Volcano Grounds 'Planes

[andygates]

So it's taken, what, less than a week to decide that this is a long-term problem, to do tests which confirm the Met's models of where the ash is, to do test flights and test-rig experiments and historical data crunching, across all manufacturers, and then to get them all to agree on a "safe ash" level and to get that agreed across the EU?

That's great work.

Nothing like a crisis to get things moving.  Necessity the mother of invention, and all that.

[Andrij]

An American view on the situation: Iceland volcano ash cloud: At least Europe has a backup in trains, ferries, buses - Yahoo! News
 

[TimO]

Apparently there's a much bigger volcano next door, underneath a glacier, with a track record of erupting vastly every 100 years or so. It last went up in 1918, apparently...

Katla, first brought up in the thread five pages back.  It erupts something like every 40-80 years. On the three previous occasions (in the last 1100 years) that Eyjafjallajökull has erupted, it has been followed by Katla. Of course that isn't a terribly good statistical population, so I wouldn't be popping down the bookies quite yet.

[Morrisette]

most people purchase "contingency resources" in the form of travel insurance; it's hardly their fault that due to the nature of the grounding this is currently no use to them

Recent events have made me question the point of travel insurance, at least within Europe where you are covered by the EU health scheme thingie. There is so much that isn't covered, terrorism (whatever that is), 'acts of god' (surely an unexpected event is EXACTLY what insurance is for otherwise it would have been an event you knew about which they then would say was a 'material non-disclosure' and wouldn't pay out anyway!).

Obviosuly further afield, and places where medical treatment is very expensive, then it is worth it, but in Europe? I don't think so.

[Regulator]

An interesting article from the Grauniad:

Why airlines resisted setting safe dust level for flights – until now


and another:

Flight ban lifted – and now the recriminations begin

[Mr Larrington]

Conclusion #3: If those who have hired motor-cars to get from Italy or Spain back to Calais were really being charged two grand  for three days and a one-way rental fee, then the car hire firms would appear to be a bunch of revisionist rip-off merchants.  I paid less than half that for three weeks one-way in USAnia last year

Conclusion #4: If it chooses to go off again big time can it wait until September 24th?

[andygates]

Apparently there's a much bigger volcano next door, underneath a glacier, with a track record of erupting vastly every 100 years or so. It last went up in 1918, apparently...

Katla, first brought up in the thread five pages back.  It erupts something like every 40-80 years. On the three previous occasions (in the last 1100 years) that Eyjafjallajökull has erupted, it has been followed by Katla. Of course that isn't a terribly good statistical population, so I wouldn't be popping down the bookies quite yet.

Katla's got a good habit of rumbling and grumbling before she goes boom, and so far, she's quiet.  Still, the Icelandic Prez is right to bring it up, as contingency plans are indicated. 

Having said that, one of the plans would be "work out just what *is* safe to fly through" and we've just done that. 

[Frenchie]

An interesting article from the Grauniad:

Why airlines resisted setting safe dust level for flights – until now

I don't feel the paper properly addresses what it promises... though I like:

However, an aerospace industry source told the Guardian that any attempt to blame aircraft and engine makers was "passing the buck".

[Greenbank]

most people purchase "contingency resources" in the form of travel insurance; it's hardly their fault that due to the nature of the grounding this is currently no use to them

Recent events have made me question the point of travel insurance, at least within Europe where you are covered by the EU health scheme thingie. There is so much that isn't covered, terrorism (whatever that is), 'acts of god' (surely an unexpected event is EXACTLY what insurance is for otherwise it would have been an event you knew about which they then would say was a 'material non-disclosure' and wouldn't pay out anyway!).

Obviosuly further afield, and places where medical treatment is very expensive, then it is worth it, but in Europe? I don't think so.

EU Health Scheme Thingy may not cover non-essential treatment, restorative dental treatment, etc. It won't cover the extra costs of flying you home early/late or with specialist equipment. It may not cover all expenses incurred (ambulances, doctors, medicines, etc). It may not cover you for specific 'risky' activities such as MTBing, skiing, etc.

It won't cover lost luggage, compensation due to airline mistakes (where the airlines expenses are token gestures), stolen money, lost/stolen passports, etc.

Maybe they should introduce 'Act of God' insurance. 50% of the holiday cost should do it...

[eck]

Has anyone seen any reports of the plight of travellers from Abroadland stuck in UK? There has been wall-to-wall coverage of the travails of plucky Brits stuck in forrin parts, but I'm not aware of anything about people who have been stranded here.
There was someone being interviewed on BBC this morning, who tried to mention it, but the interviewer brushed it aside.  
Only asking...

[Manotea]

Still gloriously quiet blue skies in London W4.

[Charlotte]

It's started here.  There were a several of contrails over South Ruislip and RAF Northolt has swung into action again (albeit I've only seen turboprops so far - no jets).

Well, that was nice whilst it lasted.

[Pancho]

Couple of high up aircraft droned their way quietly across the sky this morning.

I'd never even noticed that you could hear them before.

And I'm fairly convinced the dust on my car was volcanic today.

[tom_e]

Recent events have made me question the point of travel insurance, at least within Europe where you are covered by the EU health scheme thingie. There is so much that isn't covered, terrorism (whatever that is), 'acts of god' (surely an unexpected event is EXACTLY what insurance is for ...

No, it isn't (unfortunately). 

Insurance is to take the chances of each of us having an expensive but unlikely problem, and average them all together.  Everybody pays a bit of premium, to cover a larger amount if we should be the unlucky one.  It only works if our problems occur independently.  If something hits lots of people together, the averaging doesn't work.

If you can figure out a financial scheme for insuring against things where everybody gets hit at once, for a tempting price, you may have invented something quite useful.

Bad stuff happens sometimes.  There may not be anyone to blame for it.  We have to deal with it anyway.


(sorry for grumpiness, it just annoys me that there seems to be so much clamour for blame around.  I didn't hear many people campaigning for more research on the effect of volcanic ash on aircraft before this episode)

[Mr Larrington]

Stansted is supposed to be open but I've neither seen nor heard any evidence of hairyplane hactivity yet.

[Yorkshireman]

Just seen (in the past 10 min) a high contrail, heading in the general direction of Manchester. No signs of the big thundering buggers from RAF Waddington (which normally seem to spend a lot of time passing at a low altitude overhead.

[nuttycyclist]

Has anyone seen any reports of the plight of travellers from Abroadland stuck in UK? ...

Saw a few reports on various news slots.  Nothing like the coverage of "our stranded" though.

[clarion]

Well, they'm furrinerz.

[Morrisette]

Deleted due to rant about insurance company bastards. Soz.

[Frenchie]

Good link (from a late 1999 Boeing magazine BTW!)

Aero 09 - Volcanic Ash Avoidance

[andygates]

That's a comprehensive list of "holy crap! flee!" recommendations.

[TimO]

I would hope that airlines have a set of procedures for possible ash ingestion, similar to, but more detailed than what was in that article.  I would really hope that any aircraft currently flying around the area that was closed (and which could be closed again in the event of another eruption) have such a procedure now.

[TimC]

I would hope that airlines have a set of procedures for possible ash ingestion, similar to, but more detailed than what was in that article.  I would really hope that any aircraft currently flying around the area that was closed (and which could be closed again in the event of another eruption) have such a procedure now.

Of course we have procedures for ash encounters. As we have for almost any forseeable event, and quite a few not so foreseeable. And the majority have, at least to some extent, to be committed to the pilot's memory. As for all hazardous situations, we practise ways both to avoid the situation, and to mitigate the hazards if avoidance is not possible.

I repeat what I said earlier, however: volcanic ash has never killed or injured a commercial passenger. There are a great many other hazards we face which have killed, but which have never prompted the kind of hysterical reaction that this bloody volcano has. Even terrorist activity, which over the years has killed several thousand people in or by aeroplanes, hasn't provoked such a reaction. Remember 9/11? We were back in the air four days later even though the threat had been far from removed - and still hasn't been 9 years later. We applied risk management to that problem as we are to this one - and this is a minor issue by comparison.

[andygates]

I see that Ryan Air are busy ensuring that none of their stranded passengers ever, ever, ever use them again.

[TimO]

I didn't really think that procedures didn't exist, but that link to the Boeing Magazine was a bit bizarre, since it has a list of nine procedures written in a fairly mickie mouse fashion.

Why would you bother publishing that, if you're clearly going to have much more detailed and complete recommendations that the operator will base their instructions on?