New Evidence suggests there was no ash cloud over Europe!

If anyone is wondering why the fatcats would be bothered taking advantage of this kind of situation (or even creating it in the first place), the DailyMail has a follow up story so that we know how convenient the crisis was for the tptb:

Air fares to soar as passengers shoulder the financial burden of the volcanic ash cloud upheaval

Air passengers already hit by cancelled flights and postponed holidays in the wake of the volcanic ash cloud could be on the receiving end of further misery in the next few months – as airlines hike prices to cope with the financial burden of the last two weeks’ upheaval.

A report released this week says that the six-day shutdown of European air space as the Eyjafjallajokull volcano erupted in Iceland cost the air industry £1.3billion.

Figures revealed by the e-commerce website Kelkoo estimate that air fares are likely to rise by 5.2 per cent this year as airlines attempt to claw back losses caused by the enforced grounding of services across much of the continent.

Worse may be to follow in 2011, with ticket prices set to soar a further 11.5 per cent.

Such a jump would add £62 to the average cost of an economy class flight from London to New York, £26 to a ticket to Spain and £35 to an air journey to Greece.

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...

Nevermind the "Single Sky" project mentioned by one of you. That's yet another advantageous outcome of this volcanic ash crisis.

It doesn't matter if the ash actually was in the sky or not, or that you found it on your lawn, the main point is that we are now being bombarded with changes to the airline industry.

This is BS! My car was covered in the stuff!

Originally posted by MightyAl
Nevermind the "Single Sky" project mentioned by one of you. That's yet another advantageous outcome of this volcanic ash crisis.

It doesn't matter if the ash actually was in the sky or not, or that you found it on your lawn, the main point is that we are now being bombarded with changes to the airline industry.

You and I are both correct. You are correct that TPTB are taking advantage of this situation and I dare say they could have actually blown up or stimulated the eruption of the volcano to trigger it so they could run with "Single Sky".

Though it doesnt change the fact that volcanic ash was all over my street/country (of course my car etc) as a fine residue dust type texture. It doesnt change the fact that the aeroplanes would have blown up and people may get lung conditions after this.

The airline industry does care about its profits, I agree. This means that they would not want to risk peoples lives because if they did it would not be $1.2 Billion that they would be out of hand, they would be out of hand billions. People related to those that may have died in an aeroplane due to the volcanic dust would have sued the life out of the airlines for millions, and if thousands of people and a handful of planes crashed, you could imagine the amount of money the airline industry would lose? It would be a greater percentage than what they are dealing with now I could tell you that.

Also the fact that all their planes would crash, and they would have to replace them, they may even have to declare bankruptcy due to being sued and all their assests blown up.

I think grounding the aeroplanes was the right thing to do.

I think the government not handing out masks was the wrong thing to do. Sure they would hand out Swineflu masks for something that was completely ridiculous, but a real threat to the publics lungs and no masks? WTF?

[edit on 27/4/2010 by the_denv]

Why hasn't anyone pointed out this part of the article yet?

These models should have been tested by the Met Office's main research plane, a BAE 146 jet, but it was in a hangar to be repainted and could not be sent up until last Tuesday - the last day of the ban

So the Met Office/VAAC is in posession of a plane with the right equipment onboard to verify and prove the results of their simulation which was, strangely enough, the only data source considered before putting the flightban into action.

Now why would such an institute, responsible for and experienced in ash-related threats, send their only plane to the paintshop when they knew for some months that there was a volcano rumbling in Iceland and their own computer models predicted the ash from that volcano might eventually become a threat for the UK and Europe.

Wouldn't you know, as an institute especially created to predict and ANALYZE ash-related threats, that this plane just might become a very important tool during these days? Why would you send that very important plane in for a repaint right then? I mean paint is not really neccessary for a plane to leave the ground, now what kind of stupid excuse is this?

I guess their next excuse will be that there was a mechanical or electronic failure and they were waiting for some spare parts from china, or something of that kind. Repainting this all important plane during this time just does not seem like a valid justification to me.

Considering the extent of the ash cloud: I can't confirm any unusual dust layer on the cars here in Luxembourg besides the usual pollen and farming dust, neither in the northern nor southern extents of our small country. Yes, I've been doing that "research"

[edit on 27-4-2010 by Dylux]

reply to post by Dylux


No-one knew that this eruption would take place - and aircraft have to be serviced sometimes.

Besides, the presence of the ash cloud was readily determined by visual, LIDAR and satellite observations and these showed the model predictions to be highly accurate. It was also confirmed by the numerous cases of ash being found in aircraft engines.

Given that the safe ash limit for aircraft was zero then there was no requirement to determine how thick the cloud was: any ash meant closing the airspace in accordance with ICAO guidelines.

The airline industry were unable to say that their aircraft could safely fly at levels higher than zero because they had deliberately not tested for this eventuality - despite ICAO workshops highlighting the risk.

No-one knew that this eruption would take place

No one? Then why has the volcano already been mentioned in mainstream media back in february/march followed by an unanimous "might soon erupt"?

and aircraft have to be serviced sometimes

I don't know if besides fixed servicing intervals planes also have fixed repainting intervals but that action seems if not negligible at least delayable to me. You just don't own a very specialized plane and send that one to the garage at exactly that time it was for once really needed. Whatever the reason might be, in my opinion this is nothing but a well paid and at the same time extremely cheap excuse.

[edit on 27-4-2010 by Dylux]

reply to post by the_denv


I also think by keeping the flight ticket prices high, they will end up getting a lot more back than they lost. What's a couple of billion in losses when you will get a more than a few billion back?

I still believe that the volcano happened naturally, but that the TPTB always has the genius to take advantage of such a situation as if they already planned it earlier in the following fashion:

"Oh it looks like a volcano in Iceland is going to erupt soon, and it will affect Europe"

"Oh, well, in that case, we can just wait until then to push the "Single Sky" strategy, since no one seems to be supporting it now."

"Oh, and the best part is that we can hike the prices up, and no one will protest. Finally we have an excuse to charge higher prices without any complaints!"

"Brilliant!"

[edit on 27-4-2010 by MightyAl]

reply to post by Dylux


So here you can see how the TPTB can easily take advantage of nature. They knew it was going to happen, and when it did happen, they knew they could implement their own strategy in taking advantage of mother nature.

They must have been knocking glasses of champagne when they found out that mother nature will help them push their agenda.

I was also very interested in that section of the article. How can a bloody useless unnecessary repainting job stop the plane at such a critical time? It's ridiculous, unless it was planned that way.

could it be they were testing an ultra stealth plane ie a totally invisible/cloaked one?

reply to post by MightyAl


I hope they do raise the ticket prices..i hope they raise them by 100% or more.

That way, most of the people who would normally fly to Continental Europe, will take the chunnel, and or ferries and people who need to go transatlantic will either have to wait, or go by boat, or use technology and teleconference.

Hopefully, it will put the thieving, polluting airlines out of business..TPTB tell us all to cut down our energy use..plug in energy saver bulbs..flush less often, buy smaller cars...yet these gits in the airlines pollute more and use more fuel than anyone else!

I'm glad they lost money, i hope the second Iceland volcano erupts and they are grounded again, for a month or two this time, maybe then the shareholders will get fed up and take their money elsewhere, and most of the airlines will fold.

It would be a breath of fresh air. Despite the ash, i've not seen clearer, and quieter skies in the UK for years. Can't wait for it to be so again.

reply to post by MightyAl


If there's only a single aircraft equipped to carry out the flight and perform the tests, it's really down to a 50/50 chance of it being available.

If it was in for a scheduled service/paint, it may have been booked for a long time waiting it's turn. It may have had all the prep work done, and was partially stripped for the paint job.

Why lose the place in the queue and lose thousands of pounds to confirm what Radar and lidar was already telling us?

If there where a half dozen aircraft and they were all out of action at the same time, i'd agree there was something fishy..but only one? Either it's available or it's not, and on this occasion it wasn't.

Originally posted by stumason
Typical Daily Mail nonsense..

The Ash cloud, for what it was, would not have been visible to the naked eye. But given the huge quantity of air sucked into a jet engine, even a low density cloud could pose a risk.

Just look at the RAF jets grounded with engine damage for proof there was an ash cloud. Norwegian F-16's also were reported to have had engine damage.

Just because you can't see something, doesn't mean it isn't there.

EDIT: Having said that, I still believe the flight ban was an over reaction, but better safe than sorry especially when the science isn't that well understood. You'd all be screaming for blood if they allowed flights to continue and people died as their planes plummetted into the ground.

[edit on 26/4/10 by stumason]

My rebuttal:
Google Mt. St. Helen's Eruption, select images and compare.
IMO after viewing those images, there should have been tons of stuff blocking the view of the sky and more. I recall a reporter who was made famous for his attempt to get out of the area. Not sure if at the time there were satellite pics, but worth a try.

INFO: Live in West Norway, Bergen. From the morning after the eruption the smell of sulfur in the air was so strong i couldn´t breath and just shut every possible ventilation to the appartement.
But there is the thing, we were in the consentrated arera where it was supposed to be most critical. And yes the sun was at least 15 % less strong.

The sulfur smell only lasted some hours.

But the restrictions were to extreme and everyone was talking about a plane from 1982 without telling the damn plane went straight in to the cloud hving the volcano only some miles aways. So that is very different than from London to Lisbon

Originally posted by Dylux

No-one knew that this eruption would take place

No one? Then why has the volcano already been mentioned in mainstream media back in february/march followed by an unanimous "might soon erupt"?

As media reports said on 12th April

Iceand's volcanic eruptions winding down

As others have mentioned before me, the ash was real....but, as far as it being the cause of the flight ban, I highly doubt it.

I base my opinion on the fact that I live less than 2 miles from Prestwick airport and have a free view of the runways from my window.

During the ban, I had no evidence of dust or ash on my black car, nor to my knowledge had anyone else in my area. The planes go back up and hey presto 3 days later we have ash the size of large snow-flakes visible as it falls. These flakes disapear in your hand if you catch them and craete thread like marks on car bodywork.

Meanwhile, in the midst of the 3 day fall there are planes taking off and landing every 5 minutes. No sign of disruption or fear from anyone.

The eruption and ash was real but I have no personal doubts that it was not the casue of the fly ban. It was an excuse whether a planned one or not to clear the airspace of flights.

As an aside I dont understand how the ash being over the UK should be stopping long haul flights yet its not stopping local or european flights.

We are missing something, and its probably staring us in the face.

Respects

Originally posted by captiva
As others have mentioned before me, the ash was real....but, as far as it being the cause of the flight ban, I highly doubt it.

I base my opinion on the fact that I live less than 2 miles from Prestwick airport and have a free view of the runways from my window.

During the ban, I had no evidence of dust or ash on my black car, nor to my knowledge had anyone else in my area. The planes go back up and hey presto 3 days later we have ash the size of large snow-flakes visible as it falls. These flakes disapear in your hand if you catch them and craete thread like marks on car bodywork.

Meanwhile, in the midst of the 3 day fall there are planes taking off and landing every 5 minutes. No sign of disruption or fear from anyone.

The eruption and ash was real but I have no personal doubts that it was not the casue of the fly ban. It was an excuse whether a planned one or not to clear the airspace of flights.

As an aside I dont understand how the ash being over the UK should be stopping long haul flights yet its not stopping local or european flights.

We are missing something, and its probably staring us in the face.

Respects

Funny you mention that, as I caught a couple. I didn't mention that in my posts as I thought it unrelated, but the threadlike pattern was there just the same. Anyway, it has to be obvious that the density of the trail of ash would be impossible to determine accurately without a flying instrument, (maybe a good use for a UAV) at any given point, so there has to be an abitrary danger zone. For the BA Jakarta incident flight, if it wasn't for the persistance of the the flight engineer in trying to restart the engines, it would have ended up in the sea. And it wasn't just a matter of getting the groundspeed to restart the engines, because they did restart one engine, and regained altitude only for it to fail again, because they had reentered the ash zone. Jets do have separators to deal with airborne dirt but they were overloaded in that case. Propeller aircraft have air fliters to trap airborne dirt much like a car, in their case the eventual result would be the same, the filters will clog and the engines would, (if not totally die) lose their power which would not be recoverable. As to the long haul flights, there are plenty now heading West at least.

[edit on 27-4-2010 by smurfy]

*cough* Bull# *cough*

My brother is a helicopter pilot stationed in Germany. They were grounded for roughly 1 week because ash had collected inside the engines and the helicopters weren't working properly.


ATS you slay me. Constantly putting up bogus information.