Havoc10G

You are indeed!

Zol: I think the point was more weapons moving from Syria to Iraq as seems to be the case.

Oldtiger

08:45 BKK time – Just looked at FlightRadar and counted 16 EK planes (including 7 380’s) flying up/down the ‘Iraq flight corridor’. There are a further 18 planes flying over the Persian Gulf who have already cleared Iraq airspace. Seems that no instructions to avoid Iraq airspace have been issued to EK pilots as yet.

RichL

Will they factor in connecting flights? If this puts 45 minutes on to a flight and say your connection is 1hr 30 (for example) are they going to say you are too late for your connection?

zhaobao

Occasionally a few EK planes fly along the Iran corridor. I am thinking if a plane flies along the Iran corridor as opposed to the Iraq corridor it does not add too much time. To switch from the Iraq corridor to the Egypt/Saudi corridor might, depending on direction ?

kkdenmark

Now at 7:00 UTC there are at least 11 EK flight over Iraq

Seat64A

If they don't hold your flight, I'm sure they'd put you on the next flight (space permitting).

This will play havoc with schedules and connections.

I'm interested to know whether my next connecting flight will now be eligible for Dubai Connect. (At the moment there is a later flight which I chose not to book because I don't like tight connections; this might now be an impossible connection unless there is a wholesale rejigging of arrival and departure times.)

warakorn

Apart from EK, I mean what flight paths are available to get from Dubai/Doha/Abu Dhabi to Europe or North America?

While looking at the map, planes must cross via one of these five routes.
1) via Syria (ISIS and Assad thread)
2) via Iraq (ISIS thread)
3) via Iran (I think many Israelis on QF and US-Americans might feel very uncomfortable, esp. in case of an emergency landing; there is still the thread from Israel to go after the Iranian nuclear program)
4) Saudi, Jordan, Israel (EK/QR/EY would most probable not fly via Israel)
5) Saudi, Egypt (there are also extremists groups operating out of Sinai)

What I want to say is that a further massive escalation in the Middle East would severely jeopardize the business model of the ME3 carriers - simply because European passengers might get scared to fly via the aforementioned hot zones. I mean, should I trust the rulers of UAE that they can ensure that ISIS (whom they probably support) would not deploy surface-to-air rockets?
If another passenger plane from a reputable airline were to be shot down in the Middle East, it could be over for EK/QR/EY.

Apart from that: Ukrainian airspace can be easily avoided, a lot of "safe" routes exist north and south of the Ukraine. Even if we see a further escalation in the Ukraine, Donetsk People's Republic and adjoining Russian oblasts (e.g. Rostov), its not going to jeopardize the business case for European and Asian airlines.

zhaobao

It appears that 1) and 4) are generally avoided now, unless the flight is flying to/from Tel Aviv, Amman, Beirut (Middle East Airlines only). EK does this whole detour through Iraq corridor over Turkey before coming back down to Beirut from Dubai.

go_around

Very interesting points. I agree that these regional conflicts put a huge question mark over the viability of the Middle Eastern carriers on routes to/from Europe.

Not sure about the concerns with Iran though... seems to me like by far the safest option out of your five (agreeing that EK etc would be unlikely to overfly Israel). Wouldn't relations between QF/Australia/EK/UAE and Iran dictate the safe passage of Israelis in for example an emergency landing in Iran? Any Americans who are unsettled though about overflying Iran are paranoid.

Sigwx

EK EY are point blank not permitted to enter Israeli airspace by law! The Saudi transit exits via KITAP on the Red Sea before entering Egypt at Taba. Then up through the Med.

YuropFlyer

Remembers me of the EY flights from Abu Dhabi to Beirut.

Basically an extremely long detour, via Egypt and the Med, as both Israel as well as Syria are (understandably) avoided. 1324 Miles (and unfortunately also just so little posted ) but the flight took like 4 hours.. (Just enough to watch 2 movies ^ )

warakorn

If Israel were to attack the nuclear program of Iran, then Iranian airspace must be avoided.
Israel can only launch long range missiles to hit Iran.
Moreover, Iraqi airspace would be in danger, as well, since rockets must pass Iraqi airspace, if launched from Israel. I mean, Israel could launch the rockets from the Indian Ocean off the coast of Iran, as well. In that case EK/QR/EY flights to almost all of Asia are in jeopardy, because most of these flights are routed through the Indian Ocean (close to the coast of Iran).

Absent a conflict, that should no be a problem.
However, conflicts can start rapidly. Who would have guessed in 2013 whats going in Donetsk and Luhansg Oblast.

I remember some emails from SQ in 2001, stating that they were going to avoid the airspace of Afghanistan due to the war.

But basically - my point:
Apart from MH and the passengers on board - the biggest loser of the downing of MH17 will be the ME3 carriers. Suddenly the security of airspace becomes an issue. Tim Clark is just being proactive, however, I am still noticing quite a number of EK planes over Iraqi airspace. I guess EK and the UAE are trying hard to get more overfly rights/slots with Iran. Remember: UAE and Iran are not the best friends. Iran could use that issue as leverage (I give you more overfly rights - You give me more access to your capital market).

Oldtiger

Agreed – no doubt getting additional slots to overfly Iranian or Saudi Arabia airspace will take time and some very heavy negotiations. Let's all hope that the ME3 carriers come up with a workable solution before some nutter gets it into their head to go one better than MH17, and down a convoy of 380s as they pass over ISIS controlled Iraq.

Undoubtedly route changes to avoid northern Iraq may well have an impact on some existing short connection times, and this in turn could well affect EK’s bottom line, but as they say, “the safety of our passengers and crew are paramount”.

As of 20:00 BKK time – from FlightRadar - 13 EK flights were heading northwards, along the Iraq corridor, 4 flight heading up just inside the Iran boarder and 2 flights heading across Saudi Arabia – All flights are European bound.

Interesting – EK3 (LHR) is flying over Iran, and EK9 (LGW) is flying over Iraq – both at 40K ft and almost flying parallel. Also just noticed that EK5 (LHR) has just changed course to fly over Iran.

Xlr

When it comes to safety, borders are less important than the safety of the path. I mean, how different is ISIS-controlled Syria from ISIS-controlled Iraq?

Kurdish Iraq is pretty safe, as is Baghdad and south of it.

Iran is a pretty safe country to fly over. The fact that the negotiations seem to be having an effect (they just got rid of their highest enriched uranium) means that a strike on their facilities is less likely. Plus, flights to the US West Coast fly over Iran.

I'd rather fly over Iran thanks. That being said, we don't know about who's supporting whom.

Seat64A

The impact would be more than on existing short connection times. Unless 'planes can be turned around more quickly, I'd have thought there would also be a knock-on impact on later flights scheduled for these late arriving aircraft (excepting those, of course, which are scheduled to spend extended time on the ground at DXB, for maintenance, for example, although even here there could be problems).