So was the flying ban the right thing to do?

[Chris P]

Kata

Turbulence can be easily picked up on radar and so can be avoided, during this eruption because of the type of Glass and Rock particles make it difficult to pick them up on Radar.

I don't think saying no-one ever crashed because of Volcanic ash is a good enough reason to risk it happening.

When planes fly around Volcanoes it's usually when they haven't erupted and they never get to close. After an eruption the ash cloud is much different and munch denser, increasing the risk.

[peterb]

<---snip Far more relevant are how airline engines are afected; and, as shown by the test flights and experience elsewhere, they are fine. I have pointed this out at least once in this thread, as well...

Yes - the test flights have now shown that - and as I pointed out earlier 20/20 hindsight is not uncommon. And as the aerospace industry IS safety conscious, I don't think it unreasonable to take some (relatively short) time to analyse the data gathered and show that it agrees with data gathered under different conditions (where the debris may have different properties because of the geographical location or the circumstances of its production).

[Kata]

Kata

Turbulence can be easily picked up on radar and so can be avoided, during this eruption because of the type of Glass and Rock particles make it difficult to pick them up on Radar.

Uh...no, "turbulence" cannot be detected on a radar. The only related thing that can be picked up from radar is suspended water droplets of raindrop size or larger; these are often associated with turbulence due to the updraughts supporting them, but extreme turbulence can be encountered in many other situations...

After an eruption the ash cloud is much different and munch denser, increasing the risk.

Only if you fly through the concentrated cloud. Downwind by 1000 miles, the concentration is so small as to be almost undetectable.

[Chris P]

But they say the problem is you couldn't detect this particular ash cloud by Radar because of the particular particles produced, so how could Air Traffic control be confident that planes are not going to fly into a undetectable cloud that is constantly shifting.

[Kata]

By doing exactly what they have done; using the model to predict ash location, and setting a sensible threshold concentration. However, they had access to all the required information to do this from the start (from, for example, foreign bodies like the FAA), and merely dragged their feet.

The re-instatement of flying is nothing to do with the location of the ash cloud, just a result of the setting of some sensible limits at last...

[santa claus]

By doing exactly what they have done; using the model to predict ash location, and setting a sensible threshold concentration. However, they had access to all the required information to do this from the start (from, for example, foreign bodies like the FAA), and merely dragged their feet.

The re-instatement of flying is nothing to do with the location of the ash cloud, just a result of the setting of some sensible limits at last...

So over 25 Countries dragged their feet when, according to you, there was no need. You should have done them all a favour by flying your kite over Europe trailing one of those banner things saying "see, I told you it was safe" .

[Kata]

You should have done them all a favour by flying your kite over Europe trailing one of those banner things saying "see, I told you it was safe" .