“This problem is not going away any time soon. The current European-wide system to decide on airspace closures is not working. We welcome the operational refinements made by the Volcanic Ash Advisory Centre (VAAC) in their theoretical model, but we are still basically relying on one-dimensional information to make decisions on a four-dimensional problem. The result is the unnecessary closure of airspace. Safety is always our number one priority. But we must make decisions based on facts, not on uncorroborated theoretical models,†said Giovanni Bisignani, IATA’s DG and CEO.
IATA is calling for a number of things, including more robust data collection and analysis, a change in the decision making process and urgency in addressing the issues.
Bisignani also noted some successful examples to follow: “France has been able to safely keep its airspace open by enhancing the VAAC data with operational expertise to more precisely determine safe fly zones. Today, the UK Civil Aviation, working with the UK NATS (the air navigation service provider), announced another step forward by working with airlines and manufacturers to more accurately define tolerance levels while taking into account special operational procedures. Both are examples for other European governments to follow,†he said.
Data collection and analysis
Bisignani also noted that over 200,000 flights have operated in European airspace identified by the VAAC as having the potential presence of ash. Of these, not one aircraft reported significant ash presence which was verified by post-flight inspections. “We must back the theory with facts gathered by aircraft to test ash concentration. France and the UK are showing that this is possible. If European civil aviation does not have the resources, it should look to borrow the test aircraft from other countries or military sources,†said Bisignani.
Decision-making process
“We have lost confidence in the ability of Europe’s governments to make effective and consistent decisions,†Bisignani said pointing to different countries reaching different conclusions on airspace closures based on the same data.
“Ultimately the industry needs a decision-making process for ash clouds similar to the one used for all other operational disruptions. Every day airlines make decisions whether to fly or not to fly in various weather conditions. Airlines collate the information available and make informed decisions placing safety first and with full access to all the latest weather reporting. Why should volcanic ash be any different?†he said. IATA also pointed to the US, where air authorities have substantial experience with volcanic activity and no-fly zones are demarcated where ash concentration is the highest. For all other areas, it is the responsibility of the airline to decide to fly or not based on the various data sources available. “The US has well-established, safe and effective procedures for tracking the hazards of volcanic ash. In recent years, the industry had no recorded safety incidents from volcanic activity in US airspace. Europe has a lot to learn,†said Bisignani.
Urgency
“Volcanic ash is a new challenge for European aviation. We can understand that systems need to be developed to cope. But what is absolutely inexcusable is the failure of Europe’s governments to act urgently and collectively to provide real leadership in a crisis.
“It is important that we act urgently and globally to better deal with this crisis and to lay a solid foundation for better decision making in future eruptions. Even as Europe stumbles with its fragmented approach, IATA is working with the global community through ICAO and by tapping into the experience of leading regulators like the US FAA to facilitate harmonised solutions,†said Bisignani.
IATA said that to enhance the industry’s long-term ability to address volcanic ash issues, IATA is working with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) which has established a task force to review ash tolerance thresholds with operators and manufacturers.