As we all saw, a US drone was shot down over Iran earlier today. Also, UA is ending its BOM services for this reason.

I'm just eager to know how the gulf carriers, mainly the ME3 are going to handle this. If Iranian airspace is closed, EK, EY, QR are going to be pretty much grounded.

I really doubt that it will get any tenser than this but if it does the ME3 will just have to route around the area. It is just part of the equation when doing business in that part of the world.

For example, look at how Qatar has to route their aircraft for political reasons.

SierraPacific wrote:

I really doubt that it will get any tenser than this but if it does the ME3 will just have to route around the area. It is just part of the equation when doing business in that part of the world.

For example, look at how Qatar has to route their aircraft for political reasons.

Well if things escalate, then QR will be absolutely ....'ed because they can't fly over Saudi or Emirati airspace. They literally won't be able to go anywhere at all. EK and EY could still bypass it but frequencies, capacities would be drastically reduced for north and westbound flights.

We can only hope that cool heads do prevail but at the end of the day it’s too hard to predict just how things will play out.

Places like DXB, AUH and DOH will all be affected if things escalate, as the safety of air corridors will be difficult to determine. Significant escalation broadens out the risk to a larger area, for which the Persian Gulf will be a main focus.

acavpics wrote:

As we all saw, a US drone was shot down over Iran earlier today.

No such event occurred.

They shot down a drone in international airspace. It wasn't over Iran.

I think Qatar may actually get even with the UAE because Iran has supported Qatar in the blockade so it is unlikely Iran would ban QR aircraft and may actually give them a special exemption knowing how critical it is for them. However Iran considers the UAE an enemy and the drone that was shot down may actually have been from a base in the UAE. It would not surprise me if it at some point Iran threatens to or actually does ban all UAE aircraft as a retaliatory measure. If this happened Qatar will get even as the UAE will now also be blockaded and may actually be worse off than QR as an Iran blockade of the UAE will be much worse for them than a Saudi blockade is for Qatar. QR can bypass the blockade with Iran but the UAE will not have the same ability as many of their routes go through Iran and Saudi airspace is useless for that. There's no easy way around Iran and many more UAE flights (and almost all Gulf flights in general) go through Iranian airspace relative to Qatari flights through Saudi Arabia. Iranian airspace is too difficult to avoid, especially combined with the Pakistan airspace ban.

LTCM wrote:

acavpics wrote:

As we all saw, a US drone was shot down over Iran earlier today.

No such event occurred.

They shot down a drone in international airspace. It wasn't over Iran.

Well, I guess that's even worse. It shows that there is an increased likelihood of armed forces accidentally shooting down airliners since they are willing to shoot things in int'l airspace.

Closed Iranian airspace will be the least of the ME3s' worries if the region gets any more unstable. No one in their right mind will want to transit through their hubs.

sonicruiser wrote:

I think Qatar may actually get even with the UAE because Iran has supported Qatar in the blockade so it is unlikely Iran would ban QR aircraft and may actually give them a special exemption knowing how critical it is for them. However Iran considers the UAE an enemy and the drone that was shot down may actually have been from a base in the UAE. It would not surprise me if it at some point Iran threatens to or actually does ban all UAE aircraft as a retaliatory measure. If this happened Qatar will get even as the UAE will now also be blockaded and may actually be worse off than QR as an Iran blockade of the UAE will be much worse for them than a Saudi blockade is for Qatar. QR can bypass the blockade with Iran but the UAE will not have the same ability as many of their routes go through Iran and Saudi airspace is useless for that. There's no easy way around Iran and many more UAE flights (and almost all Gulf flights in general) go through Iranian airspace relative to Qatari flights through Saudi Arabia. Iranian airspace is too difficult to avoid, especially combined with the Pakistan airspace ban.

I don't think the closure of airspace is as big a concern as the heightened possibility of shooting down a commercial airliner e.g. MH17.

According to FR24 EK is starting to avoid Iranian airspace. Currently two inbound flights are over Iran (EK164/DUB and EK6/LHR) everything else is going around using Iraq, Kuwait and Qatari airspace.

vhqpa wrote:

According to FR24 EK is starting to avoid Iranian airspace. Currently two inbound flights are over Iran (EK164/DUB and EK6/LHR) everything else is going around using Iraq, Kuwait and Qatari airspace.

I mean that's not surprising considering the drone took off from the UAE. I'm actually amazed that they were stupid enough to let the US use their base for drones flying over Iran because they need Iranian airspace more than anyone else and will be screwed the most if they get banned from it. If anything UAE aircraft are just as threatened as US ones.

LTCM wrote:

acavpics wrote:

As we all saw, a US drone was shot down over Iran earlier today.

No such event occurred.

They shot down a drone in international airspace. It wasn't over Iran.

Depends who you believe.

Iran says the drone was shot down at 25°59'43"N 57°02'25"E and debris recovered near village of Kouh Mobarak.

The US has claimed that the drone was in international waters but has not supplied a coordinate or a flight path.

You are very welcome to take the US DOD's word for it, I personally don't.

LTCM wrote:

acavpics wrote:

As we all saw, a US drone was shot down over Iran earlier today.

No such event occurred.

They shot down a drone in international airspace. It wasn't over Iran.

The whole claim of 'international airspace' is bogus; there's no such thing as 'international airspace' when you're just 15 miles offshore. If the US was to shoot down a drone operating just offshore from the US, would anybody really believe it if the operator claimed it was over international waters? Of course not!

In this particular instance, however, the waters of the strait is divided roughly down the middle, with the southern part belonging to Oman and the northern part to Iran. Extending from the straits, there's no water which is not claimed by either Iran, UAE, Oman or Qatar.

'International waters' my so and so!

Please keep politics out of this thread, there is a thread in Non-Aviation which can be found here:

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1424647

This thread is about the fate of Gulf carriers during the Iran crisis.

sonicruiser wrote:

I think Qatar may actually get even with the UAE because Iran has supported Qatar in the blockade so it is unlikely Iran would ban QR aircraft and may actually give them a special exemption knowing how critical it is for them.

This is not about bans, this is about security in case of a full blown war.

sonicruiser wrote:

I'm actually amazed that they were stupid enough to let the US use their base for drones flying over Iran

The drone wasn't flying over Iran.

B777LRF wrote:

'International waters' my so and so!

International waters are defined in relevant international treaties of which Iran is a signatory. So much for that.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the FAA restriction on not using Iranian airspace would only apply to US airlines and maybe flights to or from the US? Surely they'd have no say on what other airlines do when flying to other destinations?

aviationaware wrote:

International waters are defined in relevant international treaties of which Iran is a signatory. So much for that.

While true, the sitution in queston AFAIK falls outside those general treaties as the Strait in question is less than 24 nm wide because national sovergin terrority extends 12 nm from the high water mark, under those treaties. There are probably no clear cut answers in that part of the world.

Gemuser

opticalilyushin wrote:

Correct me if I'm wrong but the FAA restriction on not using Iranian airspace would only apply to US airlines and maybe flights to or from the US? Surely they'd have no say on what other airlines do when flying to other destinations?

The FAA's restriction only applies to "N" registerd aircraft (ie on the Register of Civil Aircraft of the USA). Other countries can make their own restrictions on aircraft on their register.

Gemuser

Iraqi airspace is open and actually a bit shorter than via Iran if going to/from the ME3 hubs/regions.

My company has been using Iraq instead Iran for over a month now when we fly to DWC. The only "recommendation" was to keep wx radar on at all times in Iraqi airspace regardless of weather... supposedly for easier identification (by the military one would assume).

Gemuser wrote:

opticalilyushin wrote:

Correct me if I'm wrong but the FAA restriction on not using Iranian airspace would only apply to US airlines and maybe flights to or from the US? Surely they'd have no say on what other airlines do when flying to other destinations?

The FAA's restriction only applies to "N" registerd aircraft (ie on the Register of Civil Aircraft of the USA). Other countries can make their own restrictions on aircraft on their register.

Gemuser

Most ICAO countries follow FAA recommendation anyway (Aftermath of MH17 being an example)

Glancing at Flightradar, Air India appears to be overflying Iran even after the incident, as are several other airlines. As far as I can tell all South and Southeast Asian Airlines as well as Chinese and Russian, and some Gulf airlines continue to overfly Iran, including some even over the Gulf of Hormuz. Obviously aircraft subject to FAA directive are not flying there any more. So in some sense the FAA directive is not having much effect on most airlines from that neck of the wood.

I wanna keep politics out of the way, but no smart person should take anything either side says for granted. We all know how politics works.

Back on topic, flights to Europe wouldn't really be that affected. Maybe 30 min delays or so, but not much. North America will be the area most affected. Flights to LAX for example may need a fuel stop. For now most airlines are still flying over Iran, so let's hope they continue doing so.

Gemuser wrote:

aviationaware wrote:

International waters are defined in relevant international treaties of which Iran is a signatory. So much for that.

While true, the sitution in queston AFAIK falls outside those general treaties as the Strait in question is less than 24 nm wide because national sovergin terrority extends 12 nm from the high water mark, under those treaties. There are probably no clear cut answers in that part of the world.

Gemuser

AFAIK, it happened somewhat south of the Strait itself. 150 km south of the top of the strait, at a point where it is a lot more than 24 miles across.

djvalume wrote:

Gemuser wrote:

opticalilyushin wrote:

Correct me if I'm wrong but the FAA restriction on not using Iranian airspace would only apply to US airlines and maybe flights to or from the US? Surely they'd have no say on what other airlines do when flying to other destinations?

The FAA's restriction only applies to "N" registerd aircraft (ie on the Register of Civil Aircraft of the USA). Other countries can make their own restrictions on aircraft on their register.

Gemuser

Most ICAO countries follow FAA recommendation anyway (Aftermath of MH17 being an example)

Often, but not always. It's up to each country to make their own decision.

Gemuser

B777LRF wrote:

LTCM wrote:

acavpics wrote:

As we all saw, a US drone was shot down over Iran earlier today.

No such event occurred.

They shot down a drone in international airspace. It wasn't over Iran.

The whole claim of 'international airspace' is bogus; there's no such thing as 'international airspace' when you're just 15 miles offshore.

Sure there is. Airspace follows the international treaties establishing Law of the Sea. https://www.britannica.com/topic/air-law

The 12 nautical miles is the maximum limit permitted by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

I would imagine if nothing else uncertainty will be effecting forward bookings for some time to and through this part of the world.

Gemuser wrote:

aviationaware wrote:

International waters are defined in relevant international treaties of which Iran is a signatory. So much for that.

While true, the sitution in queston AFAIK falls outside those general treaties as the Strait in question is less than 24 nm wide because national sovergin terrority extends 12 nm from the high water mark, under those treaties. There are probably no clear cut answers in that part of the world.

Gemuser

MIflyer12 wrote:

B777LRF wrote:

LTCM wrote:

No such event occurred.

They shot down a drone in international airspace. It wasn't over Iran.

The whole claim of 'international airspace' is bogus; there's no such thing as 'international airspace' when you're just 15 miles offshore.

Sure there is. Airspace follows the international treaties establishing Law of the Sea. https://www.britannica.com/topic/air-law

The 12 nautical miles is the maximum limit permitted by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Just a friendly reminder that the United States hasn't signed/ratified that treaty.

opticalilyushin wrote:

Correct me if I'm wrong but the FAA restriction on not using Iranian airspace would only apply to US airlines and maybe flights to or from the US? Surely they'd have no say on what other airlines do when flying to other destinations?

Only for US registered aircraft.
For the rest it‘s somehow business as usual (at the moment) If things escalate, the airspace isn’t their biggest worry. Passengers moving to other carriers is the big thing they’re worried.

I honestly don't see Iran closing airspace to anyone... they make a ton of money from the overfly rights. To me this is barely an incident so not really comparable to MH17. The US and Iran are not on good terms so sending a military drone into their airspace was dumb to begin with and the IRG fully acknowledges they shot it down (imagine if an iranian aircraft got even within 100miles of the US...). The MH17 incident was far more murky with the assumption it was a military aircraft being shot down on a whim and each said claiming it wasn't them. I sincerely doubt the IRG is not about to start randomly shooting down civilian aircraft.

kq747 wrote:

I honestly don't see Iran closing airspace to anyone... they make a ton of money from the overfly rights.

It has been said a million times. Nobody makes a fortune on overflight fees, except maybe Russia. The fees are tiny.

Iran is one of the cheaper countries in the ME, and charge as little as 50 USD for an overflight.

VSMUT wrote:

kq747 wrote:

I honestly don't see Iran closing airspace to anyone... they make a ton of money from the overfly rights.

It has been said a million times. Nobody makes a fortune on overflight fees, except maybe Russia. The fees are tiny.

Iran is one of the cheaper countries in the ME, and charge as little as 50 USD for an overflight.

I thought Iran charged more than most countries? Or maybe that was just when Iraqi airspace was not being used? I've read varying numbers on this subject including almost $1M a day which might be a stretch but does not sound like small beer. Happy to be corrected on this.

kq747 wrote:

VSMUT wrote:

kq747 wrote:

I honestly don't see Iran closing airspace to anyone... they make a ton of money from the overfly rights.

It has been said a million times. Nobody makes a fortune on overflight fees, except maybe Russia. The fees are tiny.

Iran is one of the cheaper countries in the ME, and charge as little as 50 USD for an overflight.

I thought Iran charged more than most countries? Or maybe that was just when Iraqi airspace was not being used? I've read varying numbers on this subject including almost $1M a day which might be a stretch but does not sound like small beer. Happy to be corrected on this.

The most I've ever seen for one of my flights anywhere was 238 USD (that was not Iran). Most are much less.

VSMUT wrote:

kq747 wrote:

VSMUT wrote:

It has been said a million times. Nobody makes a fortune on overflight fees, except maybe Russia. The fees are tiny.

Iran is one of the cheaper countries in the ME, and charge as little as 50 USD for an overflight.

I thought Iran charged more than most countries? Or maybe that was just when Iraqi airspace was not being used? I've read varying numbers on this subject including almost $1M a day which might be a stretch but does not sound like small beer. Happy to be corrected on this.

The most I've ever seen for one of my flights anywhere was 238 USD (that was not Iran). Most are much less.

So I've read Iran charges $500-1000 depending on weight and with 600+ flights a day. Again, I cant recall where I read this but it was probably around the time when airlines were avoiding Iraqi airspace so might be cheaper now

For uniformed people like me could someone explain what the price quoted above is based on. Per flight, per passenger, per 100km or per hour? Much appreciated

The first casualty of war is truth. So I do not take any statements at face value, there will be spin. The admitted to drone was in some way snooping on the Iranians, who presumably therefore thought it was fair game. I always find it funny with some excuse where they say but our spy vehicle was in international airspace/sea as if that means its not part of your military preparations. I think this will be an unpredictable event..

Looking at the map, QR is gonna have a really hard time flying east to places like India and southeast Asia. They' can't fly over the UAE, and the Strait of Hormuz is being avoided since that is near where the drone was shot.
Hoping and praying for good times to come again for this airline.

zkojq wrote:

Just a friendly reminder that the United States hasn't signed/ratified that treaty.

Which is completely inconsequential for the matter at hand.

aviationaware wrote:

zkojq wrote:

Just a friendly reminder that the United States hasn't signed/ratified that treaty.

Which is completely inconsequential for the matter at hand.

No it isn't. You can't object to a country supposedly violating a treaty that you didn't even sign.

zkojq wrote:

No it isn't. You can't object to a country supposedly violating a treaty that you didn't even sign.

Literally no one cares if you didn't sign it. If you're in their territory, you're gonna be enforced with their rules whether you agree with it or not. The US may believe that they were over international waters but Iran certainly didn't, and that's why the drone is now a smoking wreckage.

zkojq wrote:

aviationaware wrote:

zkojq wrote:

Just a friendly reminder that the United States hasn't signed/ratified that treaty.

Which is completely inconsequential for the matter at hand.

No it isn't. You can't object to a country supposedly violating a treaty that you didn't even sign.

Of course you can. Iran signed it. Period.

MIflyer12 wrote:

Sure there is. Airspace follows the international treaties establishing Law of the Sea. https://www.britannica.com/topic/air-law

The 12 nautical miles is the maximum limit permitted by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

My bad, should have typed 12 rather than 15. However, two things spring to mind:

1: It's impossible to be 12-miles offshore in the straits; either you're in Iranian, Omani or UAE waters
2: The US is not a signatory to that convention

Do try operating an Iranian flagged drone 13-miles off shore from New York and see what'll happen.

B777LRF wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

Sure there is. Airspace follows the international treaties establishing Law of the Sea. https://www.britannica.com/topic/air-law

The 12 nautical miles is the maximum limit permitted by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

My bad, should have typed 12 rather than 15. However, two things spring to mind:

1: It's impossible to be 12-miles offshore in the straits; either you're in Iranian, Omani or UAE waters
2: The US is not a signatory to that convention

Do try operating an Iranian flagged drone 13-miles off shore from New York and see what'll happen.

Not all of the Strait of Hormuz is less than 24 miles wide. The shootdown happened 150 km to the south, at a point where it is 55 miles wide.

VSMUT wrote:

B777LRF wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

Sure there is. Airspace follows the international treaties establishing Law of the Sea. https://www.britannica.com/topic/air-law

The 12 nautical miles is the maximum limit permitted by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

My bad, should have typed 12 rather than 15. However, two things spring to mind:

1: It's impossible to be 12-miles offshore in the straits; either you're in Iranian, Omani or UAE waters
2: The US is not a signatory to that convention

Do try operating an Iranian flagged drone 13-miles off shore from New York and see what'll happen.

Not all of the Strait of Hormuz is less than 24 miles wide. The shootdown happened 150 km to the south, at a point where it is 55 miles wide.

Is the place where the shootdown happened an area where commercial airlinetrs fly often? In other words, did the Iranians know for sure that they were shooting down a drone? If they didn't then we are just plain lucky that it was not another MH17.

And how reliable is the technology in the region to minimize the possibility of miscalulation and accidentally approaching or striking an airliner?

acavpics wrote:

VSMUT wrote:

B777LRF wrote:

My bad, should have typed 12 rather than 15. However, two things spring to mind:

1: It's impossible to be 12-miles offshore in the straits; either you're in Iranian, Omani or UAE waters
2: The US is not a signatory to that convention

Do try operating an Iranian flagged drone 13-miles off shore from New York and see what'll happen.

Not all of the Strait of Hormuz is less than 24 miles wide. The shootdown happened 150 km to the south, at a point where it is 55 miles wide.

Is the place where the shootdown happened an area where commercial airlinetrs fly often? In other words, did the Iranians know for sure that they were shooting down a drone? If they didn't then we are just plain lucky that it was not another MH17.

And how reliable is the technology in the region to minimize the possibility of miscalulation and accidentally approaching or striking an airliner?

Extremely often. All Qatar flights to/from Asia at the moment go practically right over there. Loads of other flights too. Looked down at that very area more times than I can remember.

As for how sure they were, lets not forget that the MQ-4 Triton is an aircraft that cruises at 60.000 ft - twice the level of an airliner. It probably wasn't flying on a typical airliner track either. From my own experience, Iranian ATC is also pretty competent.

VSMUT wrote:

acavpics wrote:

VSMUT wrote:

Not all of the Strait of Hormuz is less than 24 miles wide. The shootdown happened 150 km to the south, at a point where it is 55 miles wide.

Is the place where the shootdown happened an area where commercial airlinetrs fly often? In other words, did the Iranians know for sure that they were shooting down a drone? If they didn't then we are just plain lucky that it was not another MH17.

And how reliable is the technology in the region to minimize the possibility of miscalulation and accidentally approaching or striking an airliner?

Extremely often. All Qatar flights to/from Asia at the moment go practically right over there. Loads of other flights too. Looked down at that very area more times than I can remember.

As for how sure they were, lets not forget that the MQ-4 Triton is an aircraft that cruises at 60.000 ft - twice the level of an airliner. It probably wasn't flying on a typical airliner track either. From my own experience, Iranian ATC is also pretty competent.

So you are saying that the militery personnel in Iran who are in chage of missiles etc are more sophisticated than those in Ukraine who shot down 9M-MRD thinking it was an enemy airforce plane?
I'm just worried sick that a gulf airliner, mainly QR, will be involved in such a situation.

acavpics wrote:

So you are saying that the militery personnel in Iran who are in chage of missiles etc are more sophisticated than those in Ukraine who shot down 9M-MRD thinking it was an enemy airforce plane?

Most definitely yes. Iranian airspace is much busier than anywhere in Ukraine and they are quite well aware of this. Also, there are no separatist factions (Russia vs Ukraine) in Iran that could interfere and cause an accident the way it did in MH17 in Ukraine. Iran's missile sites would be very tightly monitored under sole Iranian control relative to the infighting that took place in Ukraine.

Additionally it never ceases to amaze me how even after all these years people still believe that somehow Iran is going to be the one that shoots down a plane by accident when it is widely known that the US that shot down IR655. If we're not worrying about the US accidentally shooting down a civilian airplane, why on earth are we worrying about Iran shooting one down?

acavpics wrote:

So you are saying that the militery personnel in Iran who are in chage of missiles etc are more sophisticated than those in Ukraine who shot down 9M-MRD thinking it was an enemy airforce plane?
I'm just worried sick that a gulf airliner, mainly QR, will be involved in such a situation.

The Ukrainians were operating a Buk TEL launcher in an extremely basic mode, scooting about to avoid detection. They were in a new location every time with no access to flightplans.

The Iranians will have an entire setup with primary and secondary radars, coordination with ATC and likely proper command facilities. The Iranians are monitoring the same airspace day in and day out and have access to flightplans.

sonicruiser wrote:

acavpics wrote:

So you are saying that the militery personnel in Iran who are in chage of missiles etc are more sophisticated than those in Ukraine who shot down 9M-MRD thinking it was an enemy airforce plane?

Most definitely yes. Iranian airspace is much busier than anywhere in Ukraine and they are quite well aware of this. Also, there are no separatist factions (Russia vs Ukraine) in Iran that could interfere and cause an accident the way it did in MH17 in Ukraine. Iran's missile sites would be very tightly monitored under sole Iranian control relative to the infighting that took place in Ukraine.

Additionally it never ceases to amaze me how even after all these years people still believe that somehow Iran is going to be the one that shoots down a plane by accident when it is widely known that the US that shot down IR655. If we're not worrying about the US accidentally shooting down a civilian airplane, why on earth are we worrying about Iran shooting one down?

655 was over 30 years ago. I suspect technology has matured since then although politicians have not.

FAA Emergency Order Renders Iran Airspace a No-fly Zone

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... o-fly-zone

Light grey= water

Dark grey= land

DIRECTFLT wrote:

FAA Emergency Order Renders Iran Airspace a No-fly Zone

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... o-fly-zone

No fly zone only for US civilian aircraft. Other countries can do whatever they wish and several of them have been overflying Iran quite regularly, ignoring the US FAA order, since it does not really apply to them.

LTCM wrote:

acavpics wrote:

As we all saw, a US drone was shot down over Iran earlier today.

No such event occurred.

They shot down a drone in international airspace. It wasn't over Iran.

The drone was shot down in Iran air space. Certain Trump admin officials are baiting Iran for a showdown (even though Trump himself may not be as eager to get in a war with Iran). It is not surprising that most countries including traditional allies like Japan and many in EU believe Iran over Trump admin.