Slashdot Mirror


Volcano Futures

Now that the volcanic ash cloud is easing off from Europe and airports are re-opening, it's time to look ahead a bit. The first question is, will the Eyjafjallajökull (.OGG) volcano's ash cloud visit the US? According to Discovery News, the answer is: not likely. This article also provides good current answers, as best scientists know, to other questions such as "How long will this volcano keep erupting?" (could be months), and "Will the ash cloud cause cooling in Europe?" (nope). New Scientist looks at the question of whether planes can fly safely through volcanic ash clouds — and concludes there's a lot we don't know. "Ever since a Boeing 747 temporarily lost all four engines in an ash cloud in 1982, the International Civil Aviation Organization has stipulated that skies must be closed as soon as ash concentration rises above zero. The ICAO's International Airways Volcano Watch uses weather forecasting to predict ash cloud movements, and if any projections intersect a flight path, the route is closed. But although it is certain that volcanic ash like that hanging over northern Europe can melt inside a jet engine and block airflow, nobody has the least idea about just how much is too much. After a week of losing millions every day, airlines are starting to ask why we can't do better."

50 of 284 comments (clear)

  1. .OGG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The rest of the planet uses AAC and MP3, insensitive clod!

    Seriously, Vorbis and Theora are not supported by default on either Windows or Mac OS X, so it's really a PITA to use those formats for 99.999% of the users.

    1. Re:.OGG by pegasustonans · · Score: 5, Funny

      Seriously, Vorbis and Theora are not supported by default on either Windows or Mac OS X, so it's really a PITA to use those formats for 99.999% of the users.

      Yes, but Slashdot tends to represent the .001% of the population that knows more about installing different codecs than getting sunshine, interacting with members of the opposite sex and those other boring activities that we don't have time for.

      --
      And all our yesterdays have lighted fools The way to dusty death. --Will
    2. Re:.OGG by sopssa · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's linked from Wikipedia and they only accept Vorbis/Theora.

    3. Re:.OGG by jimthehorsegod · · Score: 2, Funny

      Right, well then I'll take a look. But if you're wrong then I'm going to come over to your house, uninstall your fancy media player and install iTunes, Quicktime, Adobe everything and Java on your computer. So there.

    4. Re:.OGG by fbjon · · Score: 2, Funny

      Quicktime? Isn't that against some anti-proliferation treaty?

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    5. Re:.OGG by siloko · · Score: 2, Funny

      TWO YEARS!! I'm 37 and haven't seen a summer in the UK yet!

  2. Design by blackraven14250 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Maybe we can't do better because the design of a jet engine is to suck in as much air as possible with tiny blades, compress it, then spit it out at an extremely high temperature that happens to remelt ash?

    1. Re:Design by Z00L00K · · Score: 4, Informative

      Notice that the threat is real - the Finnish air force did get engine damage on their F18:s when they were flying through the cloud. Just take a look here: Finnish F-18 engine check reveals effects of volcanic dust

      And we must blame Top Gear for the eruption too.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    2. Re:Design by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yeah, totally. Sand particles are a lot bigger (the volcanic ash particles are around one micron in diameter), so they tend not to occur very far above ground level and are less prone to melting in the engine.

    3. Re:Design by causality · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Maybe we can't do better because the design of a jet engine is to suck in as much air as possible with tiny blades, compress it, then spit it out at an extremely high temperature that happens to remelt ash?

      Is it safe to assume that prop planes are not affected by aerial concentrations of volcanic ash? If so, how difficult would it be for the airliner to rent/lease a fleet of prop planes for the duration of this problem? I realize that no prop plane is going to have the passenger capacity of a jumbo jet and that this is a far less than ideal solution. Still, in the face of losing "millions a day" or in terms of "it's either this option or you're stranded here", does it become better than nothing?

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    4. Re:Design by causality · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That and anyway it is not often that so big ass clouds happen. So what if air travel stops for a day or two every 20 years? Honestly it doesn't justify spending billions to R&D on how to improve the plane designs for it.

      I was wondering if I was the only person who thought this whole incident is not the big deal it's portrayed as. I view this as an inconvenience at best, yet I keep hearing from various media about "dire economic impacts" and such. I don't recall the nautical shipping industry panicking like this over the fact that they can't reasonably send ships through a hurricane, and those happen much more frequently than volcanic eruptions of this magnitude. I get the impression that the rarity of this event that the airliners should be thankful for is also the very reason they are overreacting to it.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    5. Re:Design by txoof · · Score: 5, Informative

      I keep hearing from various media about "dire economic impacts" and such. I don't recall the nautical shipping industry panicking like this over the fact that they can't reasonably send ships through a hurricane, and those happen much more frequently than volcanic eruptions of this magnitude. I get the impression that the rarity of this event that the airliners should be thankful for is also the very reason they are overreacting to it.

      The problem is that we have become dependent on the 'ready today' ability to move people and goods around the world. Sixty years ago there was no FedEX overnight service that you could reliably depend on. The 1950s Tulip sellers in Holland sold their tulips to customers within a few tens of kilometers of their fields. Today, there are huge international shipping operations that depend on being able to ship those same tulips half-way around the world in less than 36 hours. Florists in Kenya are losing an estimated USD $2 million every day sitting on product that is literally rotting before their eyes.

      I'm sure you can find many more examples of industry that is time sensitive and losing out due to this problem. Some examples that come quickly to mind are factories that depend on regular replenishment of components. There is a trend for smaller fabrication houses to stock only enough product to complete a fixed amount of orders. It's more economically reasonable for these small houses to stock only what they need and overnight or 2day more parts as they need them than to stock an indefinite supply. These companies are sitting idle and unable to fulfill contracts. The economic loss that potentially creates is huge. Imagine for a second the cost in lost future contracts, late penalties and loss of sales for a company who's model depends on being able to ship items around the world in less than two days. Now multiply that by all the countries that ship to, from and over europe. That's starting to get expensive.

      Don't forget about all the stranded people that aren't getting their work done either. I'm staying at a hotel in Norway right now and I'm surrounded by oil industry people that are stuck here, trying to get back to the UK, France and the USA. They're trying their best to do their work, but there's only so much you can do from a lappy in the hotel loby. You can bet those folks are costing their companies some serious down time. Not only are they not doing their work, they're costing the company money staying in the expensive hotel, eating expensive food. That adds up over 7 million estimated stranded people.

      Then there's the the airlines that are already hurting due to bad management, expensive fuel and a struggling economy. They have labor contracts they are obliged to fulfill. Just because their employees aren't flying and servicing, they're still entitled to their salaries. Loan and bond payments are still due even when 90% of your aircraft are sitting at an airport taking up space. You can bet every municipality that runs an airport is still expecting the airlines to pay their airport leases and gate fees even though no passengers are flying. Sum all that up and you're WAY in the red for this month.

      Shipping is a slightly different ball game. When you put your stuff on a boat and ship it to Norway from New Orleans (we just did this a few weeks ago), you expect it to arrive at some point in the future. You don't expect it to arrive today, or on 28 April. You expect it to arrive at some point within 6-12 weeks (that's what the shipping company quoted). If you build your business model around that type of speed, you build it very differently. You can bet that a company that relies on shipped goods over airfreight has a much bigger buffer of raw materials and product. When a boat is delayed due to hurricane, crowded port, or whatever, it has an impact, but a much smaller impact. You can bet that a steel mill doesn't rely

      --
      This one's tricky. You have to use imaginary numbers, like eleventeen... --Hobbes
    6. Re:Design by jonwil · · Score: 4, Informative

      Even if prop planes were unaffected, no-one makes a prop plane with more than a hand-full of seats, all larger prop planes are actually turboprops which would likely have the same problems as jets.

    7. Re:Design by The+Master+Control+P · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, perhaps it's time that corporate shipping planners got a reminder that if you do just in time shipping & supply with zero buffer, eventually the supply chain will blink or shut down for a week due to uncontrollable acts of nature and you'll be boned.

      I understand that this doesn't apply to live-shipment items like tulips or medical radioisotopes, but I find it disturbing how much of our economy has been reorganized into something resembling a program that will crash if there's so much as a cache miss in the name of efficiency. Then again, I'm very conservative when it comes to matters of economic robustness - the economy of Vinge's Namqem and the food supply for Asimov's Trantor are my idea of worst-case "how in the name of Christ could anyone anywhere have ever thought this was a good idea?!" scenarios.

    8. Re:Design by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 2, Informative

      It is not only the airlines that are suffering - lots of industries depend on just in time shipping of parts per airfreight. The BMW production lines in Germany are shut down as of today, with 56000 workers on forced vacation. Electronic parts for new cars all get airlifted these days. BMW also can't get gear parts to their US facilities. The overall impact is quite huge indeed.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    9. Re:Design by timbo234 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't recall the nautical shipping industry panicking like this over the fact that they can't reasonably send ships through a hurricane, and those happen much more frequently than volcanic eruptions of this magnitude. I get the impression that the rarity of this event that the airliners should be thankful for is also the very reason they are overreacting to it.

      The difference is that you can see a hurricane. Weather radar, satellite images and such can tell you exactly where the dangerous winds are at any moment so you can simply re-route ships around it. This volcanic ash is not visible, either with conventional radar or visually with great accuracy. Expect this to change in future with more use of the specialised equipment needed to detect it by weather organisations and maybe even in aircraft themselves.

      However for the moment the information needed to route planes around the patches of dangerously dense ash, in real-time for 25,000 flights per day in Europe just isn't there.

      --
      Pre-canned Evolution Links for all those Slashdot holy wars.
    10. Re:Design by txoof · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, perhaps it's time that corporate shipping planners got a reminder that if you do just in time shipping & supply with zero buffer, eventually the supply chain will blink or shut down for a week due to uncontrollable acts of nature and you'll be boned.

      Perhaps this is a good time to start thinking about some of the consequences of a global economy. There are definitely benefits to buying from your neighbor, but doing business locally has it's advantages as well. I'm not versed enough in economics to fully understand the implications of switching to a more localized business model, but this may be a great time to think abou the benefits of buying locally.

      There's certainly a very logical argument for buying things like food locally and that's carbon emissions. Weather you believe that global warming is happening or not, carbon emissions cost money. Period. Burning petroleum, coal, or uranium to bring tasty fish from the north pacific to New York city costs money. Buying oranges grown around the corner from your house costs less money. Due to a wide variety of subsidies, relaxed environmental regulation and a whole host of other factors we don't really see the cost of imported food.

      Locally grown food is probably tastier too, as it hasn't been shipped half-way around the world either. The big change is you have to learn to eat seasonally. It may be unreasonable to expect to find magoes in December in Ohio.

      --
      This one's tricky. You have to use imaginary numbers, like eleventeen... --Hobbes
    11. Re:Design by Dr_Terminus · · Score: 2, Informative

      NASA also has a very thorough and interesting report from their DC8's encounter with a diffuse ash cloud in 2000. Its pretty insidious stuff - building up in the turbine blade cooling channels - stuff that wouldnt even be detected without a major engine inspection like NASA undertook. http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88751main_H-2511.pdf

  3. Re:It's simple: by blackraven14250 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Oh, so now ICAO is going to profit from a study being done? Maybe they're just going to get some sort of assurance that it's safe to have molten obsidian chillin' in the jet engines of airlines, and can use that against them if they end up killing people for the sake of profit.

  4. prophet by poopdeville · · Score: 5, Funny

    I was hoping this was about a new market in futures contracts opening up.

    --
    After all, I am strangely colored.
  5. Volcanoes are Earth's pimples by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You geeks should probably have a clear concept of how volcanoes work. It's like a gigantic pool of molten sebum seething and swelling just under the surface of the earth. When this sebum reaches a vent or finds a weakness in the skin, it erupts pus and bacteria all over. In some areas, these "pimples" are very common. Many can be found on or near the so-called Ring of Fire.

    After erupting, the area is still tender and prone to subsequent eruption, but a treatment of peroxide and salicylic acid can help clear it up and prevent infection.

    As I was saying, just because one volcano calms down on one side of the Earth, another volcano may be getting closer to eruption on the other side (Yellowstone). If you think pimples on your face are bad, wait until you get one on your ass.

    1. Re:Volcanoes are Earth's pimples by Yvan256 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Not a completely bad analogy, but can Slashdot please give us a "Gross, -1" moderation for such cases?

    2. Re:Volcanoes are Earth's pimples by causality · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not a completely bad analogy, but can Slashdot please give us a "Gross, -1" moderation for such cases?

      First we need a "-1, Factually Incorrect" moderation.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  6. Finall I know what that volcano is called. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Anyone else hit Eyjafjallajökull about 15 times?

    1. Re:Finall I know what that volcano is called. by Ihmhi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      To this day, I still think the Icelandic language is an elaborate, centuries-long joke on the rest of us - especially those of us who try to learn it.

  7. Space programs by afidel · · Score: 4, Informative

    Every time people ask why we fund the space agencies, here is your answer. The majority of the data we DO have in this situation is from downlooking satellites from ESA and NASA.The The Deep Space Climate Observatory was mothballed for almost a decade and yet it has sensors on it that could be helping significantly with measuring ash density source. There are several other vehicles that can help significantly with this and other problems that cost many, many times the project cost, but all people see is the big number at the end of each budget, not the benefits.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    1. Re:Space programs by DerekLyons · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Every time people ask why we fund the space agencies, here is your answer. The majority of the data we DO have in this situation is from downlooking satellites from ESA and NASA.

      Were the US satellites NASA or NOAA? (Or somebody else?)
       
      At least in the US, cutting funding for NASA will have less impact than you might think because they aren't sole [non military/intelligence] satellite operator the government has.
       

      The Deep Space Climate Observatory was mothballed for almost a decade and yet it has sensors on it that could be helping significantly with measuring ash density

      Certainly, if by 'help' you mean 'can say yes, there is ash, somewhere', sure. Triana's instruments are fairly low resolution in keeping with its vague and post facto 'science' goals. (This is compounded by it's extremely high orbit - far too high for useful science, excellent for it's original political goals.)

  8. Conversely -- by JRHelgeson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Had they permitted a plane to fly, and it crashed, the outcry of permitting a plane to fly when we knew about the risks posed by volcanic ash...

    But this wasn't even volcanic ash, it was volcanic glass, the effect would be sandblasting the engine while in operation. The safe option was to keep planes on the ground.

    Fly or stay grounded - either way, whiners will whine.

    --
    Good security is based upon reality and common sense. Common sense is a function of having common knowledge.
    1. Re:Conversely -- by JLangbridge · · Score: 3, Informative

      It isn't only about the engines; BA 009 did suffer engine failure over 20 years ago, and they managed to restart all their engines and land, but the incident didn't stop at the engines. On final approach, they also found out that they could hardly see outside. Once they landed (doing an instrument landing), they also found out that all the attack surfaces had been sandblasted; the wings, the tail, but also the windshield. Flying through microscopic particles of stone or glass isn't just a danger for the engines.

      --
      The urgent is done, the impossible is on the way, for miracles expect a small delay.
    2. Re:Conversely -- by jimthehorsegod · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Plus whilst they did restart all four engines, one failed again right afterwards anyway. There seems to be a hint of 'well even that incident turned out alright and there's less ash here now so it'll be fine' but the thing that made the remaining three engines OK whilst affecting number four was basically luck, for want of a better and more scientific term, and there's really no clear reason why whatever affected that fourth engine couldn't, didn't and wouldn't affect the others next time

  9. Testable in wind tunnel? by yokem_55 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is this testable by putting an engine in a wind tunnel, and then testing for damage at various concentrations of ash?

    --
    ...and IN SOVIET RUSSIA, beowulf clusters imagine 1, 2, 3 profit!!!! jokes made out of YOU!!!
    1. Re:Testable in wind tunnel? by afidel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      At $10M per and a significant fraction of that just to do a teardown and evaluation I'm not sure that anyone wants to fund that kind of research. Perhaps the government could do it with surplus engines from retired F-16's or something.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    2. Re:Testable in wind tunnel? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      $10M is nothing when they're losing something like $200M per day.

    3. Re:Testable in wind tunnel? by dakameleon · · Score: 4

      to Airbus or Boeing, the limits of flying through an ash cloud might just be a major selling point.

      Actually, it'd be far more relevant to Rolls Royce, GE Aviation, Pratt & Whitney and the like.

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
  10. I don't know about that offtopic mod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Offtopic like a fox, maybe!

  11. Why can't we do better? Are you fucking kidding? by Chas · · Score: 4, Insightful

    After a week of losing millions every day, airlines are starting to ask why we can't do better.

    Tell you what. Let all the bean counters volunteer to get into a jet and fly back and forth through an ash plume until the engines fail and the jet crashes, killing everyone.

    THEN ask that stupid fucking question again.

    The reason nobody can say is there's no metrics for uptake by a jet and no guarantee that the ash plume is going to be consistent with whatever testbed is set up.

    Honestly, losing millions a day? Do they want to invest a couple billion a year (if not a month) into testing every plausible (and some implausible) ash-to-air-to-engine-intake ratio for every commercial jetliner extant?

    With various air carriers already cutting finances close to the bone, I don't think they really have the money to spend on this kind of research or on remediation methods and practices for overhauling engines on planes after scenarios like this.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  12. Eyjafjallajökull by pegasustonans · · Score: 4, Funny

    As many people in the United States with immigrant ancestors know, the government is going to have to naturalise the volcano's name if the ashes pass Ellis Island.

    Get ready for Mt. Ekull.

    --
    And all our yesterdays have lighted fools The way to dusty death. --Will
  13. 1783 by NicknamesAreStupid · · Score: 4, Informative

    It seems amazing that we have avoided something like the 1783 eruption that lasted for two years and killed over a hundred thousand. Can you imagine air traffic disrupted for years? BTW, the same thing could happen to us from the Aleutians.

    1. Re:1783 by Aceticon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If European airspace was closed for 2 years we might see a return of the era of the luxury cruise liner or even better, of the zepellin (imagine if London to Berlin took 8h but in an airship with the room and conforts of a small cruise ship).

  14. Re:Why can't we do better? Are you fucking kidding by mukund · · Score: 2, Informative

    This ash cloud from the Iceland volcano has caused engine damage. I wonder if airlines are throwing caution away to avoid the daily loss in business.

    --
    Banu
  15. Re:Katla by Duradin · · Score: 2, Funny

    Volcanoes have nothing to do with global warming. It was all the cavemen driving around in the massive dinosaur guzzling SUVs that ended the last ice age. Everyone knows that.

  16. Re:Why can't we do better? Are you fucking kidding by TubeSteak · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Honestly, losing millions a day? Do they want to invest a couple billion a year (if not a month) into testing every plausible (and some implausible) ash-to-air-to-engine-intake ratio for every commercial jetliner extant?

    I think you're confused about who "they" are.
    The airlines have never been in the business of testing anything.
    In this case "they" are the engine mfgs &/or the government.

    Since the MFGs are saying "don't use our engines under these conditions,"
    even if airports weren't shut down, no airline's insurance carrier would cover damage anyways.

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  17. Re:Katla by causality · · Score: 2, Informative

    Global warming and volcanoes are related.

    What's your source for this?

    Google. Try it yourself, sometime. It would take about as much time as the post you wrote to get started.

    --
    It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  18. Re:prop planes by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I believe you're right. However, we have a few thousand people trapped here in LA. Unfortunately, neither European rail nor Amtrak have yet built that tunnel under the Atlantic Ocean.

    Of course, if we build that bridge across the Bering Strait...

  19. Re:Can we cover the volcano with a slab of concret by Brett+Buck · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hmm, it already melted through 100 miles or so of mostly solid rock, so we are going to stop it by putting a few feet or tens of feet skim coat of far weaker material with a lower melting point?

  20. Re:Why can't we do better? Are you fucking kidding by Faizdog · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's not just the airline bean counters who are worried about this. I'm being directly affected. I was in Europe for work, and was supposed to fly back to the US last Sun. I've been stuck here since. I'm quite desperate to get back home and back to my life.

    It may seem cool to be stuck in Europe, but in actuality it's not. It feels semi-prison like in that I'm stuck in a place (albeit a very nice, historical and cultural one) and unable to get home. Things are going on at work, with friends, family and I'm all the way over here spending money like crazy because everything costs more when traveling (hotels, meals, phone calls, hotel internet charges, etc). I'm just lucky because I was traveling for work and can expense. I've met others here who aren't so lucky (one forms a sense of camaraderie with other stranded passengers on meets).

    And it's a lot of other industries and businesses too. The world is incredibly interconnected.

    The main complaint isn't from some bean counters trying to override safety. It's that a blanket ban is just unrealistic and misinformed. There has to be somewhere between NO FLIGHTS and NORMAL. What is it? Are there safe corridors? Are there certain types of planes that can fly? Are there certain elevations? Noone knows, and worse yet, noone is really tracking the ACTUAL ash cloud, it's all just computer models predicting. Let's see where the damned thing actually is.

    Those are some of the complaints the airlines, and now us passengers who've been glued to the news for almost a week, are wondering.

    The fact that so many flights flew ok yesterday indicates that the whole situation wasn't carefully thought through. Look, I'm all for putting safety first. If there is a good chance I'll die flying, I'll agree to be stuck in Europe for another month until it's safe. But, please can we first make sure it really is that dangerous?

    --
    -"Those who fought today will die tommorow."-
  21. Conclusions from googling.. by mattr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    From what I can tell via google,

    - Ash melts at 1100 degrees, below operating temperature of jet engines, and fuses into the engine
    - Windshields can be abraded so badly you cannot see out of them
    - Ash is dry and doesn't show up on radar, so new sensors are needed so pilots can discover it
    - There are no standards for how much ash is allowed or how to test aircraft against it.
    - Possibility that propellor planes and helicopters are safer

    So my conclusions for now are:
    - Need better rules, and government should pay for the experimentation
    - Need better intelligence, so we can be sure a route is safe
    - Need to examine flying propellor planes slowly at very low altitudes below the ash
    - Nobody has thought about ash bothering ground transportation. Does it?
    - Need alternative transportation
        o Trains, buses, boats
        o Slower aircraft.. hovercraft or balloons? (they still have engines though)
        o Need a closed engine design. (chemical or hydrogen powered electric closed engine?)
        o This is a common problem, more needs to be done for global transportation security. I even found a volcanic explosion in Japan yesterday at the ash advisory center, though it is not in the news at all.
    http://ds.data.jma.go.jp/svd/vaac/data/TextData/20100420_SAKU_0403_Text.html

    Links:
    http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/412103-ash-clouds-threaten-air-traffic.html
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/apr/15/volcanic-ash-bad-for-planes
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=2055888944
    http://www.ssd.noaa.gov/VAAC/vaac.html

  22. Re:It's simple: by TheLink · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think that's unfair. It's more like:

    Airlines: We think its safe[1] to fly our planes NOW!
    ICAO: Really? Let's hear from Boeing and Airbus on what levels of ash are safe for their engines. So over to you Airbus and Boeing.
    Boeing: ...
    Airbus: ...
    ICAO: Hello? You guys still there?
    Boeing+Airbus: Uh hold on while we do a few tests...

    There's plenty of evidence why the airlines aren't allowed to make that call :).

    It's the job of the airlines to push the ICAO to let them fly ASAP.
    It's the job of the ICAO to not let them fly till they know it is safe enough.

    From what I've seen, the pilots and engineers don't think it's that safe. Few pilots want to find out if they're as good and lucky as the ones who did some gliding in Indonesian airspace ;).

    [1] They may think that the economic impact to them of nobody flying after X weeks could be greater than one or two plane problems/crashes.

    --
  23. Potential longer-term effects on turbine engines by ridgecritter · · Score: 2, Informative

    Thanks for posting the link to the Finnish F-18 engine photos. The airborne dust is clearly accreting in molten globs on hot section parts. These mixed oxide/silicate blobs may react with hot section materials - not sure what the specific materials are in the F-18 engines, but they're commonly nickel-based superalloys, often with ceramic thermal barrier coatings. I think the volcanic material might form eutectic (lower melting point) compounds with either the thermal barrier coatings or the underlying alloys. This won't cause outright engine failure, but it could easily lead to accelerated blade or combuster erosion, requiring more frequent maintenance. It will also degrade fuel efficiency. Not such a big impact on military flight operations, as they will have little trouble getting extra funding for this unforseeable circumstance, but the airlines will see additional maintenance requirements eat very quickly into their bottom lines. AFAIK, there's not much of a database on turbine engine degradation modes due to long-term flight through sub-micron volcanic dust.

  24. Re:Here's some links by Troed · · Score: 2, Informative

    Gizmodo should really update their article since their source has been forced to recant.

    http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2010/planes-or-volcano/

    (Do note that the graph still doesn't fully reflect their actual text from yesterday's update)