There have been plenty, PLENTY of reports of ash in the sky.

Landroger
 

If the CAA approves landings it must be with caveats. The London zone is under potential ash cover and will be until at least 21/4 1200.

Now that's something that you'd have never thought would be newsworthy!

Perhaps the C.A.A. has spent the last few days doing what many have called for, finding out exactly what is up there and how dangerous it is? You know, just quietly going about their job.

Some of the diverted flights to BRU and SNN are already back in the air and on their way to LHR too!

Lord Adonis on R4 now [live transcript - all errors mine]- "there is a differentiation between the dangerous area, a no-fly zone, and a low contamination zone where on the advice of manufacturers and test flights where it is safe to fly. The safety regime has been changed to significant analysis of test flight data and experience of flight, and crucially advice from aircraft engine and airframe manufacturers... before last week, volcanoes weren't a problem in Europe. it's because we faced this act of God that we had to face this problem, and intensive work by manufacturers to establish how it is safe to operate."

Interviewer: Were you aware that there were all these planes in the air heading for London?

LA: Of course I knew this evening, because it was all over the media

Interviewer: Didn't BA tell you?

LA: All I needed to do was turn on the television. The process to clear airspace has been in progress since the beginning of the week.

So:

This morning flying is DANGEROUS!, and banned.

Now, flying is safe.

Utter, utter incompetence.

As a result of their engine tests at LCY this morning??? What were they doing I wonder...full thrust into the dock waters while parked in front the A318s...

Air moves around you know...

Hand Solo, can we have the evidence that the information was duff please?

Have you any grasp of what information was provided by the met men and women to the CAA?

Also, can we have some evidence (just as a bonus) of where the Met said airspace should be shut? Perhaps if their ash dispersion model is inaccurate, as aviators we could all cough up some extra tax to pay for a new one?

hand solo
 

i think i saw a senior met man on tv today say they had provided the info NATS' required and that the decision for no-fly 'was outside their (mets) remit'.
i wonder where the dice will roll......

The large bunch of intercontinental flights all now landing at Heathrow launched up to 12 hours ago, which means a decision to launch them in this coordinated fashion must have been taken 18-24 hours ago. It is clear that BA must have decided then that this was all BS and decided to present the UK govt with a fait accompli. At 19-20.00Z tonight they were faced with 20+ BA flights on the doorstep and had to make a rapid decision on what they were going to do.

Big balls for Mr Walsh, that's for sure.

I sympathise with both views. The risk probably is negligible per flight, but it only takes one double engine failure due to a locally dense ash concentration on one of 30,000 daily flights for everyone to howl for heads to roll.

So did the majority of all other European countries. NATS and UK Met Office to blame for them too? Common factor to all would seem to be ICAO?

NATS only have a licence for Controlled Airspace, not the rest. Some countries totally banned flying, some didn't UK was one that didn't. I'm not privy to ministerial briefings as to why HM Government decided not to.

BD

Will be interesting to see what the maint departments find when doing checks after flight through ash.

Or hav Airbus and Boeing just revised the maint manuals !

Based on the amount of BA long haul flights that have either already landed or are approaching Heathrow, that have obviously been heading towards the UK since this morning.....

Dare I ask who actually decided on the re-openeing of the airspace and the new guidelines for flying in ash. Was it NATS and the CAA based on experts advice and test flight data, or was it Willie Walsh who decided to reactivate his long haul last night/this morning?

@ QDMQDMQDM:

Government didn't face the decision making process at 19.00Z tonight: the American, Canadian and Mexican Speedbirds were all posted up on the LHR arrivals board before lunchtime today. It's pretty obvious that yesterday (Monday) was spent in planning and then before nine o'clock this morning BA told Lord Adonis to don a spotter's anorak.

Indeed, Airbus procedure on the Bus after encountering volcanic ash is quite thorough and will take some time.

Depends if the crews report encountering ash I guess.

MM 05-51-25-601 if you're interested.

It will be interesting what Ryanair do, they have no pressing commercial need to fly.
By waiting for the winds to clear the cloud away on Thursday/Friday they may save themselves a lot of money.

Not withstanding the fact that inspecting the engines after every flight will blow their business model and profit..

Desk Pilot wroteRyanair, you might like to hear, pay most of their employees on an hourly basis. If there is no work, there is no pay. It is in O'Leary's interest to sit this one out as he has very little comparative cash burn compared to BA.

Desk pilots are prone to risk aversion I hear. Quite safe sat twiddling with ones pen.

Desk Pilot
 

Why? Airlines and Pilots in Command have always been responsible for deciding it is safe to fly. Why should it concern you now?

Regards

I'd love to be a fly on the wall when the reports from the first required post-flight inspections are submitted. I'm guessing you all saw the scope pics from the Finnish F-18?

The (admittedly unconfirmed) reports of 'burning smell' during descent tonight is troubling. This could backfire quite spectacularly.

What apart from that being how they make their money?

back to topic....

These jets set off when they were under the impression airspace would open this evening. BA are not the only airline flying in. Qatar, Thomas Cook, TUI and some others have all begun approaching LHR.

They most likely took a calculated risk of diversion after the earlier possibility that airspace may open.

Regardless of what you think, financial reasons are not going to force an airline to send their aircraft through areas which they think is going to cost them millions more in damage than the continuing stoppage.

Let us not now use this as an excuse to berate anybody. Airlines are staffed with personnel (or are able to call on the expertise of other people) who are far more qualified to make these judgements than the self proclaimed saviours of aviation on both sides of the line on here.

Slowly though it came, it appears that data has been gathered, manufacturers have been consulted and various boffins have come to the conclusion that it is time for a more directed approach to the airspace closure.

I can't wait to see this disected in the coming weeks and months as my cynical view point is that

1) BA perform test flights for 3 hours, nothing of note found (aparently)
2) since early this morning flights flying over uk to USA/south America
3) WW launches the fleet, knowing he is invited to cobra in 12 hrs
4) dozen or so BA jets rock up over head, only hrs after airports again shut down
5) WW to goverment, I have 12 jets overhead, running low on fuel. You want to send them to Europe after they have already been flying overhead for an hour or so, surely let's get them on the ground asap.

how can from this afternoon it suddenly gets bad enough to re close the whole uk again, until Speedbirds arrive overhead...oh did I mention there is an election coming up? Voters stuck overseas...media not talking about politics only ash...

Am I being cynical?

Joetom
 

I presume most prudent airmen will avoid flying through visible ash, so I imagine that this will be an extremely infrequent occurrence.

Statement on Icelandic volcanic eruption: Tuesday April 20, 2300

NATS welcomes new CAA guidance and reopens airspace
We are delighted to report that most restrictions on UK airspace began to be lifted at 2134 (local time) this evening, following new guidance from the UK’s safety regulator, the Civil Aviation Authority on restrictions to UK airspace as a result of the volcanic eruption.
Air traffic control services have resumed in the UK with the exception of an area over the north west of Scotland which continues to be affected by a dense concentration of volcanic ash. Based on current information this situation is not expected to change overnight. The situation continues to be dynamic as a result of changing weather conditions and the prediction of dense areas of volcanic ash. NATS will continue to monitor the latest Met Office and VAAC information and the CAA’s updates on the availability of UK airspace.
This brings to an end a period of disruption and uncertainty for air passengers. Our operation is fully staffed and already responding to the backlog of flights entering UK airspace. We will be working with the airlines and airports to resume normal operations as soon as possible.
Due to the scale of the disruption, it will take some time for flights to resume normal operations and passengers are advised to check with their airlines for the latest information about flights.
There are no further operational changes expected overnight and on this basis our next update will be at 0900 (local time) on 21 April.

I am really interested to hear from all those folk who posted on here lambasting anyone who dared suggest that this whole exersize was an overreaction. Will they be strapping into their respective rides when they're next rostered even if the 'plume' is still floating about?? Just curious...

Sky News
 

Just watching Sky News. Enormous effort by those involved over ash delays to protect themselves over decisions taken, ie no loss of face. Well done Will.

I'm incredibly proud to work for BA, especially tonight. I'm not usually a fan of WW, but tonight he's put the bearded one firmly into the shadows. An incredible piece of brinkmanship.
I'm bloody glad he's working for us.

New no-fly zone
 

The Irish Aviation Authority website at Irish Aviation Authority - IRISH AIRSPACE AND AIRPORTS CLEARED TO REOPEN links to the current EU no-fly zone as a PDF at http://www.iaa.ie/files/2010/docs/ne..._Air_ash_c.pdf

http://i290.photobucket.com/albums/l...rtgo/nofly.jpg

The guy from NATS interviewed on sky (sorry dont know his name) did say that no entity had put any pressure on them at all to re-open the airspace........ rather it was a decision that was made based on a better understanding of what is actually in the air based on all the data collected recently.

I guess the inference being........ more knowledge makes for more informed decisions. The position previously adopted was the ICAO NO ash is acceptable, but that was based on minimal, if any data. Now the various parties have data and have raised the bar from NO ASH to whatever ash now and im sure as time goes by that will be updated as well.

I'm sorry I just think that is an odd point of view.

Ryanair do have substantial cash reserves I agree, but MOL is hardly the type of person to throw them away unless he has to.

Quite frankly I trust the judgement of the airlines (in conjunction with other members of the industry such as the engine manufacturers) far more than that of contributors to this thread.

I guess we'll have to wait and see if BA have just thrown away 50 or so multi million pound engines as all these aircraft come in, or whether they had a fair idea what they were doing, i.e. the thing they have been doing very successfully under one name or another for the best part of a century, flying people safely around the globe, (at times through areas of volcanic activity).

So allegations that engines were affected on the BA flight to CWL and
one aircraft on approach to LHR this evening reports "burning smell" during
descent through 5000'.

BS? Scaremongering?

Personally I'm not convinced regarding the longer term affect on engine life.
I just hope this doesn't backfire in about a months time.

A4

When one of your shareholders throws 12 flights across the atlantic at you expecting a service at the same time as crying to the government.... I'd say thats pressure being put on you

TDK

Overreaction? would that ever happen with all the scientific knowledge?

Mexican flu! 65,000 estimated deaths. £2 billion on tamiflu reality 340 deaths cant give the Tamiflu away.

Bird flu! what happened to all the birds which were going to invade and kill us?

Global warming man made? How much Carbon has this thing chucked into the atmosphere? Oh well im sure the science will blame man made causes for any temperature increases and raise the taxes to further kill off the airlines.

The list goes on and on.

Shall I start on medicine?

Do we over react? of course not.

Maybe that black cloud was really caused by banging particles together somewhere in Switzerland :ugh:
The only black hole is in our aviation industry.

Pace

Speaking as a jet Captain with nearly forty years experience and over twenty years in the left hand seat of jet airliners I am more than delighted to see sensible reason overcome 'Teflon coated beurocracy'.

The simple truth is that we have seen what could have been the end of European Aviation as we know it. Without reasonable assesment risk and flight evaluation based on true fact and not computer models we could have obliterated commercial aviation in the UK. The unpronouncable volcano could, and might contue to erupt for years to come. What were we supposed to do? Go back one hundred years?

I am more than happy to take to the skies with passengers on board, and would have done so from day one. It was obvious that whilst we needed to evaluate the erosion and long term effects on engines there was no reason that so long as we kept well away from the core cloud we were at no more danger than in every day life.

The sooner we stop living in a 'Health and Safety' bubble fuelled by lawyers ever ready to make a buck on the slightest excuse of liablility the better. Sadly I doubt it will be in my lifetime.

Met Office are publishing charts indicating concentration levels. Not entirely sure what the 'Standard concentration threshold' is but here you go....

Met Office: Icelandic volcano - Ash concentration charts

How else do you expect it to work?

I am utterly confused. Either it is safe or unsafe and there is a (not necessarily constant) boundary between the two.

I agree with the somewhat wiser posters on this thread that make the point about *some* in the piloting profession getting all upset when their judgement is questioned, yet think they know more than experts in other professions. Disappointing and unacceptable. "Your safety is our first priority (except with it's not convenient)" it would seem.

volcanoes
 

Just a thought, - in South America there are eruptions in the Andes all the time? How is it handled there?