Iceland volcanic ash alert grounds UK flights

[Avi]

an image from couple days after the event:

_http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap100419.html

 

[Artur]

an image from couple days after the event:

_http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap100419.html

What a beautiful disaster! wow! :(

 

[malikucad]

I just asked, does this canceling flights has any connection with funeral of polish president and his suddenly death. Maybe, there is one big - polish president died, world leaders couldn't be on funeral because of volcanic ash. So, my question is, does his suddenly death has any connection with people who wasn't on funeral? Maybe they are afraid of going there... why???

 

[Niall]

Looks like they changed their mind about ash damaging jet engines:

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/207200-European-airspace-reopened-after-authorities-suddenly-discover-ash-is-not-dangerous-for-jet-engines

aircraft and engine manufacturers changed their advice on commercial jets' ability to withstand contamination from volcanic ash clouds

6 days' lockdown based on what was initially widely reported as a scientific fact of aeronautics. They've sure milked this volcanic eruption for all the stress its worth!

 

[Niall]

Now that the no-fly zone has been lifted we can finally pay the volcanic eruption itself some attention:

Could it be any more cataclysmic?!

 

[Windmill knight]

Looks like they changed their mind about ash damaging jet engines:

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/207200-European-airspace-reopened-after-authorities-suddenly-discover-ash-is-not-dangerous-for-jet-engines

aircraft and engine manufacturers changed their advice on commercial jets' ability to withstand contamination from volcanic ash clouds

6 days' lockdown based on what was initially widely reported as a scientific fact of aeronautics. They've sure milked this volcanic eruption for all the stress its worth!

I love this bit:

He said that information about how aero engines could cope with adverse ash conditions only became available yesterday. Earlier, however, scientists and pilots warned against rushing the resumption of flights.

That's because they didn't ask for my opinion!

All this flight-ban has been so farcical that I'm wondering again if they didn't make a big miscalculation out of desperation... Unless they come up with something else on top of this later, who knows?

 

[Devar]

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/207188-Airspace-lockdown-could-last-weeks-ash-cloud-is-being-measured-by-computer-models

It also describes 20,000 ft as a "high altitude" for jumbo jets on long-haul flights i.e. to beat the "ash cloud" they have to fly above it. Does that sound very low for any jet plane to be cruising at? Vulcan?

20,000 feet is quite low for a cruising altitude, IIRC. 32,000 feet and above (even up to 41000 feet for more modern planes) is more the norm for mid flight longhaul altitudes.

 

[malikucad]

The Force is Strong With Them!

 

[Vulcan59]

It also describes 20,000 ft as a "high altitude" for jumbo jets on long-haul flights i.e. to beat the "ash cloud" they have to fly above it. Does that sound very low for any jet plane to be cruising at? Vulcan?

Cruise altitude for big jets depends on weight. So for example on a long haul flight (more than say ten hours), it's quite common for the aircraft to cruise at 28000ft and then as the aircraft weight reduces, it continues climbing and towards the end of the flight it may be at it's maximum cruise altitude of 41000ft. Very few large commercial aircraft are capable of cruising above 41000ft.

If the aircraft is very light, then it has a range of altitudes to chose from, up to the maximum of 41000ft or higher if it's capable. On short flights, cruise altitude depends on a combination of factors like, aircraft weight, distance and time to destination, winds, etcetera. The figure of 20,000ft cited in the article would be too low for any large wide bodied commercial aircraft in existence today, unless it's a very short flight (30 minutes or less) but certainly it would not be "high altitude".

 

[Heaalih]

It also says these Lufthansa jets are the first to traverse the UK's skies since the lockdown, yet forum member Alphonse saw planes overhead in the UK on Sunday and Monday.

Could those planes be fake ?
Like on this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_vq5rIeyeE&feature=related
It's a plane filmed with a jack-knifed left reactor. And at the end of the film, we can see the plane without the right reactor.
I don't know what to think about that film, but could fit here.

 

[Eboard10]

Sort of lead them to the brink of frustration then pull the plug and reinstate the flying. Pavlov's dogs style.

Yep, I think we can take it to the bank that TMI is being applied here, regardless of the dangers of volcanic ash/dust to jet engines.

With what the C's said about the consortium's designs to shut down air travel, the huge spike in airport and airplane related incidents, as well as the airport security hysteria, I wonder if the volcanic eruption was an opportunity to stimulate a reaction to banning air travel.

Their timeline for this event to occur was 8 months I believe which is still a few months from now. It could be that the volcanos big brother Katla will erupt causing the whole european air space to be closed down, hence most international flights to be suspended.

And guess who might just trigger that into happening!!!

Or perhaps they will keep the Eyjafjallajokull card under the sleeve, so any time they want to shut down flights, they will declare that the volcano just erupted again, or is about to, or the wind changed or whatever, and even though you cannot see any ash, better to be safe than sorry so flights will be suspended for a couple of days.

If they were hoping to shut down air travel entirely for a significant period of time, I think they miscalculated big time. It's actually kind of funny to see the hysteria and contrast it with the growing skepticism from the people. I've overheard a few conversations on the street, and for what I've seen in Facebook, lots of people are quite cynical and annoyed about the ban. The belief that it was 'for our safety' seems to be eroding rather fast. (That's my impression anyway.)

If this was indeed a miscalculation and not a test, then they are indeed making mistakes out of desperation. According to the Cs, their desperation is related to what this group is doing - something which I find hard to believe, but what do I know - so perhaps it is no coincidence that they tried to pull this trick shortly before Laura making a public appearance in the Nexus conference.

Their timeline for this event to occur was 8 months I believe which is still a few months from now. It could be that the volcanos big brother Katla will erupt causing the whole european air space to be closed down, hence most international flights to be suspended.

I think it's safe to count it as a hit for the Cs already; timelines are just approximate. They did say it wouldn't be a total ban all over the planet, and added that it wouldn't last long, so it applies quite accurately. I was quite impressed because I don't remember any time ever that flights were grounded in several countries at once and for so many days. In fact I kept thinking that the prediction couldn't be right - yet here it is! What are the odds??

There is a fairly high possibility that Katla will erupt in the coming weeks or months. Here are some articles I found on the matter:

_http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1267324/Iceland-volcano-eruption-Ash-return-time-warn-scientists.html

There is also the possibility that the activity could spread to the neighbouring Katla volcano. Dr Sue Loughlin of the British Geological Survey said: 'These two volcanoes are right next to each other, and three out of four previous eruptions of Eyjafjallajokull have been associated with eruptions at Katla. 'Katla is a much bigger volcano and has a much larger ice cap. It is thought to have a large magma chamber at a very shallow depth, so it has the potential to be very explosive and release a large amount of ash.'


_http://ww2.elitetele.com/telecom-news/all-eyes-on-katla-volcano-after-eyjafjallajokull-eruption/13901

Katla is another volcano in Iceland. Situated to the north of Vík í Mýrdal and partly covered by the Mýrdalsjökull glacier, Katla’s peak reaches 1,512 metres. Katla last had a major eruption in 1918 and the one word used to describe that has been ‘vicious.’ Since 1999, geologists have been uneasy around the Katla volcano as it showed signs of waking up and historically, every time the Eyjafjallajökull volcano erupts, Katla soon follows. The past two days has seen an increase of 200% in Katla’s activity. This isn’t something to just worry the residents of Iceland, but of the whole world too. Smog, famine, floods and freezing were just some of the things the last Katla eruption caused. Let’s hope that travel disruption is the worst of it!

 

[1984]

_http://ww2.elitetele.com/telecom-news/all-eyes-on-katla-volcano-after-eyjafjallajokull-eruption/13901

Katla is another volcano in Iceland. Situated to the north of Vík í Mýrdal and partly covered by the Mýrdalsjökull glacier, Katla’s peak reaches 1,512 metres. Katla last had a major eruption in 1918 and the one word used to describe that has been ‘vicious.’ Since 1999, geologists have been uneasy around the Katla volcano as it showed signs of waking up and historically, every time the Eyjafjallajökull volcano erupts, Katla soon follows. The past two days has seen an increase of 200% in Katla’s activity. This isn’t something to just worry the residents of Iceland, but of the whole world too. Smog, famine, floods and freezing were just some of the things the last Katla eruption caused. Let’s hope that travel disruption is the worst of it!

Interesting indeed. This article was posted yesterday on SOTT: http://www.sott.net/articles/show/207199-Iceland-s-Eyjafjallaj-kull-volcano-is-nothing-compared-to-Angry-Sister-Katla

 

[PopHistorian]

Interesting stuff. This event cost me a bunch. Siblings and I bought an expensive cruise vacation (their choice) for parents' anniversary. They couldn't get a flight and had to cancel. Fortunately, we bought separate travel insurance (not the cruise-line-provided-conflict-of-interest insurance). But still, because a ship doesn't fly through the air on jet engines, the cruise itself is not canceled. So, we can get only 75% refund, the insurance company is swamped with claims, will be looking for any reason not to pay, and will take months to issue whatever refund we're supposed to get. Urgh.

 

[rylek]

Sort of lead them to the brink of frustration then pull the plug and reinstate the flying. Pavlov's dogs style.

Yep, I think we can take it to the bank that TMI is being applied here, regardless of the dangers of volcanic ash/dust to jet engines.

With what the C's said about the consortium's designs to shut down air travel, the huge spike in airport and airplane related incidents, as well as the airport security hysteria, I wonder if the volcanic eruption was an opportunity to stimulate a reaction to banning air travel.

FWIW one thought that occurred to me was that this event could be used to further desensitize the population to warnings coming from governments/international bodies etc. and
after all these false scares like avian flu, swine flu, now with the eruption voices being raised that the shutdown was an over-reaction, that down the road the PTB might use
this apathy towards warnings from these untrusted sources to our detriment, maybe something with the climate who knows.

Here's one article downplaying the role of volcanoes in climate disruption:

Volcanic climate change? Not likely, say experts http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8631396.stm

 

[Windmill knight]

This is interesting, as it suggests that they did have plans to have the flight-ban extended for a longer period of time, but perhaps they weren't expecting the opposition from the industry. It also means of course that airlines knew the ban was way out of proportion.

Did BA Brinkmanship Force No-fly U-turn?

BA boss Willie Walsh has attacked the airport jet ban - as suspicions grow his decision to send 26 UK-bound planes into the sky forced the Government's hand.

The no-fly zone over Britain was dramatically lifted after a game of brinkmanship by the British Airways chief executive.

The extent of the turnaround has become clear after the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) revealed the new agreed safe level of ash is 20 times that detected on some test flights at the height of the crisis.

Angry at the shutdown - which has cost the industry around £130m a day - Mr Walsh sent 26 long-haul flights towards UK airports on Tuesday night and demanded they be allowed to land.

After initially being turned away, the planes were eventually permitted to touch down just before 10pm UK time when Nats - which controls Britain's air space - and the CAA relented and lifted the flying restrictions.

Mr Walsh, who went up in a test flight himself because he was so confident it was safe, said: "I don't believe it was necessary to impose a blanket ban on all UK airspace. We could have safely continued operating for a period of time."

British Airways chairman Michael Broughton told Sky's Randall and Boulton Unleashed programme that people should be thanking the airline boss.

"I would honestly say to you that any person who flew today in or out of the UK should say 'thank you Willie' because if he hadn't have gone up and led the aviation approach to this we'd still have a ban on," he said.

"Our assessment before that was that it was safe and this was a demonstration that it was. He was sufficiently confident that he wasn't prepared to send somebody else up."

Other travel companies have also hit out at the Government's handling of the crisis.

TUI Travel - which owns Thomson and First Choice - has called the response "a shambles".

Chief executive Peter Long said the Government "underestimated the consequences" of the total closure.

But the Government has insisted the decision to reopen the skies was based on safety and not pressure from any airlines.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown has defended the lockdown saying the Goverment would "never be forgiven" for putting passengers at risk.

Previously, CAA guidelines advised a 'zero tolerance' approach to volcanic ash - because there was not enough understanding of its effect on aircraft.

The normal concentration of particles in the atmosphere is around 10 micrograms per cubic metre - however, this would not be ash but rather pollen and bacteria.

Test flights at the weekend detected concentrations of around 100 micrograms per cubic metre in parts of the ash cloud.

But the new safe level agreed with aircraft manufacturers is 2000 micrograms per cubic metres - 20 times the levels found on test flights at the weekend.

CAA chief executive Andrew Haines has denied authorities were slow to act.

He told Sky News the ban had ended after extensive talks with plane engine manufacturers and only when it was clear that it was safe to do so.

He said: "We have now had robust advice from all the manufacturers that given the level of contamination there is over most of the UK at the moment, it is safe for planes to fly."

Transport Secretary Lord Adonis said the Government had "engaged in dialogue" with the airlines but "continuous assessments" had been made throughout the lockdown caused by the volcanic ash cloud.

Calling the events of the last six days "unprecedented", he told Sky News: "The scientific community had to better understand the impact of the ash cloud on jet engines.

"From immediately after this crisis started the safety regulators were gathering data on the ash cloud and flying conditions.

"As soon as the advice from the safety regulators came we implemented it. We have to be able to guarantee the safety of the travelling public."

The Government's chief scientific adviser Professor John Beddington has also told Sky News that air travel is now "completely safe".

However, Mr Walsh - whose anger increased as rival European airlines flew over Britain on Tuesday above 20,000ft - said "lessons can be learned" from the handling of the event.

He said: "Safety is always our over-riding priority. We have many years of experience of operating in areas of volcanic activity all around the world.

"On behalf of the tens of thousands of customers stranded around the globe, we are delighted the authorities have paid heed to the arguments we and the industry have put forward."

David Johnston, managing director of Stansted Airport, has said that he expects a "post-mortem" after which lessons would be learned.

He said: "There has been political pressure - I think we need to fully understand what the future rules would be."

The CAA has described the crisis as "a situation without precedent".

In a statement, it added: "The major barrier to resuming flight has been understanding tolerance levels of aircraft to ash.

"Manufacturers have now agreed increased tolerance levels in low ash density areas."

Nats has also insisted it faced no political pressure to ease the restrictions.

A spokesman said: "Where the pressure has come has been to better understand the safety implications."