BBC: New rules will allow planes to fly in areas with double the density of ash than before

[Are_grits_groceries]

Airlines will need the agreement of aircraft and engine manufacturers to fly in the zone for a limited time.

The authority's move was welcomed by airlines, regulators and manufacturers after thousands of passengers were stranded by UK airport closures
<snip>
"The world's top scientists tell us that we must not simply assume the effects of this volcano will be the same as others elsewhere.

"Its proximity to the UK, the length of time it is continuously erupting and the weather patterns are all exceptional features.

"The answer can only come, therefore, from aircraft and engine manufacturers establishing what level of ash their products can safely tolerate."
<snip>
British Airways chief executive Willie Walsh has said blanket bans on flying were "a gross over-reaction to a very minor risk" and called for a "much better and more sensible" approach.

Meanwhile Ryanair chief executive Michael O'Leary said reliance on "outdated, inappropriate and imaginary" computer-generated volcano concentration charts was "ridiculous".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8688517.stm

Now you can ride on a roulette wheel.
If the rules interfere with profit, change the rules. They know what the ash will do. Whether it happens or not is a matter of chance if you fly through it. They are guessing and crossing their fingers. What scientists did they pick to back up their decision? Someone versed in biological processes?

[Hekate]

1. Aw, shit. We're flying to Ireland on May 25.

My hands are breaking out into a cold sweat. :scared:

Hekate

[Karenina]

2. Just until the first plane takes a nosedive.

For the time being the dough's gotta flow. Katla is waiting in the wings. She's doing the earthquake thingy now...

[Xipe Totec]

3. Bump it up! Bump it up!

Got to go faster, time is money!

Now where did we just hear that recently?...

:think:

Oh, yea, I remember now.





















The Deep Water Horizon.

[Paper Roses]

4. Accident waiting to happen. All for the almighty $, €,yen, whatever.

If I was a pilot, I'd make a big stink over this. As a traveler, I'd make my thoughts known.

How many accidents have happened because things were "safe"

Gulf gusher? Sure was fine, until it wasn't.

[MadHound]

5. Glad I'm not heading to Europe anytime soon,

Because this is going to end badly.

And if I do have to go to Europe, well, there's always a boat.

[dipsydoodle]

6. Whether or not to fly

remains the flyers choice.

[no_hypocrisy]

7. I read on DU all it takes is one minute of flying through ash to damage engines.

What kind of warnings will the airlines give passengers to allow them to decide whether they want to assume that risk?

[whyverne]

8. This may go on for years. Parameters have to be tested.

They're not going to fly if there is significant engine damage on every flight. Let's not get too crazy. This involves a lot of jobs.

[Are_grits_groceries]

9. A lot of planes will be flying all the time.

If the amount of ash changes suddenly will they be able to ground all the planes in time? I also doubt that the amount of ash is a constant throughout a flight at this time.

I don't assume it will be hunky dory even now. They have nothing but assurances from people who should have a clue about what will happen. That gets a lot of people in trouble in a lot of situations. They know the ash will damage the engines. They don't know what more of it might do. So let's test it all at one time with lots of planes. I wouldn't want to be on one where the significant engine damage is enough to bring it down.

[newfie11]

10. OK I won't be going to Europe this year n/t

[comtec]

11. As i understand it, it's a fairly simple thing to fix... mid-air

the engines will require more work on the ground, but up in the air, you turn the engine off, count to 10 then turn it back on.
The rapid change in temperature from operating (way hot) to non (freezing cold) chatters the glass sending it on its way.

The other thing is they're talking about flying THROUGH A PLOOM OF ASH!

The amount of ashy buildup during a routine flight is generally nothing to worry about, and if so the fix is easy.

It's not JUST a matter of money.

it's fine for Americans safe on their continent who don't have to GO anywhere, who generally DON'T go anywhere bitch... but over here it's very different.

Honestly some of the posters here sound like spoiled, ignorant hicks, the kind that give us Ex-pats cause to cringe when called American!

There are many reasons why they have to do this. For one, no plane has gone down because of this kind of thing... ever.

they have a fix.

The tech will improve.

We don't have a choice, being the most important one.
The world economy is built upon air travel.

[Are_grits_groceries]

12. I realize that the world economy is built on air travel even

though I am apparently a 'spoiled, ignorant hick.'

I also know that since I am not in the eye of the flying problem, I can't completely understand the magnitude of it. I do try.

The article also does not say that it has to be a plume of ash. It also doesn't mention anything about technical fixes that have been found.

While there has been no crash, this has occurred:
<snip>
During the early 1980s, two Boeing 747s were severely damaged by the ash clouds spewing from Galunggung Volcano on Indonesia's Java island. One of these, a British Airways flight, lost power on all four engines. While the pilots managed to restart the engines at a lower altitude, the resulting glide still ranks as one of the longest ever performed by an aircraft not specifically designed as a glider.

Another 747 encountered similar problems while flying through the ash clouds over Mt. Redbout, near Anchorage in Alaska. And at least 10 Jumbo jets and 10 DC-10s suffered multiple engine failures in 1991 from ash from Mt. Pinatubo in the Philippines.
<snip>
Other problems besides engines failing can also occur:
The ash can block the pitot tubes and other sensors that supply vital information on speed and outside air pressure. It also can clog air filters, such as the ones through which air flows to the passenger cabin.
<snip>
http://news.discovery.com/tech/why-volcanic-ash-threatens-air-travel.html

I hope all air travel is resumed and nothing occurs.
Until now, volcanic eruptions have mainly occurred out of areas with major air travel. This entire situation is unprecedented and it is not static. E-Kull keeps throwing more ash into the air.

[comtec]

13. I should have been more clear, I wasn't referring to the OP

I think your post is spot on!
I sincerely apologize if you were offended (ok I apologize anyway, it was a kind of dick-ish thing to say), you are NOT my target (I rather like your posts in general ^_^;)

The two most important things about that story (and it's been quoted here a LOT!) is that they flew directly THROUGH the ploom (we have better tech so planes can avoid such things now a days... hopefully.
and two... they came out of it ok.

And yeah... it's... it's a major thing.

My company I work for has been hit very hard because we're an American company and everything comes from the states (California in fact and china) and this has caused untold delays and problems.

I agree, we need better alternatives of travel. But even speed boats can't cross the ocean even close to the amount of time that a plane takes, and there is only one Chunnel. Farys are possible (and common) but it all takes additional time, and there jsut aren't enough for the massive amount of traffic that fly every day.

Literally the airports were closed again Monday here in the Netherlands for 8 hours.

There are airports in the UK that are still closed from the recent new ploom.

It's bad here, very very bad.

[Are_grits_groceries]

14. I get all my exercise by

jumping to conclusions.:hi:

[comtec]

15. Yeah me too

We should work out together XD

[ThomWV]

16. What rubbish ...

Yeah, europe is different. Tell me, is there anywhere in Europe that could not be reached by land travel or a very short boat ride? Is there no communications system in europe, or must every european communicate face to face?