It seems to me that there are people out there forgetting that there are passengers and crews lives at risk here. Not perhaps today or tomorrow but we just dont know the longterm effects of this stuff on engines. Anyone fancy being 180 mins away from the nearest diversion with the hot sections in both engines melting? I'm not an engineer or pilot but have seen what glass beads and sand can to to hot sections and it isn't pretty. Shoot me down if you like but the it seems to me there is to much guess work going on here. The other problems the airlines have is just how much of any damage to engines if it did happen would be covered by insurance. Big crash yes. knackered engine probably not. Big bills they can hardly afford at this point.

Right. My small rant over.

Ryanair, Europe's largest low-cost carrier, has cancelled all flights to and from northern Europe until at least mid-Wednesday because of the ash cloud.
The airline's CEO, Michael O'Leary, has said he is "nervous" about the airlines who are seeking compensation because of the volcano. He also said that passengers seeking expenses in such extraordinary circumstances is "ludicrous."

BBC News - Ryanair boss Michael O'Leary says expenses "not fair"

Removed because of an almost identical post just prior to this (Ref NASA DC8)

So who is ultimately responsible for lifting the ban?
 

The airspaces were closed by the ATCOs, so they are the ones to open them. It was an easier decision to close them than the much harder decision to open them. With due respect to the ATCOs, they surely do not have the competencies or authority to lift the ban? Are they experts in weather, engine wear, vulcanism and the myriad of related technical fields of expertise? Having said that, I cannot suggest who is competent to make these decisions.

With severe weather, for example, I understand the ATCOs can advise the flight crew but the ultimate safety decision rests with the commander of the flight, not ATCO. Is this event not similar to abnormal weather, in legal terms?

It will be a very brave administrator who decrees the airpsaces open; they will tend to be ultra-cautious, for obvious reasons.

Do you have a source or are you just inventing?

And nobody is trying to figure it out :ugh:

FA10 i do have a source and usually very, very reliable but i can't quantify myself with any documents, so hence the question......only seeking the truth as to if it has occurred or not ??

....
 

I have not seen mention here yet (and apologies if I've missed it) but I understood that over the weekend the Met Office were struggling with the question of how to treat the ash cloud(s) in the Monday onwards forecasts.

According to the Met folks the ICAO recommendation is that ash clouds are assumed to have dissipated 60 hrs after the event that created them.

The Met Office were concerned that this would mean they should start dropping mentioning/reporting ash from Monday onwards.

They felt unsure/unhappy with this as their indications were that the ash cloud would still remain and be extensive. That is if the atmospheric ash represented a danger over the weekend then the same danger would still remain on Monday.

But, if they followed the ICAO met reporting standards then they should simply stop reporting the existence of the ash.

I'm left wondering if the decisions to open airspace is based on actual measurements or a decision on how to interpret the reporting.

Some Facts - no opinions
 

Some FACTS that many here are ignoring:

1) Being a commercial pilot, even a heavy captain with tens of thousands of hours, gives you no special knowledge about the effect of volcanic ash on commercial aircraft and engines.

2) All of the following are telling you the dangers of flying over Europe/UK are unknown:
Aircraft manufacturers
Engine manufacturers
Aerospace engineers
Volcanologists
Engine repair technicians
Metallurgists

3) Geologists and Volcanolgists keep telling this forum there are significant, and lethal, differences between volcanic ash and sand/dust, even the oft mentioned Sahara grit.

4) Geologists and Volcanolgists keep telling this forum there are significant differences between the volcanic ash and ash plume emitted by Icelandic and Italian volcanoes.

5) Geologists and Volcanolgists keep telling this forum that the eruption plume from the Iceland volcano is quite different that those encountered in Indonesian due to the cooling effect of the glaciers.

6) Prior, and recent test flights over the UK have detected significant concentrations of “heavy grit” at various flight levels.

7) The Finnish F-18’s were totally unaware, i.e. no visible indication, of the volcanic ash that damaged their engines.

8) The “unknown airforce” F-16 with ash damaged engine was totally unaware, i.e. no visible indication, of the volcanic ash that damaged their engines.

9) I have found no posting on this forum by any professional or expert with knowledge of the interactions of commercial aircraft/engines and volcanic ash that suggests it is safe to fly in Europe/UK

10) Engine manufactures are telling you to borescope engines after flight into volcanic ash. Engine mechanics are telling you this is an expensive and time consuming process.

11) Volcanic ash related engine damage has repeatedly occurred when commercial flights encountered volcanic ash that was not visible.

And, if I can add to Danny’s comments. This is a professional pilots forum and obviously a prime news item. Discussion and input from all sources and not just professional pilots is more than welcome. However as a busy topical thread it is attracting a great deal of input from those with little to add, or whose comment, question or observation would be better accommodated on another forum where there are also threads on this same subject currently running.

For those contributors who feel the need to post the same endless links to the same webcams, describe the sunset where they live or the dust that has accumulated on their Ford Fiesta, wet themselves with excitement whenever their virtual radar site shows an aircraft may have taken off from an airport, offer their nuclear weapon solutions to the volcanoes existence, or simply keep repeating their own personal mantra over and over again, then the post is likely to be removed.

Again this is a professional pilots forum and that is the target audience. Anybody is welcome to take part if they have something relevant and new to add. However it is not a forum, nor is it a thread for those simply seeking out an audience for otherwise meaningless waffle or irrelevant comment.

Thunder and lightning, very very frightening:
Photographing Iceland’s Fiery Volcano - Lens Blog - NYTimes.com

....actually, just wondering, would it not be worth the UK CAA requesting borescopes of the aircraft that have been flying with regularity at the lower levels for the duration of the ash plume ? would answer the questions and concerns raised quite suitably one would think ?

Stunning photos......

OutsideCAS, that really sounds like a plan!
I have followed this thread (and a german one) for quite a while now, but nobody came up yet with that solution...:ok:

Well, i do have the odd genius moment.....and would certainly be a better overall result platform than a one off flight, could yield far more purposeful results and be included in future for reference.....heaven forbid it should ever rear it's head.

A lot happened this evening here in Holland.
KLM have dispatched 3 flights with passengers this evening and hope to operate more then 50% of their schedule tomorrow.

According to our Minister of Transport they had a conference call with all the EU ministers today and they decided that the closure of all the airspace within the area charted by the VAAC was unreasonable. They will now divide the airspace in 3 categories instead of 2:
No ash.
Some ash, but not in quantities that are deemed to be unsafe.
A lot of ash.

I have not found a new map of the airspace with these 3 zones depicted on it. Nor do I know how they decide what is safe and what is unsafe.

This change in rules is permanent, not some temporary measure.

The notam for EHAA FIR says that IFR flights are now allowed in VMC and UDP conditions only.

Heard this morning that some domestic flights in or around Newfoundland, Canada have been stopped due possibility of ash. Anyone got anymore on this?

Wow I notice now.

And ridiculously, pilots must file pireps after the EACH flight to BOTH [email protected] and [email protected].

How about just forwarding those reports to each other? Pffrt.

Not sure if this has been posted previously NERC press releases
but might shed some light on what D-CALMs been up over the last few days.

New Met Map up
 

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/aviation...1271719538.png

Eurocontrol keeps saying they are basing their new zones on "concentration". This only shows "altitude".
Anyone know of any Met posted Met info that addresses ash concentration?