I don’t think anyone doubted prop planes would work - of course they’ll work, just as the jet engines work, the question is whether or not there’s enough ash to damage them, and if so, how long until the damage stops them.
That said - I can certainly see an uptick in prop plane traffic if the airlines aren’t running.
Piston engines shouldn’t be as badly affected, since they run a whole lot cooler than turbines, and can’t get the ash to re-melt to form igneous rock formations in internal cooling air passages. There’s still the problem of erosion of air passages from abrasive particles, but that’s a gradual thing.
I’m a little surprised not to see more flights relocated to Madrid and Lisbon, with added train service to the rest of Europe. Maybe if this gets credibly forecast to last more than a few more days?
I think with piston engines the most likely problem is the air filter clogging to the point the engine is choked for oxygen and stops running, but I’m not certain. I don’t have any experience with volcanic ash and flying, as my strategy has been to stay the hell away from hazards like clouds of ash. In any case, it’s still not good for piston engines, even if for different reasonsl
The lower airspace is fine. None of the planes had any problems, and turbine helicopters are flying as well. There’s not enough ash there to do any damage.
The problem is that through ticketing between rail networks is not all that common or easy, it takes a long time, there are not that many through trains, and it’s not easy to adjust rail schedules in a hurry. Plus historically the vast majority of demand has been met by air travel, and as a result all useable capacity is now booked out.
E.g. there is apparently one direct train from Madrid to Paris each day - it leaves at 7pm and arrives at 8.27 the next morning. Ouch.
Plus, with some truly spectacular timing, there has been a national rail strike in France over the last couple of weeks. This has kept the largest high-speed rail network in Europe (and a key connector between Belgium/Germany/Spain/Italy) out of action so far.
But certainly, if this keeps up then I can imagine rganisations like Railteamgetting a lot more traffic, and a lot more long-distance trains being routed across borders.
What’s with military aircraft being allowed to fly? Is it just that the pilot is more expendible, more talented, or is there a difference in the aircraft?
Military patrols are absolutely necessary whereas commercial flights aren’t. Further, it’s not the pilot that’s expendable, but the plane itself. Here’s images from the inside of a Finnish F/18 engine ravaged by the ash. Those surfaces should be smooth, the engine will need to be completely replaced.
The Finnish aircraft were damaged before the restrictions. From the link above:
Yeah, integrated ticketing for business travel even where it makes obvious sense potential sense, e.g. TGV to normal line connections off of the London-Brussels-Paris corridor is not the easiest thing to do in the world nor do most travel websites link into the rail ticketing. I have the impression rail ticketing is maybe 20 years behind air in terms of realising technological potential.
Yup, it is a somewhat aged sleeper, I have taken it actually, for a combined business - pleasure trip (from Malaga to Paris and back actually). Pain in the ass on several levels. Among which the TGV line from Malaga does not directly link up with the Northern bound trains (quite the oversight if you ask me) so you have to take taxi or subway across the whole bloody city to the northern station from Atocha… real pain that.
First, note that the classic rail lines in Spain and France use different gages so that train has to go through a re-gaging at the border. That adds some significant time (although one is fast asleep by then). There is also a similar set-up for Barcelona to France (Marseille as memory serves, then on to Paris is possible).
Second, the TGV lines that are planned - although sharing common gage - are not yet complete. The Barcelona - France line, which would link up Madrid to the southern end of the French network is set as memory serves for 2012.
Nevertheless, the ticketing system on what exists is to say the least non-obvious.
But perhaps this little crisis will give an impetus to that, it is sorely needed to really get all the possible out of the existing rail network as I know from experience some people fly for the ease of self-scheduling.
Viva la France, damned strike-prone frogs.
Necessity.
Right, but note that the Finns indicate they would continue to fly absolutely required missions.
I don’t know how high commercial airlines fly, but if they can’t fly under it, maybe they can fly over it?
Obvious issues here are knowing how high is safe, the climb to altitude, and the descent to a landing. There’s also the point that certain problems (e.g. loss of cabin pressure) require an airliner to descend - not attractive when ash below may not permit safe flight.
It seems clear that a big part of the problem is poor ability to measure just where the ash is and its concentration, combined with a lack of knowledge about what is the threshold for problems significant enough to avoid flying. Until these things can be determined (and they don’t look especially easy to figure out) the natural reaction is to err on the safe side - the cost of which grows more painful by the day.