Slashdot Mirror


Iceland Volcano's Ash Grounds European Air Travel

Ch_Omega writes "From the article at CBSNews: 'An ash-spewing volcano in Iceland emptied the skies of aircraft across much of northern Europe on Thursday, grounding planes on a scale unseen since the 9/11 terror attacks. British air space shut down, silencing the trans-Atlantic hub of Heathrow and stranding tens of thousands of passengers around the world. Aviation officials said it was not clear when it would be safe enough to fly again and said it was the first time in living memory that an ash cloud had brought one of the world's most congested airspaces to a standstill.'" The BBC says "Safety group Eurocontrol said the problem could persist for 48 hours," and the Deccan Herald describes some of the effects on the ground in the volcano's home turf: "In Iceland, hundreds of people are fleeing rising floodwaters as the volcano under the glacier Eyjafjallajokull erupted yesterday again, for a second time in less than a month."

57 of 283 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Nothing unusual by cruelworld · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As watching endless episodes of Discovery channel would tell you ash has been responsible for plane crashes in the past. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airways_Flight_9

  2. great name by berashith · · Score: 5, Funny

    My cat can type words like Eyjafjallajokull too.

    1. Re:great name by Kjella · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's not nearly as complicated as it seems, "fjalla" means mountain and "jokull" glacier so a native would read it more like "the glacier of the mountain Eyja" or "Eyja Mountain Glacier". But like the Scandinavian and German language they build one long word out of it.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:great name by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's less of a flamebait and more of an ashbait.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:great name by adavies42 · · Score: 2, Funny

      My cat can type words like Eyjafjallajokull too.

      But can he pronounce it.

      every hairball....

      --
      Media that can be recorded and distributed can be recorded and distributed.
      -kfg
    4. Re:great name by ibwolf · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's not nearly as complicated as it seems, "fjalla" means mountain and "jokull" glacier so a native would read it more like "the glacier of the mountain Eyja" or "Eyja Mountain Glacier". But like the Scandinavian and German language they build one long word out of it.

      It is even simpler than that as Eyja means island (err, since Iceland is spelled Island in Icelandic maybe that isn't a simplification). It is a reference to the nearby Vestmann Islands, that lie just off the coast from where the glacier is.

      So Eyjafjallajökull -> Islands Mountain Glacier.

    5. Re:great name by Shimbo · · Score: 5, Funny

      I blame Mattel for changing the Scrabble rules to allow proper nouns. Within a couple of weeks of them doing it we have a volcano in Eyjafjallajokull, and the Kyrgyz president fleeing the country. Coincidence, I think not.

    6. Re:great name by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually German and Icelandic are in two separate branches of the germanic language family. The indo-european derived proto-germanic split into the northern germanic and the western germanic language groups. Icelandic developed from the northern germanic family via Old Norse, while German belongs to the western germanic languages and is not a derivative of Old Norse, but developed by convergence from a mixture of western germanic languages, which are still present in the form of dialects in today's German.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
  3. Could last a while by mick232 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The last eruption was in 1821 and lasted 2 years... you better get yourself some train tickets if you want to travel in Europe!

    1. Re:Could last a while by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 2, Insightful

      heh, what's less "green", an erupting volcano for a few years or all the airplane pollution in the world for the same time?

      --
      This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
    2. Re:Could last a while by FlyingBishop · · Score: 3, Interesting

      http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/content/questions/question/2008/

      The volcano is roughly 100 times as green if we're talking about CO2 emissions, and 10 times as green if we're talking about SO2. Of course, that's assuming that given

      Pv = the pollution output from this volcano over two years
      Pvt = total pollution output by volcanoes.
      Pe = European airplane pollution
      Pht = total human-sourced pollution

      Pe / Pht == Pv / Pvt

      And there are some gaping flaws in that logic, but the point is volcanoes are fairly inconsequential as drivers of pollution.

  4. Re:Nothing unusual by nemasu · · Score: 3, Informative

    They won't let planes fly near ash clouds as a safety measure. Reduces visibility, can wreck the windshield and probably the worst thing is that ash and jet engines don't get along. The reason it's getting so much attention is that there are many many flight paths that go near Iceland as it provides a shorter path between the two continents.

    --
    I made an app! Shoutium
  5. Re:Nothing unusual by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Informative

    The trouble with ash and aircraft is that, at the high temperatures found in jet engine combustion chambers, ash turns into a delightful material extremely similar to molten glass(you also have the less immediately dramatic; but still annoying, problem of having the ash particles basically sandblasting the surface of the aircraft).

    Best case scenario: some rather expensive repairs, including replacing scratched glass and engine parts(or even entire engines).

    Worst case scenario: Fiery death.

  6. Re:Nothing unusual by malloc · · Score: 3, Informative

    Not crashes, "just" 4-engine failures. All the cases I read about said once altitude was lowered the engines eventually started up again.

    Having all your engines fail isn't minor, but it isn't on the same scale as an actual crash.

    --
    ___________________ I want to be free()!
  7. Re:Nothing unusual by itsdapead · · Score: 4, Informative

    The ash cloud hit my city a few hours ago (Sweden). Other than the airports closed (and I don't understand why), nothing out of ordinary is going on.

    Here in England you wouldn't know anything was happening. The dust is passing over at high altitude, so its only the planes that are affected. I'm sure we'd have had a very nice sunset if it hadn't been cloudy...

    --
    In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
  8. Re:Nothing unusual by master811 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Did you even read the link you posted?, that flight never crashed, it just lost power to all 4 engines for about 15 mins, but they eventually started up again.

  9. Re:The fkn Brits deserve this. by lordholm · · Score: 2, Funny

    I live in the Netherlands, am Scandinavian and side with Iceland on this issue. Please avoid collateral damage on us expats.

    --
    "Civis Europaeus sum!"
  10. Revenge for the Icelandic / English Bank Crisis by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 5, Funny

    England and Iceland have been in a huff ever since a lot of English tax dodgers lost their fortunes in Icelandic banks that went tits up. The British have been threatening Iceland with everything, even including their major satire weapon weapon of mass destruction, "Viz" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viz )

    The Icelandians have responded with volcanic gas.

    Let's hope that this situation doesn't escalate.

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    1. Re:Revenge for the Icelandic / English Bank Crisis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Dear Iceland,

      We said "send CASH".

      Yours sincerely,
      United Kingdom

    2. Re:Revenge for the Icelandic / English Bank Crisis by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 5, Funny

      Quote:

      Dear Iceland,

      We said "send CASH".

      Yours sincerely,
      United Kingdom /Quote

      Dear United Kingdom,

      You should have stopped to consider that there is no letter "C" in the Icelandic alphabet before issuing your demand.

    3. Re:Revenge for the Icelandic / English Bank Crisis by augustw · · Score: 2, Informative

      1) They weren't tax dodgers, just ordinary savers choosing to save with an Icelandic-owned bank. The British government are pissed that they compensated the savers (expecting Iceland to repay them later), and now the Icelandic government won't cough up what they owe the British government.

      2) England is not the same thing as Britain, Britain is not the same thing as England. Exactly like California is not the same thing as the USA, and the USA is not the same thing as California. Not to hard to grasp, is it?

  11. Re:Nothing unusual by Brett+Buck · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They closed the airports because the ash eats up jet engines, and can't easily be detected on radar. It's mostly silica and doesn't have a dielectric constant different enough from air to show up on most aircraft radar. So even if the cloud is thin enough on the ground to take off safely, you are relying on visual indications of the clouds thickening, and your visibility is poor so it's hard to see.

           

  12. Lessons Learn Alaska Style by northland5 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Any pissed off European travelers stuck in the airport reading /. may want to read KLM vs. Mt. Reboubt before hitting the friendly skies.

  13. Re:Nothing unusual by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The ash cloud hit my city a few hours ago (Sweden). Other than the airports closed (and I don't understand why), nothing out of ordinary is going on. Sky a far away is a little bit more yellowish, nothing more. It also doesn't affect breathing as even normal street dust is more dangerous.

    I'm curious as to how you claim that normal street dust is more dangerous. What do you base this on? Volcanic ash is mostly silicates, and based on what happens when you inhale other silicates (Asbestos) I wouldn't be too keen on the substituting volcanic ash for road dust.

    As for why they would close the airports. It is a highly abrasive substance, and is very fouling. Running aircraft through a volcanic cloud is like subjecting it to several years of wear all at once, and not the normal wear that an engineer would design for. You would be running through your engines a very fine abrasive compound and at the same time reducing the performance of your engines as you have displaced some of the air. It can clog your machinery very quickly, especially non-jet engines. (Imagine running a piston engine and adding a highly abrasive and clogging dust to the fuel-air mixture.)

    --
    Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
  14. Damn those sons of Vikings by Harold+Halloway · · Score: 5, Funny

    First they fucked up our fishing, then they fucked up our economy, now they're fucking up our air. I say we INVADE these unpronounceable herring-botherers.

  15. Re:Nothing unusual by Spliffster · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well, I just had a beer with my little brother, a BA Pilot grounded here at our home in switzerland.

    BA Flight 009 was special because it is the first such incident documented in a modern jet airliner. The pilots were pretty clouless when they suddenly saw funny flares through their front windows (cause by ash particles). "Somke" was reported from the cabin and after some time they piloted a very expensive glider plane (all 4 engines failed). The 747 has a glide angle of something about 1:15 which is very good for a heavy airliner. But with failing speed indicators it is quiet a challange to restart engines midair (windmill effect is used, they need to hold a certain speed before they can inject fuel and ignite it again).

    I think these pilots back then did a tremendously good job if one takes into account that they had no fucking clue what was going on (today they have procedures for such situations, my brother showed me his checklist for such cases). And they had a lot of luck. The pilots lost height due to engine failure, decided to do a 180 turn and once the engines restarted (pretty low) they got into the ash cloud again and lost some engines again before they landed with reduced sight (sandpaper effect on the front window) and reduced IFR instrumentation at night.

    Cheers,
    -S

  16. Eurocontrol = Air traffic management by Fjan11 · · Score: 2, Informative

    "Safety group Eurocontrol"... Eurocontrol is the European air traffic management center.

    --
    This sig is just as redundant as the rest of this posting
  17. Re:Nothing unusual by Amouth · · Score: 2, Funny

    except for that whole high alt ash cloud.. that won't block out the stars any, nope

    --
    '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
  18. A tallent for understatment. by LWATCDR · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Having all your engines fail isn't minor, but it isn't on the same scale as an actual crash."

    The amount of shear luck involved not to mention skill on the part of the pilots is just over the top.

    Having a 747 loose all power and not crash is just short of proof of divine intervention.
    Honestly that is probably the worst thing that could happen short of a crash and should be avoided at all costs.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    1. Re:A tallent for understatment. by profplump · · Score: 2, Informative

      You know planes aren't held aloft by their engines, right? I mean, it can be hard to find an appropriate landing surface, and you certainly have less maneuvering capabilities, but a plane at 20,000' has a lot of potential energy, and a very efficient mechanism for converting that energy into stable, controllable flight.

      If the wings fell off and you landed safely*, then I'd be impressed. But engines are no more necessary for safe flight than they are for safe driving -- you're better off with them, but it's hardly a death sentence to lose them.

      *I am aware this has happened, and I am impressed, even if the guy was flying something more akin to a missile than a plane.

    2. Re:A tallent for understatment. by fm6 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oh please. Yes, you can glide a jetliner without engines, but it's not easy. As somebody already pointed out, the rate of descent is pretty nasty. Sometimes, very rarely, they get lucky and make it to a landing strip before they run out of altitude. Most of the time, they're not lucky.

    3. Re:A tallent for understatment. by sphealey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > You know planes aren't held aloft by their engines, right? I mean, it can be hard
      > to find an appropriate landing surface, and you certainly have less maneuvering
      > capabilities, but a plane at 20,000' has a lot of potential energy, and a very
      > efficient mechanism for converting that energy into stable, controllable flight.

      Besides the concept of depending on luck and chance to safely land thousands of passengers instead of the engineering, training, and procedures that ended the routine yearly death toll of passenger flying around 1960, the other minor point is that volcanic ash destroys gas turbine engines. Not "breaks them so they need a bit of maintenance", but destroys them. So now you have hundreds of airplanes with 1000 or so destroyed engines scattered all over northern Europe. And a global capacity for making new engines of a few dozen a month.

      sPh

    4. Re:A tallent for understatment. by Digicaf · · Score: 2, Informative

      To add some numbers to your argument:

      The given glide ratio of a 747 is 15:1. For every one foot you drop, you move forward 15. This is under IDEAL conditions. So, considering that commercial flights occur between 30,000 to 38,000 feet (mid-flight), that means that an unpowered 747 would have 85.2 to 102 miles of forward range before hitting the ground. Now consider the unlikely case that the 747 has an airport or suitable landing area directly in front of them and lined up and some things become obvious.

      Even if you're at maximum altitude when you're 747 loses its propulsion, you.... are.... screwed... 85 to 102 miles is very little range. Add to that the fact that the plane will almost certainly need to turn to present an acceptable landing arrangement, significantly harming the glide ratio during the turn, and you end up with something very close to a nightmare scenario.

    5. Re:A tallent for understatment. by LWATCDR · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Oh yes I am aware of all that. The glide ratio of a 747 in a clean configuration I believe is around 15:1 So at 20,000 feet will glide roughly 60 miles.
      Actually a good bit less because you will need to set up your approach slow down, and drop flaps and gear to land.
      I am not sure what the best glide speed of a 747 but I would guess some where around 300 mph or more.
      So the pilots would have less than 10 minutes to find a safe land spot set up an approach and land.
      So unless the failure was right over an airport or a handy rock hard dry lake bead you are in a world of hurt. An Airbus did do it once. They where at high altitude and had a trained sailplane pilot as the captain who just happened to know of former Air force base and managed to get it on to the run way. It was still technically a crash since the nose wheel failed but no one was hurt.
      So I stand by my statment that it is just about the worst thing that could happen. Yes a massive structural failure of the lifting and or control surfaces are worse but at this point it is a case of splitting hairs.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  19. Re:Nothing unusual by StrategicIrony · · Score: 2, Informative

    Uhm, I think it has more to do with the jetstream, which spreads the ash cloud over Britain.

    It's not intercontinental flights that are shut down. It's ALL air traffic over northwest Europe.

  20. Re:Nothing unusual by Luckyo · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is actually untrue. Actual sand is not a problem for a modern jet engine - if you ever bothered to watch the A380 ads, one of the tests on the engine was when they fed a constant thick stream of fine sand into the intake of a running engine, and it was going just fine. It will certainly stress the engine, but it will keep running just fine for a very long time before sand starts to really wear out the internal mechanics to cause serious damage and shutdown.

    Problem is that hot ash is actually not sand (which would not be able to stay that high in the air), but actual hot ash. As a result, as it goes through the engine, it coats the fuel feeding system and as it's rapidly cooled by compressed cold air pre-ignition, it becomes a glass-like material that blocks the fuel from getting into combustion chamber. This is what is causing the engine flameout. The reason why keeping the engine shut, putting plane into descent and keeping on trying to restart the engine is current modus operandi is because the glass-like substance that ash forms on the inside of the engine becomes very brittle when engine is being cooled by fast air stream going through it. As a result, when temperature drops below certain threshold, the normal vibration caused by drag and turbulence shatters the brittle mass, clearing the nozzles and allowing for fuel feeding to work again.

    This is what happened in the 747 that lost all 4 of it's engines to flameout when flying through volcanic ash in the past. The report should be available to the general public, at least I recall reading it somewhere (though in finnish). In general, ash doesn't really scratch as much as stick to surfaces and solidify into dark glassy mass (which does in fact block the windows as well, meaning pilots would most likely have to land in instruments-only conditions in addition to handling engine flameouts).

  21. iPad to the rescue! by jschen · · Score: 2, Interesting

    According to a CNN article, the prime minister of Norway is stranded as a result of the resulting travel chaos and "running the Norwegian government from the U.S. via his new iPad".

    1. Re:iPad to the rescue! by catman · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Heh - he'll have to turn in his iPad at customs when he gets here- its transmitter is too powerful according to EU regulations, which Norway follows.

      The Crown Prince is stranded in London on his way home from a visit in Qatar, but at least he can make it home via ship from Newcastle to Bergen.

      The worst problem Norway faces is emergency services for the dispersed population in the north of the country. Locally, helicopters provide ambulance services - and what used to be a half-hour helicopter flight might now be several hours by land ambulance - or boat. Health authorities are worried.

      For non-emergency situations, it will now take 2 days or more to get from the south end to the north end of the country, with a normal flight it's less than 3 hours.
      One positive side: maybe politicians will finally realize that they need to stop talking and actually doing something about the appalling state of our railways and some of our roads!

  22. Brown condemns Iceland over terrorist volcanoes by David+Gerard · · Score: 4, Funny

    ALING, Heathrow, Thursday (NTN) — Prime Minister Gordon Brown has condemned Iceland's terrorist attack on British air travel and their refusal to refund tourists' air tickets.

    The UK government used anti-terrorism laws to freeze all British-held assets of Umhverfisráðuneyti, the Icelandic Ministry Against the Environment, after minister Kolbrún Halldórsdóttir threatened to further unleash the power of the Katla volcano in the wake of the devastation to school holidays caused by Eyjafjallajökull.

    Thousands of confused and angry passengers wandered around Britain's becalmed airports today trying in vain to find out how long the disruption caused by the ash cloud might last. "Can't we just, you know, give the planes a try?" said Brenda Busybody, 54 (IQ), of East Cheam. "I wanted to go and rest on holiday, and Monday I'm back to doing nothing in the office. I pay my licence fee!"

    The Prime Minister offered his outrage and sympathy, in lieu of money or anything useful. "This is fundamentally a problem with the Icelandic-registered El-stodth Thyonustah Voweld," said Mr Brown, attempting not to choke on his own tongue. "They have failed the people of Iceland and they have failed the people of Northern Europe! You pay my licence fee! Er, hold on ..."

    Icelandic Prime Minister Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir also offered her sympathies to British travellers. "But, you know, we're still pretty upset about the cod."

    --
    http://rocknerd.co.uk
  23. Re:Aha! by plover · · Score: 2, Funny

    Re: your sig

    If you learn of an Apple-Google-Nintendo merger, do not be troubled. For you are in Eyjafjallajokull, and are already dying of volcanic ash!

    --
    John
  24. Re:Nothing unusual by timgradwell · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Reminds me of the old adage - "Red sky at night... volcanic ash in the atmosphere."

  25. Re:Nothing unusual by atisss · · Score: 3, Informative

    can wreck the windshield and probably the worst thing is that ash and jet engines don't get along.

    I'm not sure what's worse for pilots - broken windshield when they are facing huge blow of wind or no engines.. without engines you can at least sit in the cockpit.

    The reason it's getting so much attention is that there are many many flight paths that go near Iceland as it provides a shorter path between the two continents.

    Actually everything around Baltic sea is currently no-flight zone. You can check out http://www.flightradar24.com/ to see that there's only single plane over northern part of Europe.

  26. Re:Nothing unusual by PlusFiveTroll · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/silicacrystalline/index.html

    OSHA seems that exposure to silica in the crystalline form is bad stuff.

    http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/ash/health/#chronic

    Volcanoes, like the one in Iceland currently erupting release large amounts of the stuff.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellowstone_Caldera#Volcanic_hazards

    Think of the air traffic delay if Yellowstone went off!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huckleberry_Ridge_Tuff

  27. Re:Nothing unusual by c++0xFF · · Score: 2, Informative

    Check out the satellite imagery. The ash plume can easily reach into Europe.

    It dissipates as it goes, but does anybody know the "critical density" before it's a problem?

  28. Re:Nothing unusual by Gordonjcp · · Score: 2, Informative

    broken windshield when they are facing huge blow of wind

    It won't break the windscreen, just sandblast it. Great for bathrooms, not so good for visual approaches.

  29. Re:Nothing unusual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is actually untrue. Actual sand is not a problem for a modern jet engine

    Which isn't what the parent said. Did you just want to wheel out your A380 advert anecdote? :) The parent said hot ash turning into molten glass-like substance is a problem for engines. Which you disagreed with, then repeated!

  30. Re:Nothing unusual by petermgreen · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm looking for maps, but it doesn't seem to look that close...?
    Note: rectangular maps of the world distort distances. Rectangular maps use some variant of a cylindrical projection* so as you approach the pole east-west distances appear larger than they really are.

    Still it is a bloody big ash cloud (note: also because of winds it's neither circular nor centered on the source).

    *The variants differ in how they deal with north/south distances. Mercator's projection (the most common afaict) modifies the north/south distances as well so local shapes are correctly represented. Peters projection modifies north/south distances in the opposite way so it preserves area but distorts local shape even more than a straight cylindrical projection does.

    --
    note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  31. Re:Nothing unusual by Buelldozer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    An automobile's air filter will plug within minutes of being introduced to volcanic ash. Plug to the point of keeping the engine from running.

    This was experienced during the Mt. Saint Helen's eruption in the United States. Stores sold out of pantyhose in very short order because people were using them to filter the ash so it wouldn't plug up the regular air filter.

  32. Re:Eyjafjallajokull by Henriok · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's a compound word: Eyja - Fjalla - Jökull
    It's translated: Island - Mountain - Glacier
    It's pronounced something like: Eh-ee-ah fee-at-law jeh-coot'l

    --

    - Henrik

    - when the Shadows descend -
  33. Re:Nothing unusual by John+Hasler · · Score: 4, Informative

    > An automobile's air filter will plug within minutes of being introduced to
    > volcanic ash.

    Only when there is a great deal of it: enough to impede visibility. The levels we are talking about here might cut the life of your air filter in half. Jet engines are much more sensitive to this sort of dust than internal combustion engines are. They inhale much, much, much more air, it is impossible to filter it, and they run hot enough to melt the silica.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  34. Re:Nothing unusual by QJimbo · · Score: 4, Funny

    As Flight 9 approached Jakarta, the crew found it difficult to see anything through the windscreen, and had to make the approach almost entirely on instruments [...] He then called out how high they should be at each DME step along the final track to the runway, creating a virtual glide slope for them to follow. It was, in Moody's words, "a bit like negotiating one's way up a badger's arse".

    British Airways pilots, always classy.

  35. Katla Volcano by mbone · · Score: 4, Informative

    There is another, larger, volcano nearby called Katla and ...

    "Eyjafjallajokull has blown three times in the past thousand years," Dr McGarvie told The Times, "in 920AD, in 1612 and between 1821 and 1823. Each time it set off Katla." The likelihood of Katla blowing could become clear "in a few weeks or a few months", he said.

    Given this, and given that the last eruption was on and off for 2 years, we could have travel interruptions for a while to come.

  36. The next Iceland volcano is much bigger by symbolset · · Score: 5, Informative

    When this Iceland volcano erupts, nearby Katla always goes up soon after. A major eruption of Katla could give us another "Year without a summer" in the northern hemisphere.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
  37. Map failure by russotto · · Score: 2, Informative

    I noticed a few people up above slightly confused about where Iceland is, based on misleading map projections. But WCBS radio (New York) this morning certainly gets the fail-prize for World Geography; their commentator noted how a volcano erupting "halfway around the world" was canceling flights from New York to London.

    Nice going, guys. All the Londoners stuck in the airport who were listening now have an even worse opinion of American geographical knolwegde.

  38. Re:Nothing unusual by dintech · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Somke" was reported from the cabin

    Ah yes, the icelandic trout. Most modern airliners now have somke detectors for just such problems.

  39. Inconvenience. by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Terror? More like inconvenience.

    This eruption can go on for months, even years. To add insult to injury eruptions in Ejafjallajökull have historically been foreplay for eruptions in Mt. Katla which is a 100 square kilometer caldera that lies under nearby Mýrdalsjökull glacier. That eruption will be orders of magnitude bigger than this one. When Katla blows, and there is a good chance she will do so within the next two or three years or so if history is to be trusted, you can pretty much kiss air-traffic over much of Europe, or North America goodbye. Whose turn it is to not fly for a week or so at a time will depend on the wind direction and trust me, the economic damage of only being able to fly every other week for six months to a year is more than a mere "inconvenience".

    --
    Only to idiots, are orders laws.
    -- Henning von Tresckow