Originally Posted by
Ranger 1
"Knowing where the birds are on the ground is a good start and sometimes they are best not disturbed when a airmove is very close(had to stop the security police letting their gaurd dogs chase gull flocks off empty dispersals at night"
I hope the practice of leaving birds where they are, in the hope they will not move is no longer practised, as they will move when you don't want them to,
. . .
At night on airfields the active Taxiways & Runways including their margins should be checked, birds should be cleared using special tactics as no to disturb any roosting birds on the remainder of the airfield and its approaches and Climbout's
I think these are just two parts of a similar problem. Knowing the base that Scotavia was at I know that it was better not to disturb the birds on the ASP as this was well clear of the taxiway and runways. At least you knew where they were. The clue is in your answer -
as no to disturb any roosting birds on the remainder of the airfield that, exactly was Scotavia's point.
I hope the practice of leaving birds where they are, in the hope they will not move is no longer practised, as they will move when you don't want them to,
This would have been the answer in the Elmdorf case. The geese were extremely close to the runway and only needed spooking to get them up.
But where the birds are safely in a roost that is
not adjacent to the operating area then I think you are saying that they should not be disturbed. The bird strike we suffered last year was because the disturbance occurred close to the birds. The only way we could have avoided the bird strike was to give the birds priority.
Finally, the point of control is 'what birds' and 'what roost'.
But all this misses the point. These geese were not in a roost and they were not disturbed until, that is, the A320 arrived at the intercept point.