🚀 go-pugleaf

"Geoff Lock" <glock@home> wrote in message 
news:4e02bd57@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> On 23/06/2011 4:28 AM, DonH wrote:
>> "Geoff Lock"<glock@home>  wrote in message
>> news:4e01716a$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>> On 22/06/2011 4:20 AM, DonH wrote:
>
>>>>     If volcanic ash clouds are to become a regular thing, then the 
>>>> airline
>>>> which designs an ash-proof plane will scoop the field.  Ash filters?
>>>> Rocket
>>>> propulsion?
>>>
>>> Plus flying at different heights? Blimps? Catapaults? Flocks of large
>>> African swallows? :)
>>
>> # There was a retired BOAC captain on (the) 7.30 (Report) last night,
>> recalling how his plane flew through an ash cloud over Indonesia, where 
>> all
>> four engines failed.
>
> Saw that same interview.
>
>>     It seems Indonesia has lots of volcanoes, many active, so ash clouds 
>> are
>> common.  Presumably, flights can go above, around, or below - or through, 
>> if
>> not too dense?
>
> If it is light ash, yes, a plane could fly thru.
>
>>     "Man conquers Nature!" or can ignore it, is the assumption of AGW
>> Sceptics and Deniers, yet a little thing, like an ash cloud, grounds the
>> mighty jumbo jet.
>>     Can aeronautical engineers design an ash-proof jumbo?
>
> Probably given the relatively rare occurences of ash clouds which ground 
> planes do you think they would bother?

# It may depend on how polluted our skies become, whether from volcanic ash 
and other natural sources, or man-made.
   The air-intake of a jet engine is its weakness; but this may be avoided 
by indirect intake of air, where a hood enabled air to come from behind, and 
through filters.
   Abrased windows are another problem, but likely more easily solved.
   Yet, as you say, probability determines necessity.
   I think the seaplane was largely discontinued due to the large "flying 
boats" being liable to impact on floating debris (human origin), when 
taking-off or landing.  But that may be only an excuse for scrapping them.