FROM THE NY TIMES, SATURDAY,    4.17

At least one major airline, Lufthansa, expressed frustration at what it suggested was excessive caution by the German authorities, who kept every German airport closed to air traffic for a second day. Amalie Schwierholz, a Lufthansa spokeswoman in Frankfurt, said the company had flown a large jet from Munich to Frankfurt on Saturday without passengers but without incident, although at a lower altitude than normal.

 But German officials defended their decision. “What’s more important, the safety of passengers or business?, asked Helmut Malewski, a meteorologist at the German Weather Service. “No one knows how to deal with this situation. We’re erring on the side of safety”

Here’s one question no one seems to be raising about the volcanic ash over Europe: is it possible that we are seeing a vast overreaction? Could it be that extrapolations have been made from past events which don’t apply here?

At base, this question turns on a couple of issues: how dense does the volcanic ash have to be to risk the possibility that jet aircraft might lose power in their engines? If we don’t know that answer to that question, we don’t know whether what is being done in Europe is appropriate. Second, is it possible to fly up through the ash and then operate safely at higher altitudes? For example, could an aircraft take off from Paris, climb through rather scattered ash and then fly above it on its way to the US? How about flying low until the aircraft leaves the ash zone?

We can be all but certain that these questions are being pressed hard behind closed doors this weekend. The European authorities probably don’t want any hint out that they might not be right, because that would fuel anger on the part of the thousands of people who are stranded at airports. They will, in European tradition, maintain the public face that they are right, up to the very moment they decide something else can be done.

     How do we know the density of the ash clouds anyway? As the ash disperses over a wider and wider area, it would be natural that the ash would become less dense in the air, even if it is being continually fed from the source in Iceland. We have seen in our own country a great tendency to overreact to terrorist scares and reports of possible shootings on campuses. Once one “authority” closes something off, others believe they have to follow or risk being            called irresponsible. If one airport is open while others are closed, then that airport’s management, or air traffic control, would be blamed for any negative event. Yet, it can’t be long ahead before the questions are turned on the airports and governments as to whether this is all necessary.

PROP AIRCRAFT

Let’s not forget that there are many thousands of aircraft around the world which are not powered by jet engines. While some have said they believe that props would “not fare much better” than jets, how about equipping props with special air filters? Surely, ti would cut down on the amount of power available and flight characteristics would have to be re-calibrated accordingly, but this is another possibility that will have to be considered in the days ahead, especially if it looks like this event might continue for months.

We might be in for a flashback to the old days when there were no jets hoping to and from Europe. 12 to 16 hour flights, with one or two stops along the way, were not uncommon. Well, at least that would do away with jet lag, wouldn’t it?

As usual, this story is not the same as the one being peddled on television newscasts and newspapers. There is more there. While the loss of jet air travel could be a major economic blow, we all could learn something about our dependance on one form of travel over all others. At least the Europeans, unlike us, have trains to fall back on.

Doug Terry, 4.17.10