Which thereby proves threemiles wrong when he says that this is the first time the ash is 'clearly visible' to the satellite.:ok:

Not true. They have also normalised the pixel spacing. Something that, when you get as far north as Iceland, has a significant effect upon the data. It'd be interesting to know if the London VAAC normalise in a similar way, or whether they increase accuracy by using other sources of information.

Well now I am confused
 

Well looking at the latest London VAAC charts it looks to me as if this morning GLA and EDI should be closed due ash and later today this is likely to affect MAN, BFS and LPL so I don't understand why the associated flights and airports aren't closed?

Can someone explain to me as a pilot why they're still operating within the red zone?

Desk-pilot

Desk Pilot,

you're probably looking at the wrong charts. It's the black areas on these charts that indicate the no-fly zones:

Met Office: Icelandic volcano - Ash concentration charts

Czech airspace closure?
 

Oversteer,

Looking at these charts, I don't think there's going to be any disruption in Czech airspace today. :ok:

Take care,
Sabenaboy

Why did France not close its Southern Airspace?
 

Spain closed parts of its airspace yesterday, so did Italy in the north today. Of course the ash got there by passing trough Southern France. Ash concentration charts for 0000Z on 09/05/2010 indicated a thick black area over the whole Cote Azure, yet the airspace remained open.

In a Notam, France reminded pilots and operators to check Sigmets/Notam/Ashtam before flight, but passed the bucket to the pilots/operators to decide whether or not it's safe to fly. Spain and Italy determined that it would not be safe under the circumstances.

Do you think it's justified to leave the decision to fly with pilots and operators?

Latest ash concentration charts by VAAC London can be found here: Met Office: Icelandic volcano - Zoom air ash concentration charts

yes ! individual routings and diferent types make a blanket ban inapropriate. I guess the airlines cancelled some flights in the area they judged as affcted

bb

Ash Radar
The ash didnt get to spain from france, it moved in from the atlantic. Thats not to say it didnt end up in france.

It should not be entirely up to the pilots, but since no politician in Europe has the leadership skills and balls required for the job, it is left up to us. Instead of sending up drones, balloons or using other test/sample equipment or boroscope examination results already available from all carriers in Europe, the politicians, as usual, chicken out. They're not even wiling to provide us with any sort of drone/test flight/ laser measurement data.
Without a plethora of committees and subcommittees to hide behind, no fall guy and no way to shift the blame, they are scared sh!tless and need human shields (pilots) outside their offices.
I have never heard of similar situations in other parts of the world, even though volcanoes erupt everywhere, all the time! That said, I have no second thoughts about flying in Zone 2 / low contamiation areas. I am more worried about bird strikes and thunderstorms, since these have brought down far more aircraft than invisible computer generated ash clouds...

Perhaps the French quite rightly have concluded that it is better for the pilot/operator to make the final call, given good accurate indicative information, rather than some government department stating that airspace is closed ufn.
Far more sensible and realistic approach by the French imo.

Make up you mind do - you want 'politicians' (actually the experts are giving the guidance) making the decision or do you want operators to decide themselves?
The science says you can't fly. Whats the point of sending "up drones, balloons or using other test/sample equipment or boroscope examination results already available from all carriers" when it simply confirms the know extent, distribution and effect of VA?

FAAM Flying Programme?
 

Hi

Like others on this thread I question why the UK Gov sold off the C130 "Snoopy" in 2001.

Were it still with us it would be an ideal platform for measuring ash concentrations and could contribute real data in support of predictions.

Today we rely on a partnership programme from Cranfield run by BAE and others using a modified RJ.

What's the RJ doing this weekend? Where is it operating? Can an RJ fly as high or as far as Snoopy? The FAAM programme does not provide much reassurance.

I fear this summer will see Billions wiped off the airline industry at a time when many carriers of all sizes are close to the financial edge.

The European airline industry needs real time real measurements in order to ensure we can keep flying for as long as is safely possible.

The UK contribution of an RJ run by BAE and others looks a bit light weight to me....

Regards Bigpants

You need to read the volcanic ash cloud thread, there are some factual posts in there which may assist your understanding.
Personally I'm very glad that governments are making the decision to close airspace and it's not left up to pilots/commercial pressures on airlines. I believe that governments have a responsibility to their citizens to make decisions for their safety. A plane falling on my head, my wife's, my family or friends is not something I wish to happen. Engine manufacturers have (finally) decided on a 'safe' level of ash ingestion and governments are applying regulations based on the 'unsafe' ash forecast areas.

BD

Stupid and dangerous to those on the ground. In my company 'safety first' isn't just a catchword or soundbite phrase, we live, breathe and practice it.

BD

Money. Costs a lot to run a plane.
This has been an unprecedented event, you have to make a risk assessment to balance the cost of maintaining something 'just in case' and the likelihood of that event occuring.

BD

Vulcano ashes & Pitot probes
 

Hi there. Don't know if this has been mentionned but isn't the accelerated clogging & obstruction of the Pitot tubes by vulcano ashes a potential danger ?
Jeff

FAAM flying programme
 

To reassure Bigpants;

>>>"Were it still with us it would be an ideal platform for measuring ash concentrations and could contribute real data in support of predictions."

The BAe 146-301 G-LUXE has become far more capable than Snoopy, and has recently had extra instrumentation fitted especially for the ash sniffing role. It is contributing real data in support of the science models used to predict the location of the ash.

>>>"Today we rely on a partnership programme from Cranfield run by BAE and others using a modified RJ."

The aircraft is tasked by the science teams involved in the research - Met Office and University, to be pedantic (on pprune, never!) BAE are the aircraft owners, they do not define the science programme.

>>>"The UK contribution of an RJ run by BAE and others looks a bit light weight to me...." := It most certainly is not!!

The aircraft tasking is continously under review so that it is used to best effect and, as you can see from the FAAM website, it is currently devoted to the 'VOLCANO' tasking. There is intense activity 'behind the scenes' to ensure aircraft and instrument availability and to optimise the aircraft operation.

G-LUXE was the prototype 146-100 and was flown then as G-SHHH (whisperjet). The airframe was then modified to become the 146-300 test airframe, now G-LUXE, before the conversion to type 146-301, the unique aircraft you see now. I believe that means it was never an RJ.

Jim

no nice for easyjet today 1050
 

no flight to nice today at 1050 from lgw

From that I assume you refuse to accept the weather forecast models and expect to depend on real, continuous measurements of the cloud. But how many aircraft will that require - hundreds to cover the whole of Europe I'd guess.. would they be more precise in giving hourly updated than remote sensing/forecasting? I doubt it.

However, they may also show that the models vastly underestimate the extent and density of the ash cloud, resulting in far more closure of airspace. I assume you would welcome this, or are you simply asking for the answer you want rather than the truth?

Sorry boys and girls.
Who has the latest info sitting in front of them? The Met office/ATC! Not me in my aircraft.
As for the operator? Well do you really want Willy, MOL and co, deciding if it’s safe or not? Are you MAD!

Small Met Charts
 

Sepp asked: Does anyone else find it frustrating that, given the potential insurance problems, we have either to:
a) trust our luck to rediculously small charts (Met Office*)...

Don't forget that these charts are only forecasts of ash distribution, derived from meteorological models. Their accuracy is no better than the weather forecast.

Larger charts would only give the impression of greater accuracy.

I take it you never fly unless CAVOK :rolleyes:

Apparently Ryanair have canx all ops out of Belfast City for the rest of the day

No, I don't believe BDiONU flies at all. According to his profile he works for NATS, therefore I guess he is trying to justify the initial over-reaction of closing the airspace completely.

In southern Germany this afternoon even Gliders were no longer permitted to fly! :{ I would like to have someone to explain to me, what harm volcanic ash can do to a glider???
:confused:The DFS (German ATC) told me at the phone, the FIR Munich is a "NO FLY ZONE" today. :yuk:

AEST & Windytoo
 

Correct I'm not a pilot and there is no need for European ANSPs to 'justify' closing the airspace. The ICAO guidance was out for 3 years and IATA/Engine Manufacturers were content with the 'zero ash tolerance'. It wasn't until the volcano exploded and the ANSPs closed airspace, exactly in accordance with the guidance, that industry suddenly sat up, took notice and stopped ignoring the situation. Now a 'safe' ash tolerance level has been arrived at with the engine manufacturers and airspace closures made in accordance with it.

BD

Is it just me or the CAA, NATS and the Met Office have done a p**s poor job of making the relevant information ( i.e. where is the no-fly zone) available. Try go to any of the above web sites and use their Search function. Nada. The only reason I know about

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/aviation...1273426758.png

and

Met Office: Icelandic volcano - Ash concentration charts

is because I found it on pprune.

In addition, if you look at the above two, the seem to show pretty different ash distribution. Any idea?

Sigh.

Hello JetII

Someone in the Ryanair thread is saying after inspections at BHD Ryanair, BMI and Easyjet have found traces of ash in the engines.

Intending to fly home from Texas the middle of next week, I'm wondering just where I'm going to find myself in a two engined aircraft, given that my great circle track is being bent out of all recognition. That's of course assuming I'm airborne at all.

Facts Please
 

Hi All

To answer a few of the points what I had hoped for were multiple flights across Europe to substantiate the predictions from the met office and others with hard data.

That frankly is the least that passengers and the airlines had a right to expect from governments who banned flying and shut down airspace.

Nice to hear that the RJ is well equipped but where was it today? How many flying hours? Where did it go? Who else is flying and gathering data?

As it happens, I flew to Belfast and back this afternoon and like last week saw blue skies and nice fluffy fair weather Cu.

Why I am sceptical of the met office and other academic predictions?

Well the met office bar b q summer predictions did not help and neither did the academic cover ups re global warming.

But what makes me most sceptical is personal experience. When flying the GR1 over Iraq c 1993/4 the vis around Dharan was poor and full of desert blown dust.

The RB199 engines were lasting about 300 hrs because of combat take offs and dust. But had we operated the aircraft back in Germany and made daily take offs at combat power we would have worn the engines pretty quickly anyway.

More recently I have spent over a year operating the Airbus to and from Morocco, typically Tangiers, Casa and Marakesh. The vis in the summer is often quite poor and the air contains desert blown sand and dust.

The "Bus" and the CFM engine seemed to have coped.

So is desert blown sand and dust that different from volcanic ash?

Maybe, but at the high temps found in the back end of a gas turbine both form a glassy material that blocks cooling ducts in blades. Not convinced its ok to fly in desert dust and a few km vis but not ok to enter dilute levels of volcanic that are not visible to pilots.

I remain sceptical of todays airspace closures and believe that we are being sold an over reaction from governments and regulators that may well ruin airlines and jobs.

Will HMG bail out UK airlines like it did the banks?

The ICAO guidance was out for 3 years and IATA/Engine Manufacturers were content with the 'zero ash tolerance'. It wasn't until the volcano exploded and the ANSPs closed airspace, exactly in accordance with the guidance, that industry suddenly sat up, took notice and stopped ignoring the situation. Now a 'safe' ash tolerance level has been arrived at with the engine manufacturers and airspace closures made in accordance with it. Where is the over reaction?


BD

Bigpants:
seems you may have missed some important parts of the thread form the beginning. Just in two short sentences:
(1) dessert sand is COMPLETELY different than volcanic ash: material, size, particle shape, melting temp
(2) sand does not usually melt since it has higher melting temp then the engines, volcanic ash unfortunately is melting in engine temps
details are available via search button in this very thread

Originally posted by Loose rivets:
My daughter flew home from Toronto to Glasgow last night and had a good view of the Icelandic volcano from her window seat as they flew North of Iceland and around the ash plume.

The only other route options appear to be well South depending on the extent of the ash cloud over Spain/Portugal.

North of Iceland seems to be the way that most trans-Atlantics are going according to RadarVirtuel.com, which I guess is why there are 4 hour+ delays on this route due to increased demand.

It's kicked off again: http://www.mulakot.net/images/myndavelar/14flugv.jpg

@permafrost_atpl

https://www.cfmu.eurocontrol.int/PUB...pec/index.html

It is all on here. Due to ajax it updates itself.

A good professional European ATPL should have seen this before.

Except that, in the mentioned case, France has not acted in accordance with the 'unsafe' ash forecast areas, while others have. Some operators have cancelled flights into/out of the region, others haven't.

I imagine a lot of pressure on the shoulders of a pilot who informs his operator that he doesn't wish to fly into an area of forecast 'unsafe' ash if the operator has decided to fly there as long as the airspace remains open.

Can any Icelandics comment on the current state of eruptions?

The Norwegian Met Office have a nice animation:

http://api.met.no/weatherapi/volcani...type=image/gif

News from the rock.

The eruption is steady and on going with now sign of letting up and has been steady in the last 3 day. Life here goes on as normal for most part of the country, the only affected area is to the south of the eruption. KEF is closed at the moment, Akureyri is being used for the to/from traffic, and Icelandair is using GLA as a hub.

Live feed both visual and thermal:
Eyjafjallajökull frá Þórólfsfelli
Eyjafjallajökull frá Hvolsvelli
Eyjafjallajökull frá Valahnúk

facts please
 

Bigpants,

>>>"Nice to hear that the RJ is well equipped but where was it today? How many flying hours? Where did it go? Who else is flying and gathering data?"

Tucked up in its hangar at Cranfield. Science and operational considerations have determined that the best flight opportunity for data is tomorrow (Monday). The FAAM website shows flight B528, the crew list and the sortie brief. You can even follow the aircraft track plot in flight from the website.

Continuous sampling flights are an inefficient use of limited aircraft and crew hours. The data from the flights are used to calibrate the computer models which produce the plots you see published. Fixing model calculations with in situ measurements in this way keeps the model under control. Each science flight requires significant preflight instrument preparation (typ 3hrs) and post flight data reduction (typ several hours) so it is impractical to operate with continuous in situ measurements, the model runs every six hours routinely. Occasionally back to back flights are flown but if this is done too frequently there is danger of a backlog of unprocessed data which is no good to anybody in the rapidly developing volcano situation.

Much of the work of the 146 is model validation, particularly for satellite measurements where the aircraft can fly profiles or drop sondes at times of satellite overpasses and so get in situ measurements down to the surface simultaneous with the satellite.

Jim