EK Avoiding Iraq Airspace

theaviator380 · Mon Jul 28, 2014 1:48 pm

Dear All,

In the wake of recent MH 017 incidence, EK have said that they will avoid Iraq airspace as a precautionary measure. This is a good step I must admit. I hope other airline follow this asap (BA, VS and LH seems avoiding when I looked at Radar this late morning).

I went to flightradar 24 and looked at the map and I could see EK5, EK57, EK91, EK51 flights to EU did divert regular path and flown avoiding Iraq airspace but interesting thing was, EK09 and EK75 flown over Iraq and very close to Baghdad. So why is that? Also interesting thing flight coming in to DXB still flying Iraq.

Article link - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28524628

Any thoughts?

[Edited 2014-07-28 06:53:55]

flyenthu · Mon Jul 28, 2014 2:08 pm

I don't see any change yet for EK51, for example:

July 27: http://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ek51/#3eb558b
May 26: http://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ek51/#36b8546

theaviator380 · Mon Jul 28, 2014 2:11 pm

Quoting flyenthu (Reply 1):

Check EK51 at this moment of time, flying over Iran keeping away from so called ISIS area. Rather EK05 enroute to LHR has completely avoided Iraq airspace.

http://fr24.com/UAE51

[Edited 2014-07-28 07:12:45]

ManchesterMAN · Mon Jul 28, 2014 2:31 pm

Well they obviously can't avoid it for the flights they operate to BGW, BSR & EBL!

flyenthu · Mon Jul 28, 2014 2:33 pm

Thanks. I was looking at the map before and figured going over Iran would be the logical change. Doesn't look like QR and EY have made changes yet. Good move by EK, this is what makes them a quality airline.

[email protected] · Mon Jul 28, 2014 2:49 pm

In today's Times Tim Clark said it'll take 7 to 10 days for them to fully change.

theaviator380 · Mon Jul 28, 2014 3:20 pm

Quoting ManchesterMAN (Reply 3):

Obviously I knew that much. Incoming flights I mentioned about were coming from EU countries.

theaviator380 · Mon Jul 28, 2014 3:22 pm

Quoting flyenthu (Reply 4):

Yes QR and EY still using it. Well done EK.

jetblastdubai · Mon Jul 28, 2014 3:27 pm

Iran cannot come close to accepting the volume of traffic that normally leaves DXB for Europe/Russia/North America over the the Iraq routes. Something will have to give.

theaviator380 · Mon Jul 28, 2014 3:38 pm

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 8):

As a curiosity, may please know why they won't? Volume wise you are correct, that's crazy traffic and very busy airspace, rather it looks like motorway in the sky, that channel over Iraq. Flying over Saudi is okay but then heading out Jordan, Syria, Israel is risky nowdays. There is hardly any alternative for EK than opting for Iran.

jetblastdubai · Mon Jul 28, 2014 4:24 pm

Quoting theaviator380 (Reply 9):
As a curiosity, may please know why they won't?

Iran simply cannot accept the close spacing that we can run up through Bahrain and Iraq airspace. Bahrain and Iraq have some western ATC staff and they're pretty aggressive for Middle East standards when it comes to moving traffic.

I'm not familiar with the available (radar) routes west of Iraq that are options but I can guarantee that they won't accept the additional volume that Iraq currently can accept because they're already working the flights that are landing in the neighboring countries....Saudi, Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, Kuwait, Bahrain, Libya, Tunisia etc. All northern and western Africa flights go over the same (north-western) fix and they so you can't just all of a sudden throw a boatload of "off-routed" flights at them. Casablanca, Lagos, Algeria would be in the same flow as JFK and LHR.

Just like in the U.S. with weather issues. If a route is shut off by weather, you simply cannot throw double the traffic into an adjacent sector that might already be saturated or not equipped (trained) to deal with such an increase in traffic.

Imagine I-95 closed between DC and NYC but all other roads open.

[Edited 2014-07-28 09:41:30]

solarflyer22 · Mon Jul 28, 2014 5:34 pm

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 8):
Iran cannot come close to accepting the volume of traffic that normally leaves DXB for Europe/Russia/North America over the the Iraq routes. Something will have to give.

I mean there is plenty of room if you fly a little further east. There are multiple lanes though the shortest one over the Zagros could fill up quickly. Their ATC is quite good is my understanding though I don't know what spacing their Radar can handle. How much more time/fuel is it costing to go into Iran? Doesn't look like much.

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 10):
Iran simply cannot accept the close spacing that we can run up through Bahrain and Iraq airspace. Bahrain and Iraq have some western ATC staff and they're pretty aggressive for Middle East standards when it comes to moving traffic.

I am kind of shocked that as of today, EK is running a lot of flights WEST of Irbil. I can see flying over Iraqi Kuridstan and there are at least two large airports there but why not fly east of it? They are kind of shooting the gap between Mosul and Irbil which seems a little risky. That area is not fully controlled by Baghdad or the Kurds. Mosul unfortunately was exactly the right spot to fly over but its not safe.

I did notice on Flight Radar the KLM flight to DXB flew far away from Iraq. It went into Turkey and fairly deep into Iran before turning by Tabriz. Smart move by them.

I would not go over Syria/Lebanon/Israel. Its both farther and less safe than Iran route. Maybe AA and UA should but thats it.

solarflyer22 · Mon Jul 28, 2014 5:39 pm

Quoting theaviator380 (Thread starter):
Baghdad. So why is that? Also interesting thing flight coming in to DXB still flying Iraq.

You didn't mention some of these are A380s too. I really would not, I mean definitely not be sending those with 20 miles of Mosul. Sending a A320 into Baghdad is one thing but a big bird like A380 with all those people has to be routed a little more carefully IMO. I just saw like 4 A380s shoot through the gap between Mosul and Irbil.

theginge · Mon Jul 28, 2014 5:55 pm

That is a lot of traffic to reroute via other airspace, particularly at some times of day, expect it will create delays at some pinchpoints

[Edited 2014-07-28 10:56:27]

DeltaMD90 · Mon Jul 28, 2014 6:26 pm

Maybe a bit off topic, but does anyone know what AA ISIS has? I assume the Iraqi military has some AA but I doubt they'd be using it much since ISIS doesn't have any aircraft operational. I'm not sure if ISIS has anything that can reach altitude.

Can't hurt to be extra safe I guess

dtw2hyd · Mon Jul 28, 2014 6:37 pm

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 11):
I am kind of shocked that as of today, EK is running a lot of flights WEST of Irbil. I can see flying over Iraqi Kuridstan and there are at least two large airports there but why not fly east of it? They are kind of shooting the gap between Mosul and Irbil which seems a little risky. That area is not fully controlled by Baghdad or the Kurds. Mosul unfortunately was exactly the right spot to fly over but its not safe.

EK operates regular service to EBL. So does TK/RJ/OS.

solarflyer22 · Mon Jul 28, 2014 8:31 pm

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 14):
Maybe a bit off topic, but does anyone know what AA ISIS has

I have seen them wheeling around with the Russian style mobile AAG. That's only up to 10k ft but given how easy it is to fly East of Irbil, it makes sense too IMO. The real issue is that they have a lot of money and potential access to commandeered Iraqi or Syrian assets. Plus if you had to land in Irbil or Baghdad for a medical/mechanical emergency, I think it'd be like flies to honey for that airport. This isn't the size of Ukraine, its much easier to route around it. You have to get more than 20 miles East of Mosul though IMO.

boysteve · Mon Jul 28, 2014 8:40 pm

OK, I know that EK have grown and grown but Iraqi air space has been closed before and the world did not stop!

Flightsimboy · Mon Jul 28, 2014 11:25 pm

Quoting flyenthu (Reply 4):
Good move by EK, this is what makes them a quality airline.

Really? So the others continuing to fly over are not quality airlines?

DexSwart · Mon Jul 28, 2014 11:46 pm

A quick look shows EK62 passing Kut, Iraq as we speak, along with a bunch of others.

When will this "ban/stop gap/whatever" take effect?

ElPistolero · Mon Jul 28, 2014 11:58 pm

Quoting DexSwart (Reply 19):
When will this "ban/stop gap/whatever" take effect?

7-10 days, according to reports. I currently see OS, LH, BA, QR, EY and TK flying over Iraq - so not sure why EK is taking the action its taking.

DexSwart · Tue Jul 29, 2014 12:00 am

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 20):
I currently see OS, LH, BA, QR, EY and TK flying over Iraq

QF1 is currently headed to LHR right over Iraq along with every other airline.

Maybe this is more a publicity thing? "Emirates values it's passenger's safety. No matter the cost!"

RyanairGuru · Tue Jul 29, 2014 12:32 am

As others have said, this isn't really anything new for EK. They routed over Iran for a long time until 2008 (?)

dtw2hyd · Tue Jul 29, 2014 2:05 am

Apparently TC is totally unhappy with most of the world aviation authorities for letting MH17 happen by not closing airspace over conflict area. Ukraine CAA, Eurocontrol, ICAO to name a few and he wants an airline association to take over that responsibility ie., which areas/airports to avoid.

TWA772LR · Tue Jul 29, 2014 3:21 am

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 12):
Sending a A320 into Baghdad is one thing but a big bird like A380 with all those people has to be routed a little more carefully IMO

I see the point you are making but flying any plane over a war zone, be it a Cessna 172 or 737 or A380, is a terrible idea, especially if the area has SAMs or MANPADs, and if the aircraft gets shot down, it is equally bad for the amount of life lost.

bchandl · Tue Jul 29, 2014 3:33 am

Quoting theaviator380 (Reply 9):
Flying over Saudi is okay but then heading out Jordan, Syria, Israel is risky nowdays.

Why is Jordan risky? Do you know of something the rest of the world doesn't?

Syria is dangerous for the same reason Iraq is, ISIS. But they only occupy the NorthEastern part of Syria. That's easy to fly around. Southern Iraq (Baghdad and south is fine in reality)

Israel? Hamas only dreams of a rocket that could track and down an RC aircraft, let alone a real one at cruising altitude. Hamas can do nothing but smile and wave at a plane over Israel at 35-40k feet.

They fire rockets and whereever they go, they go. They have no control and their rockets are low altitude, low range and low explosive factor. I'd fly a Cessna over Gaza.

bchandl

CBRboy · Tue Jul 29, 2014 4:58 am

Quoting flyenthu (Reply 4):
Good move by EK, this is what makes them a quality airline.

Quoting ManchesterMAN (Reply 3):
Well they obviously can't avoid it for the flights they operate to BGW, BSR & EBL!

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 22):
Maybe this is more a publicity thing?

Quoting dtw2hyd (Reply 23):
Apparently TC is totally unhappy with most of the world aviation authorities for letting MH17 happen by not closing airspace over conflict area. Ukraine CAA, Eurocontrol, ICAO to name a few and he wants an airline association to take over that responsibility ie., which areas/airports to avoid.

While I will be the first to admit that it is not clear precisely what Emirates is going to do, I think that RyanairGuru may be correct that this is a publicity and airline regulation politics thing. It is of course completely illogical if Emirates cancel overflights of Iraq but continue to operate services into three Iraqi cities where you'd think the flights may be within range of ISIS MANPADS.

There is a significant amount of puiblicly-available information about surface-to-air missiles having been delivered from Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and possibly the US to Syrian rebels. Some of these could have fallen into ISIL/ISIS hands. There are reports of ISIS using Stinger missiles. It also appears that a large number of SAMs were taken from Libya to unknown destinations. Nothing I have seen suggests that ISIS has anything more capable than Stingers.

On current information I will be reasonably comfortable flying on Qantas from Dubai to London over Iraq. Qantas media comment about this is here.

Qatara340 · Tue Jul 29, 2014 5:01 am

Guys let's not forget Iraq was a No Fly Zone before Bush invaded it so airlines pre 2003 are used to not flying over Iraq.

SASDC8 · Tue Jul 29, 2014 7:03 am

Quoting QatarA340 (Reply 27):

And the amount of movements in the area has also risen sharply since 2003.

theaviator380 · Tue Jul 29, 2014 8:10 am

Quoting DexSwart (Reply 21):

QF have said they won't alter their route.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/tr...pace-wake-MH17-missile-strike.html

Quoting bchandl (Reply 25):

May be I am wrong saying Jordan however your statement is little audacious saying you can fly over Gaza, don't ever underestimate fire power.

bchandl · Tue Jul 29, 2014 8:20 am

Quoting QatarA340 (Reply 27):

Why was Iraq a NFZ before 2003? US imposed NFZ because we (America) said so, as some sort of pre war prep?

Sadam not let airlines overfly?

Iraq was *stable*, especially in today's context before the war.

Quoting theaviator380 (Reply 29):
May be I am wrong saying Jordan however your statement is little audacious saying you can fly over Gaza, don't ever underestimate fire power.

IDF plane are overflying Gaza on a daily basis. If they could shoot one of them down you better believe they would. Reality is they have unguided rockets.

This .gif is about North Korea, but it is pretty accurate for the firepower Gaza has.

http://cheezburger.com/6108806400

bchandl

DALCE · Tue Jul 29, 2014 10:56 am

And the marketing machine moves on......

It has nothing to do with safety, as long as I still see plenty of EK-flights going thru Iraqi airspace.
It's sad as well as obvious that they use the MH17 tragedy like this. They should act like they say or shut up.
Marketing and selling more tickets to fill the 100+ 77W's and all those A380's...... that's what it is about, nothing more, nothing less.

turjo101 · Tue Jul 29, 2014 11:15 am

Was there any restriction to flying over Iraq, pre-2003 invasion? I know there was no fly-zone; but I assumed that was for the Iraqi Air Force.

I remember the first time I flew EK, (LHR-DXB) and then (DXB-LHR) back in 1998, was routed over Egypt, Red sea, Saudi, Qatar, the Gulf and then on to DXB, and the same way back. Was that the norm back then?

KWI · Tue Jul 29, 2014 11:24 am

the no fly zone over Iraq applied to pretty much everyone. Being based in Kuwait (and having flown between Kuwait and Europe many many times), prior to 2003 all Europe - Kuwait flights approached Kuwait from the south by overflying Turkey, Syria, Saudi Arabia before flying into Kuwaiti Airspace. Even flights from Syria, Jordan, and Lebanon didn't fly over Iraq - pretty much all flights flew into Kuwait via Saudi Airspace.

I remember when Iraqi Airspace opened up after 2003 - flying over Basra, Baghdad, Najaf, etc felt surreal.

*Note...The above info applies for 1990-2003...I assume that prior to 1990 Iraqi airspace was normal and safe.

atcsundevil · Tue Jul 29, 2014 11:28 am

This is slightly off-topic, but does anyone if UA has changed the routing of its IAD-KWI flight? Syria and Iran are obviously no-go, so if Iraqi airspace isn't used, there isn't really a great way to make the trip as far as I can tell. If they are still using Iraqi airspace now but are forced to change, where else could they go? I've taken the flight twice and it was already long enough even with flying over Iraq, much less a massive reroute having to dodge numerous war zones and countries not to keen on the US!

jetblastdubai · Tue Jul 29, 2014 11:54 am

Quoting atcsundevil (Reply 34):
Syria and Iran are obviously no-go, s

UA and DL routinely file/fly over Iran on the DXB-IAD/ATL flights. I'm guessing there is some financial incentive for Iran to handle these over-flights.

einsteinboricua · Tue Jul 29, 2014 12:27 pm

Looks like a couple of flights are skimming the east part of the country. Few flights are over the central west part of the country except those headed to Lebanon.

A better and more impressive detail of the fr24 map is the number of flights avoiding Ukrainian airspace altogether.

theaviator380 · Tue Jul 29, 2014 12:30 pm

Having spent some more time today on flightradar, I have come to a conclusion that carriers are selecting route randomly or some logic behind it which we don't know. Some EK flights still flying over Iraq some not. Saw VS, 9W just now avoiding Iraq and flying over Iran instead.

solarflyer22 · Tue Jul 29, 2014 1:35 pm

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 35):

UA and DL routinely file/fly over Iran on the DXB-IAD/ATL flights. I'm guessing there is some financial incentive for Iran to handle these over-flights.

There is a NOTAM in place for Iran but it only applies to US carriers. It basically says, there is no consular/embassy support so go call the Swiss, lol. Americans technically cannot pay for services either (fuel etc.)if they land so I think the Swiss pay and the USA gets them back. This actually happened to DL once.

Quoting atcsundevil (Reply 34):
IAD-KWI flight

That's a real tricky route. DXB is comparatively easier.

Quoting theaviator380 (Reply 37):
Saw VS, 9W just now avoiding Iraq and flying over Iran instead.

Yeah, it is random. Even within the same airline it changes.

CBRboy · Wed Jul 30, 2014 2:01 pm

Quoting atcsundevil (Reply 34):
This is slightly off-topic, but does anyone if UA has changed the routing of its IAD-KWI flight? Syria and Iran are obviously no-go, so if Iraqi airspace isn't used, there isn't really a great way to make the trip as far as I can tell. If they are still using Iraqi airspace now but are forced to change, where else could they go? I've taken the flight twice and it was already long enough even with flying over Iraq, much less a massive reroute having to dodge numerous war zones and countries not to keen on the US!

Both UA982 and UA981 - ie forwards and backwards the last time - have flown over Iraq.

goldorak · Wed Jul 30, 2014 6:57 pm

AF/KL have also announced that they stop to fly over Irak.

jetblastdubai · Wed Jul 30, 2014 7:26 pm

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/dubai-...ines-divert-flights-155526912.html

They're all jumping ship now. Maybe I picked the wrong city to work in.

Flightsimboy · Thu Jul 31, 2014 2:10 am

today UAE 231, 221 & 203 tracked over Iran on the way to the US. Just two days back 231 and 203 went over Baghdad. (I used to be able to link screenshots saved to Flickr, but cannot anymore. Not sure what has changed there?)

CBRboy · Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:30 pm

The US FAA has banned US carriers from operating in Iraqi airspace below FL300. In response, Qantas has indicated that it has 'temporarily' rerouted flights to avoid Iraqi airspace.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net