371 replies to this topic

[LA_PHX]

Some more information from Met.

Quote

Met Office scientists have been working with the Universities of Reading and Hertfordshire to gather comprehensive data about the potential danger to aircraft from the volcanic plume.

The volcanic dust was measured using newly-developed probes that attach to meteorological balloons that can be used for measuring volcanic dust.

The Met Office Chief Forecaster, in conjunction with atmospheric dispersion scientists, used our plume forecast to identify a suitable location for the launch.

The RAF helicopter scrambled at the weekend to transport the scientists and equipment to fly to Scotland at low level under the ash plume had to be grounded, forcing a long journey through the night by road for scientists from Reading University, the Met Office in Exeter and Lincolnshire.

The weather balloon and probe was launched at 9 a.m. on Monday morning and clearly showed a 600 metre-thick layer of dust at a height of 4 km.



The layer was found to contain highly abrasive dust particles, at concentrations of a third of a milligram of dust in each cubic metre. While the amount sounds small, a typical jet engine would ingest some 60 billion of these particles every second.

And airlines are telling us it is completely safe to fly. But can you really blame them when they are losing millions each day?

EDIT: Actually, looking at the latest charts, also courtesy of Met, things appear to be getting better for Europe.  Sorry for such a large image.



*hopes it stops before getting to the United States*

Edited by Alex - MetroAir, 20 April 2010 - 11:48 PM.

[Mr Smooth.]

Airlines make me sick, they are all about money money money.... I just checked Iberia's website, for a one way flight Madrid - London Heathrow, lowest price econemy, 893€. Thats bloody rediculous.

[jetblast787]

Mr Smooth., on Apr 21 2010, 07:54 AM, said:

Airlines make me sick, they are all about money money money.... I just checked Iberia's website, for a one way flight Madrid - London Heathrow, lowest price econemy, 893€. Thats bloody rediculous.

not surprised considering the backlog that has to be cleared

just woke up and was greeted on the radio by an Iberia A346 about to push back and start engines in 2 mins

AZA201 has just took off from LHR

Edited by iranair787, 21 April 2010 - 02:08 AM.

[Tobe-le-Rone]

Mr Smooth., on Apr 21 2010, 08:54 AM, said:

Airlines make me sick, they are all about money money money.... I just checked Iberia's website, for a one way flight Madrid - London Heathrow, lowest price econemy, 893€. Thats bloody rediculous.

It's the first time ever that such a big area is involved. I don't see why airlines don't wait until reliable data is available (e.g. where is the ash, concentrations, what concentrations are tolerable for regular flying) other than money.

They say they want to bring back all the people stuck around the world asap, but when in history did a commercial organisation ever act just for the benefit of others?

But then it's in the arms of the politicians to define clear rules, they seem to give in to the pressure of the airlines, though.

[Captain-Amar]

Believe me fella's, if you where a real pilot you'd be happy they are flying again. KLM is getting back to 75% today. Scientists are also saying this ash cloud is over-hyped. And I agree.

[_NW_]

Captain-Amar, on Apr 21 2010, 07:20 AM, said:

Believe me fella's, if you where a real pilot you'd be happy they are flying again. KLM is getting back to 75% today. Scientists are also saying this ash cloud is over-hyped. And I agree.

I am a real pilot, and I don't care.  I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was up there than up there wishing I was down here.

BTW, scientists generally are not engineers or meteorologists..  and there are plenty of all 3, including "experts" who say it was okay to fly, and those who say that it's still unsafe.  No one really knows, no one can predict the future, and no one wants to be blamed for a plane crash if an airplane flew into ash.

It's a risk...  what's more important..   loosing 200 million pounds a day...   or the loss of human life?  Airlines say it's safe...  national weather guys say no it's not.  My faith is on the weather guys, since they are not worried about loosing money.

[Fate01_VUSAFS]

Captain-Amar, on Apr 21 2010, 08:20 AM, said:

Believe me fella's, if you where a real pilot you'd be happy they are flying again. KLM is getting back to 75% today. Scientists are also saying this ash cloud is over-hyped. And I agree.

And your flying qualifications are what?

Edited by Falcon01, 21 April 2010 - 08:29 AM.

[Captain-Amar]

NWilkinson, on Apr 21 2010, 03:04 PM, said:

Captain-Amar, on Apr 21 2010, 07:20 AM, said:

Believe me fella's, if you where a real pilot you'd be happy they are flying again. KLM is getting back to 75% today. Scientists are also saying this ash cloud is over-hyped. And I agree.

I am a real pilot, and I don't care.  I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was up there than up there wishing I was down here.

BTW, scientists generally are not engineers or meteorologists..  and there are plenty of all 3, including "experts" who say it was okay to fly, and those who say that it's still unsafe.  No one really knows, no one can predict the future, and no one wants to be blamed for a plane crash if an airplane flew into ash.

It's a risk...  what's more important..   loosing 200 million pounds a day...   or the loss of human life?  Airlines say it's safe...  national weather guys say no it's not.  My faith is on the weather guys, since they are not worried about loosing money.

Well the pilots here are very happy to fly again. And the weather dude's here do say its safe and the air is very clean. With the exception of a few small regions. And from my point of view, I need the airlines to recover, because I need a job in 2 years time. And these extra blow's aren't really helpfull. But anyway opinions of US pilots v.s EU pilots, it's always different

edit: I must say, I am speaking from a dutch point of view. So, dutch meteorologists, dutch pilots. Just the stuff that has been said here on the news and such. Maybe we are weird for being happy or something..I don't know.

Falcon01, on Apr 21 2010, 03:29 PM, said:

Captain-Amar, on Apr 21 2010, 08:20 AM, said:

Believe me fella's, if you where a real pilot you'd be happy they are flying again. KLM is getting back to 75% today. Scientists are also saying this ash cloud is over-hyped. And I agree.

And your flying qualifications are what?

Don't need any for my opinion. Although in years 2 time I will have my ATPL (f) and I would rather like the industry to be stronger then it is now, and the closure isn't really helping. And, allot of people here are saying the airspace could have been opened already by saturday/sunday.

Edited by Captain-Amar, 21 April 2010 - 08:39 AM.

[Mr. Schutte]

Tobe, on Apr 21 2010, 06:14 AM, said:

but when in history did a commercial organisation ever act just for the benefit of others?

Hooters Air?  

[jetblast787]

BREAKING NEWS; THIS PICTURE TAKEN 5 MINS AGO AT LHR:

http://www.airliners...0/phpkFCocb.bmp

[jetblast787]

[Max.]

Duke, on Apr 21 2010, 05:19 AM, said:

Max., on Apr 20 2010, 03:04 PM, said:

Duke, on Apr 20 2010, 08:01 PM, said:

Tucker., on Apr 20 2010, 02:49 PM, said:

G-BYGC B744 BA124 (BAH) eta 19.12 div to BRU
G-YMMS B777 BA218/BAW17V (DEN) eta 19.33 div to SNN
G-BNWC B763 BA102 (YYC) eta 19.41 div to CDG
G-VIIG B777 BA194 (IAH) eta 19.47 div to NCE
G-CIVO B744 BA246 (GRU) eta 20.00 div to BCN
G-VIIL B777 BA142 (DEL) eta 20.00 div to BRU
G-ZZZB B777 BA072 (AUH) eta 20.17 div to ATH

So far.

Wow. What a complete mess. Would have been better off staying where they were.

Not that bad for pax though, as long as they can get to a northern European port they cant get back to Britain.

Disagree with you mate, the ferrys and trains are quite booked up really. SNN might not be bad but ATH, BCN, or NCE aren't really convenient at all.

Swim.    

[_NW_]

iranair787, on Apr 21 2010, 11:27 AM, said:

BREAKING NEWS; THIS PICTURE TAKEN 5 MINS AGO AT LHR:

http://www.airliners...0/phpkFCocb.bmp

LOL I see a Virgin Blue 737..  LHR-SYD would be a looooong flight for a 737
I also see a Southwest 737..  LHR-Anywhere WN flies would be a looooong flight for a 737

Oh I also see an Ansett Australia (doesn't exist anymore Q400...   now LHR-SYD in a Dash8 taht's one LOOOONG flight

[E-Jet]

Max., on Apr 21 2010, 04:04 PM, said:

Duke, on Apr 21 2010, 05:19 AM, said:

Max., on Apr 20 2010, 03:04 PM, said:

Duke, on Apr 20 2010, 08:01 PM, said:

Tucker., on Apr 20 2010, 02:49 PM, said:

G-BYGC B744 BA124 (BAH) eta 19.12 div to BRU
G-YMMS B777 BA218/BAW17V (DEN) eta 19.33 div to SNN
G-BNWC B763 BA102 (YYC) eta 19.41 div to CDG
G-VIIG B777 BA194 (IAH) eta 19.47 div to NCE
G-CIVO B744 BA246 (GRU) eta 20.00 div to BCN
G-VIIL B777 BA142 (DEL) eta 20.00 div to BRU
G-ZZZB B777 BA072 (AUH) eta 20.17 div to ATH

So far.

Wow. What a complete mess. Would have been better off staying where they were.

Not that bad for pax though, as long as they can get to a northern European port they cant get back to Britain.

Disagree with you mate, the ferrys and trains are quite booked up really. SNN might not be bad but ATH, BCN, or NCE aren't really convenient at all.

Swim.    

Just give them a life jacket and see how far they can go. If they really wanted to get home then go all the way!

[Cactus]

Mr Smooth., on Apr 21 2010, 02:54 AM, said:

Airlines make me sick, they are all about money money money....

Take a look at the finances of a company such as BP, Shell, or Exxon and then try telling me that airlines are "all about money money money"

Airlines are not exactly charities, but even still they have an awfully hard time making profit. Considering the net effect of these airspace closures are even worse than 9/11, I don't think airlines will fare as well in 2010 as we all hoped. 2000 to present has been littered with many difficult obstacles for operators to overcome, not a very good time to start a new carrier at all.

[Max.]

Was nice seeing those tubes back in the sky today.  

[suddste]

iranair787, on Apr 21 2010, 12:15 PM, said:

Block off that annoying Greenpeace advert!

[THBatMan8]

Mr Smooth., on Apr 21 2010, 02:54 AM, said:

Airlines make me sick, they are all about money money money.... I just checked Iberia's website, for a one way flight Madrid - London Heathrow, lowest price econemy, 893€. Thats bloody rediculous.

Money is what it's all about. If you don't make money then you won't have a company. You can thank inflation for the rising ticket fares.

[Mr Smooth.]

Duke, on Apr 21 2010, 10:01 PM, said:

Mr Smooth., on Apr 21 2010, 02:54 AM, said:

Airlines make me sick, they are all about money money money....

Take a look at the finances of a company such as BP, Shell, or Exxon and then try telling me that airlines are "all about money money money"

Airlines are not exactly charities, but even still they have an awfully hard time making profit. Considering the net effect of these airspace closures are even worse than 9/11, I don't think airlines will fare as well in 2010 as we all hoped. 2000 to present has been littered with many difficult obstacles for operators to overcome, not a very good time to start a new carrier at all.

Bat_Man, on Apr 21 2010, 11:53 PM, said:

Mr Smooth., on Apr 21 2010, 02:54 AM, said:

Airlines make me sick, they are all about money money money.... I just checked Iberia's website, for a one way flight Madrid - London Heathrow, lowest price econemy, 893€. Thats bloody rediculous.

Money is what it's all about. If you don't make money then you won't have a company. You can thank inflation for the rising ticket fares.

I understand this fully and still do, everyone has to make in some way. Airlines havn't done this because they need all that money. They have simple done it because there are 1000s stranded that need to go home, this is the best and fastest way of doing so, so they know people will pay those prices. They are taking advantage of vulnerable people. It makes me sick.

[THBatMan8]

Mr Smooth., on Apr 21 2010, 08:14 PM, said:

I understand this fully and still do, everyone has to make in some way. Airlines havn't done this because they need all that money. They have simple done it because there are 1000s stranded that need to go home, this is the best and fastest way of doing so, so they know people will pay those prices. They are taking advantage of vulnerable people. It makes me sick.

I gotta hit the brakes here. If you pay the higher fare then you cant really complain because there are other alternatives. For the amount of time that the passengers were stranded at the airport, I personally would have used another means to get to where I need to go instead of waiting days and days. Airliners lost alot of money because of this eruption, and they have to make it back somehow. If they don't raise fares then they have to start laying off employees.