Sussex Police Helicopter Bird Strike [Archive]

whoateallthepies

26th May 2005, 10:49

Yes we hit a common buzzard at about 400'agl, returning to Shoreham.

No time to avoid , it just whacked throught he chin window and hit me on the shins. It was like being kicked by Roy Keane!

Lots of rushing air and feathers, pushed a PAN call out to Shoreham and landed in the field below us. (Probably where the buzzard's prey had been!).

We had our visors down of course but we're considering wearing shin pads as well now.

Sussex ambulance "spokeswoman" was a bit melodramatic though. Shame she didn't speak to me before posting that stuff.

:hmm:

Plonquer Pilot

26th May 2005, 11:12

I passed close to a Buzzard yesterday 750ft agl over the downs NE of Chichester, it did not seem to concerned but the R44 was a bit worried!

quichemech

26th May 2005, 11:21

Glad you're all ok pieman, should keep your engineer busy for a little while, finally give him something to do:rolleyes: :ok:

Vfrpilotpb

26th May 2005, 13:56

Hey Pie man,

You obviously never played Rugby, Roy Keanes lot kick like big Girls!!:ok:

Vfr

Thud_and_Blunder

26th May 2005, 14:42

Pies,

Where you're off to, you want to watch out for the Lappet-Faced and Turkey Vultures - they'll do more than tap you on the shins!

whoateallthepies

27th May 2005, 09:23

Thud
Yes I remember those big boids from last time. I'll treat them with great respect (as always!)

Vfr You're right, Keane is an overpaid woose. maybe a Johnny Wilkinson drop kick would have been a better description.

Anyway here's a nice pic of my mate the buzzard.
http://i.1asphost.com/whoateallthepies/bird2.jpg

Droopy

27th May 2005, 09:55

Did it get badly. err.. fowled up :p with the pedals? The 902 yaw linkages do seem a tad exposed in the footwell.

widgeon

27th May 2005, 10:21

Does this weight catagory not require laminated screens ? , I think the BK117 has to have them in Uk. It looks from pics like a plexiglass screen.

What Limits

27th May 2005, 18:08

Mr Pies,

Shame you did not take a direct hit on the camera turret. Nice insurance claim!

Yaw pedal stuff only about as exposed as most others!

ShyTorque

27th May 2005, 19:46

Shame the aircraft wasn't at 410 feet, or even quite a bit higher, then it would have missed.

Tin hat on. :E

aeromys

27th May 2005, 19:50

I thought with 902's, most bird strikes were up the rear as they tried to overtake? :E :E

Skycop

27th May 2005, 21:53

But seriously, why low fly at 400 feet during the RETURN from a job? We were always urged not to do so for good neighbourliness reasons. It's a well documented fact that the chance of a bird strike is far greater at low level. At my unit (and the company I worked for) used to encourage operating between 1200 and 1500 feet, whenever possible, above the main low level risks (wires, LL fast jets and most birds) and below most light aircraft, whilst being a bit less noisy for the anti-police helicopter lobby on the ground near the unit.

whoateallthepies

27th May 2005, 23:10

Skycop
Procedure at Shoreham is to enter the zone at 600' QNH below fixed wing circuit at 1100'.

This puts us at 400'agl over the downs just north of the airfield when re-joining.

Our unit policy is to fly as high as possible for the task in hand.
Glad I could clarify that for you.

We don't transit at low levels for the reason this thread is running!

Skycop

27th May 2005, 23:58

WAATP,

Thanks for that info, glad to hear it.

But why don't they allow you to join the fixed wing circuit, at the higher altitude?

I have never understood why some airfields insist on joining procedures that MUST be different for helis and light fixed wing.

They fly at similar speeds and having a similar arrival for all means less chance of confusion on both sides, especially when the heli pilot isn't familiar with the airfield.

In your case it might have meant you didn't need an expensive aircraft repair. If that bird had hit a little higher you would be talking in a very high pitched voice. :ooh:

J.A.F.O.

28th May 2005, 02:43

Aren't we all missing the really newsworthy point - a 902 was airborne, now how often does that happen?

:E INCOMING :E

helicopter-redeye

28th May 2005, 07:10

I have never understood why some airfields insist on joining procedures that MUST be different for helis and light fixed wing.

On a survey conducted for this programme last year, many helicopter pilots said they prefered special helicopter procedures for approach to airfields also used by FW, basically for direct approaches from various points of the compass.

Skycop

28th May 2005, 08:29

Well, myself and my 3 colleagues (over 100 years of flying experience between us) must be in the minority because we all share the same opinion.

In this case, a local helicopter procedure which obliged the pilot to fly at 400 feet agl 3 miles from an airport (500 foot rule, anyone?) was a factor in a very expensive and potentially disastrous birdstrike.

Perhaps this type of join needs reconsidering.

Thomas coupling

28th May 2005, 09:43

This issue of 'safe height to fly' always seems to be based on some mythical topographical area where land is at sea level and most GA flies at 1500 - 2000', mil jets at 500 - 700' and birds at 400' ???

Where is this mythical land?

Common sense should prevail - look at the land your flying over and apply it!

Where I fly, a mil jet doing 300kts can be 50' MSD one moment then 1500 MSD 5 seconds later??
GA same: 500' rural, then crossing a large valley: 2500'??

As for birds around here: pick a height, any height , they love to soar off all ridges??? [100' - 5000']

Obviously there are choke points [transit lanes for jets, VRP's for GA and cliffs for birdies], but outside of this, everyone is everywhere...
They most certainly DON'T adhere to specific height bands???

Flying Pencil

28th May 2005, 11:11

Sky Cop, would i be right in thinking it would be 2 miles out that you would need to be at 600' and the 500' rule doesn't apply because your following a normal joining procedure? I wait to be corrected.

Flingingwings

28th May 2005, 12:03

Sky Cop,

Not all heli's (type and/or pilot) could safely fly an approach at fixed wing circuit and approach speeds. (especially if the airfield has larger fixed wing traffic)
Agree a heli specific routing may make an initial visit harder work. However IMHO a phone call for a pre flight briefing would remove that issue, especially if the joining has a special noise abatement procedure/s.

Also worth considering that there is no real need for heli's to fly a full circuit on joining, unless flying at night.

In the early stages student pilots have enough to cope with without worrying about a quicker fixed wing approaching from behind. Again just MHO based on experience, but I think that where possible keeping heli's on a seperate procedure helps.

As a minor technical issue. The 500' rule states 500 ft clear of any person,vehicle,vessel or structure. Thats a distance not a vertical height, and actual ground clearance is not mentioned. Any responsible heli pilot will be mindful of noise abatement and will fly defensively ensuring an ability to land clear.

As FP states as the approach is a prescribed procedure at a licensed airfield you are exempt the 500' rule but not the land clear portion.

Been into SHM a few times with no problems. Regular heli routings are no probs and the ATC guys/gals are very heli aware/friendly.

Of more importance is the fact that all concerned (except the bird) are ok. Must have refocused the pilots mind a touch!

Can u bbq buzzard :E
Or will some wheeze stuff and mount it as a trophy.
Sure Cliff could sort it :cool:

SilsoeSid

28th May 2005, 12:04

skycop;
Well, myself and my 3 colleagues (over 100 years of flying experience between us) must be in the minority because we all share the same opinion. And that's just what it is, an opinion!!

That doesn't necessarily make it the correct solution.

S.O.P. doesn't stand for 'Statement of the Oldest Person'!

If you care to look and read the relevant page in the AIP, you will find WAATP was following the published procedure that he mentioned earlier. It also states, that 'Helicopter arrivals and departures should follow ATC instructions closely...'

Yes, the Capt is ultimately responsible for the safety of the a/c etc, but try telling that to the birdies. What height should they be at?

Do you really think in that part of the world they are unaware of the bird problem? :rolleyes:

Why are you trying to place blame, when it's a case of luck.
Here, from 50' up to 2000' there are swifts all over the place, collecting insects to feed their young. Please can your 'council' advise me at what speeds and heights I should be flying, in order to place luck on my side and avoid a similar fate happening to me as WAATP's, Thanks.

p.s. 100 years of flying experience = 876,000 hours
219,000 hours each,!!!! I bow down!

Do you possibly mean aviation experience? :=

:E
SS

Skycop

28th May 2005, 12:57

>Why are you trying to place blame, when it's a case of luck.
Here, from 50' up to 2000' there are swifts all over the place, collecting insects to feed their young. Please can your 'council' advise me at what speeds and heights I should be flying, in order to place luck on my side and avoid a similar fate happening to me as WAATP's, Thanks.<

I'm not trying to place blame, it's just that I was surprised a police helicopter was at 400 ft agl 3 miles out from base returning from a job when usual advice is NOT to do so for a number of reasons. If a pilot on my unit had put himself in this situation for no good reason then he would have been given a word in his ear, both for reasons of noise abatement and considerations of unneccesarily mixing it with low level military jets that transitted our "patch", in addition to the increased risk of a birdstrike. If local ATC procedures require this type of join, as I was politely informed, I was only putting forward the suggestion that those procedures perhaps ought to be reviewed, especially in view of this fairly serious low level birdstrike which could have had more serious, even tragic, consequences.

Most birdstrikes occur below 1000 ft, not my opinion but FACT. I could direct interested parties to some statistics if you like.

Birdstrike avoidance is NOT a case of luck - I'm surprised a professional pilot made that statement!

The advice I'd give on trying to avoid swifts is - you won't; they occur in all height bands because they feed solely on insects which fly at varying heights, mainly dependent on the weather conditions. However, they will avoid you like the plague. They have potential natural airborne predators, they will see a helicopter as such and are very well equipped to get out of your way. In any event, they are only 6.5" long and weigh but a few ounces so it's almost certain that no aircraft damage will result from a collision with one. I can't recall a birdstrike report involving a swift. House martins or swallows yes (they aren't so agile, I've had birdstrikes with them myself) but they are even smaller still.

A Buzzard, on the other hand, being up to 24" in length, is likely to weigh in at up to a kilo, more if it carrying a rabbit! It has NO airborne predators and is territorial. It therefore poses a serious flight safety hazard. It has no reason to keep out of the way of a helicopter, so it might not do so. This one didn't.

Glad they are all OK.

Flingingwings

28th May 2005, 14:25

Three pages for teddies to fly :confused:

Lets hope we can accept that matters may have been poorly worded but that a logical (in the writers opinion) question was asked.

Failing that I suggest a dual to the death using whats left of the buzzard :E

Skycop

28th May 2005, 16:17

SS,

"And that's just what it is, an opinion!! That doesn't necessarily make it the correct solution."

I agree, we are all entitled to an opinion - so why try to belittle mine, based on a good few years of low flying - possibly more than yourself? The CAA, FAA and the military ALL share it, as it happens. All of them publicise their "opinion" that the lower you fly, the more likely you are to suffer a birdstrike. Do your own research but their "opinion" is backed up by facts gathered from birdstrike reports. 80% or so of all birdstrikes occur below 1000 feet and the lower you go, the worse it gets.

"Do you really think in that part of the world they are unaware of the bird problem?"

Not now, :(

MightyGem

28th May 2005, 16:57

Something a bit bigger than a buzzard! It still came off second best though.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v465/MightyGem/Bird2.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v465/MightyGem/Bird.jpg

Plastic Batwings

28th May 2005, 17:43

Mmm tastefull pics, though I fail to see the connection between a mashed bird and a night on the vino rosso!

SilsoeSid

28th May 2005, 18:18

Birdstrike avoidance is NOT a case of luck - I'm surprised a professional pilot made that statement! Utter Tosh!

Yes we know that rubbish tips, trawlers, nature reserves, coastlines etc aren't the best places to be as far as bird strikes are concerned, but I will still say that there is a vast amout of luck involved.

Either luck or this afternoon I was particularly skillful in avoiding countless swifts and the odd pidgeon and seagull by matters of only inches. How I can fly so accurately I'll never know. Just natural I suppose.....not!!

The reason you can't recall a birdstrike report involving a swift, is perhaps because the bird involved was so small it could not be identified or even found!!

I have a good share of low flying hours myself, however If I was you I, would be careful about starting a p*$$**g match on that one with anyone here!
(Then again with your 219,000 hours I might be on a stickey wicket on that! ;)
I do not doubt the relationship between height/birdstrikes, but by nature of our job, it will happen.

When migrating, birds fly generally at about 5,000 ft, regularly up to 20,000 ft ,the record being reported to be at 29,000 ft (a flock of swans!)

So depending on the time of year all levels are fair game, although the stats do to tend to favour the lower levels for strikes.

Swifts by the way, will go as high as they need to get the insects and if the weather is not suitable in the UK for feeding, they will go to mainland Europe to feed for up to 2 days. They then return to feed the young, who in this time will have been running on fat reserves and would have lost up to 50% of their weight. (Thanks to BBC watch and learn, with signing!)

Concur with the feeling, Glad they are all OK.
:ok:
SS

helicopter-redeye

28th May 2005, 19:08

It has NO airborne predators and is territorial

I believe they are 'programmed' to regard the Eagle shape as an airbourne preditor ??? (as indeed are most birds on the Earth except the Eagle ??).

Most of these birds of prey (Earth form, not Klingon variety) dive at a v fast speed. I have three who patrol my local area and form a hazard to low flying helicopters (and there is nowhere to land if ......)

:\

volrider

28th May 2005, 19:19

Mighty Gem cracking picture of the Eagle, but it's obvious the pilot should have taken the usual advice and wrapped it in cling film first before trying to be it's friend...... Still I guess thats the price of flying glass cockpits now..you need something to kill the boredom:E

kopterfan

28th May 2005, 19:23

Hey guys should a bird not run for cover when it sees the big mechanical birdy in the sky?? But then again it was an MD902..Guess it was so surprised to see it airborne it just gave up on life;)
Anyway we can laugh now but it must have been bloody scary at the time.. (I am on about the Bird not the 902):p

Skycop

28th May 2005, 20:44

Sid,

"I have a good share of low flying hours myself, however If I was you I, would be careful about starting a p*$$**g match on that one with anyone here!"

I have no reason to; everyone else seems to think you have cornered the market on the "Lynx down on SPTA" topic.

"Then again with your 219,000 hours I might be on a stickey wicket on that!"

It's not quite that many - I spent some time reading, which is something you might try one day, in order to get with it a little more, instead of looking in the mirror so much. :8

"I do not doubt the relationship between height/birdstrikes"

So what is your argument then? That is my original point - you've just agreed with it. Thanks for your support. Goodbye.

whoateallthepies

28th May 2005, 21:10

Mightygem
If you want to start a p*$$**g match for things through windscreens!!
http://i.1asphost.com/whoateallthepies/horse_windshield_spainsm.jpeg

mickjoebill

28th May 2005, 22:36

Is this a reason to fly wearing a helmet fitted with visor?

Would a laminated screen made much diference?
Which light utility helis have laminated screens?

Mickjoebill

SilsoeSid

28th May 2005, 22:41

"You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life." Winston Churchill

Whirlygig

28th May 2005, 23:22

WAATP,

The first time you posted that photo was pretty offensive and it ain't much better now! Although a bit smaller, IIRC.

Cheers

Whirlygig

whoateallthepies

29th May 2005, 00:14

Different context Whirly.

I appreciate not everybody has the same black humour which can hang around emergency services units.

Bertie Thruster

29th May 2005, 09:45

Glad for them that it was nothing worse; quite a big bird!

I would estimate about 1/3 of the helicopter tasks I have carried out in the last 25 years have been between 0-500ft, 1/2 around 500ft and the rest up to 1500ft.

I suggest that avoiding birds is a regular proceedure in most helicopter operations.

Hitting one is simply a matter of chance, hence the clear visors.

SilsoeSid

29th May 2005, 11:33

Any doubts about the birdstrikes and luck relationship?

Watch this. (http://www.killsometime.com/Video/video.asp?video=Bird-Baseball)

Download from here (http://www.funfry.com/data//689/2Accident-Baseball-Hits-Bird-Video-FunFry_com.mpeg) (1.5 Mb)

Saturday, March 24, 2001

During the seventh inning of the Diamondbacks' split-squad 10-6 victory against the Giants on Saturday, the NL Cy Young winner hit and killed a dove flying in front of home plate.

Johnson's pitch to the Giants' Calvin Murray was about three-fourths of the way to home plate when it struck the bird.

The bird flew over catcher Rod Barajas' head and landed a few feet from the plate amid a sea of feathers.

"I'm sitting there waiting for it, and I'm expecting to catch the thing, and all you see is an explosion," Barajas said. "It's crazy. There's still feathers down there."
(http://espn.go.com/mlb/news/2001/0325/1161522.html)

:uhoh:

Have a safe Bank Holiday.
:ok:
SS

on21

29th May 2005, 17:16

but thats the type of humor that keeps us turning in every shift!

SilsoeSid

29th May 2005, 21:37

It's a good job that hare and rabbits don't fly, because their timing and luck is at about the same level as our feathered friends!

An unlucky hare at a touring car race! (http://www.geocities.com/pprunessilsoesid/haretouringcar.zip) (199kb)
Hare blood and guts warning!

:ugh:
SS

(p.s. No I won't get on to car crashes etc!)

Heli-Ice

29th May 2005, 23:44

WAATP!

You should buy a bigger car before taking your dates out for a drive! :}

Did I actually say that?

Skycop

30th May 2005, 00:29

I have never had a birdstrike while flying above 500 feet agl. Had lots below that height in the previous military job though. If you are in the dangerous height band (below 1,000 ft according to the research stats) then it is probably just down to luck or a matter of time.....

The ones arguing against probably spend too much time in the weeds and perhaps know no other way to operate.

Whirlygig

30th May 2005, 00:40

Well I had my one and only birdstrike after 33 hours (just checked my logbook!). Definitely below 500ft as I making a final approach to the airfield. Wasn't much left of the crow and I needed a G&T while the engineers checked it all out :ok:

The airfield was a busy international airport with bird scaring in operation. Obviously takes a lot to scare a crow ;)

Cheers

Whirlygig

ShyTorque

30th May 2005, 00:46

The one you hit is probably now very scared.

Whirlygig

30th May 2005, 01:11

The one you hit is probably now very scared

Scared? I think the last thing that went through his mind was his a....

Cheers

Whirls

SilsoeSid

30th May 2005, 10:27

skycop;

Didn't you say of meBirdstrike avoidance is NOT a case of luck - I'm surprised a professional pilot made that statement! But, In your last post didn't you just say;If you are in the dangerous height band (below 1,000 ft according to the research stats) then it is probably just down to luck or a matter of time..... :confused: :confused: :confused:

So, you admit luck has its part! Thank you!

I for one know no other way of being in that band in order to land or take off! (ain't no weeds around this urban jungle to fly around in anyway !!!!)
I have never had a birdstrike while flying above 500 feet agl. I'll wager soon you'll be eating those words, accompanied with a nice cut of pigeon or other seasonal delight. Have the crew ready with a nice little Chianti, (alcohol free of course!) and it won't be such a bad outing after all! ;)

According to the CAA Safety Sense Leaflet 10B, Bird Avoidance;Birds of Prey have been known to attack aircraft!
Perhaps this wasn\'t a \'birdstrike\' as such anyway!! :suspect:

VISORS DOWN AND LOCKED!!

:ok:
ss

jayteeto

30th May 2005, 10:50

I have had 3 birdstrikes in 20 months of police flying around liverpool. First at 400'/120kts which was a low cloud day. Second was at 1200'/120kts at NIGHT!! (poor owl) and the most recent was a swift/swallow at 1000'/120kts. It is usually bad luck in my opinion, however the fact is that the lower you fly the more things there are to hit. Kids balloons look lethal!!

Banjo

30th May 2005, 11:25

The lowest level bird strike I have had was at only 107 inches AGL.
That is the height of the mast on the R22 I had just started and was running through pre take-off checks in while sat on the airport apron when a suicidal wood pigeon decided to fly through the disc. Shut down to check for damage and found the obvious remains all over the tail of the aircraft. Definitely did nothing for the nervous trial lesson I had in with me.

Johe02

30th May 2005, 18:06

Mike Smith taught me. . 'less than 90kts if below 2000ft'

When birds see you they need to 'fake' in one direction before they fly away in the other. If you fly more than 90kts it doesn't give them chance to do that so. . . :ouch:

John Eacott

30th May 2005, 21:54

Just a thought: do any of you use landing lamps whilst low level, or in a high risk zone? Birds will react to a flash of light far quicker than either the noise or sight of an oncoming vehicle: try flashing your headlamps at a bird in the road and see the reaction.

Most dipper pilots would have experienced large sea birds playing around the rotor wash when sitting in a 40' hover pinging for subs. They have been known to miscalculate; I even had one go through the disk whilst running on the flight deck :p

Skycop

30th May 2005, 23:28

SS, you miss my original point, so keen were you to jump in with criticism. Which IS: If you operate all the time in the bit of sky where there are more birds, then the risk of birdstrike is more likely. If you can fly higher, you reduce the risk. Glad to hear this has prompted you to read the CAA safety leaflet. Perhaps the first time as you seem surprised by the content?

Yes, some big birds of prey can be aggressive to anything airborne, which is what I meant when I said that the Buzzard is territorial.

During my time in Belize in the late 1970s / early 80s, RAF Harrier pilots often found out the hard way that a local hawk species mistook the head-on profile of their jets, with their pronounced wing anhedral, for a "stooping" competitor and they were very prone to "tip in" for a fight. This resulted in a bit more of a fight than they thought - as the jets were doing 420 kts....

As there were no low-flying restrictions at all out there, we sometimes used to fly down from APC to Rideau (100 nm) at low level, just for fun. One day I came within a gnat's wotsit of hitting a big formation of brown pelicans which certainly taught me a lesson - after that I usually stayed up at medium level for those transit flights.

Gulls are also very dangerous as you say, because although they aren't aggressive they fly in large unruly flocks and seem to have no fear of a mid-air collision. If you watch a flock of them you can see it for yourself - they often bump each other in flight. They are careless fliers - bad news for an aircraft in the same bit of airspace as they are BIG birds.

Some years back I had a heavy birdstrike at around midnight, over the sea at 500', with a casualty on board, flying under a September moon in hazy conditions. Whatever we hit blotted out the lights of Hong Kong Island and the moon just before it hit us - it was VERY big. I suspect it was a large black-eared kite (wingspan well over a metre). It hit the front of the aircraft just above my head, solid structure rather than glass windscreen and it bounced off, or I might not be here arguing with you. We landed with blood, feathers, meat and guts all over the top of the aircraft, including on the main pitch rods but no real damage occurred other than some big scratches through the paint right down to the composite fibre flight control cowling.

In my most recent employment we tend to cruise at 2000 ft or above and there are certainly FAR fewer birds up there. Something I am very conscious of as I don't have the luxury of wearing a clear visor these days.

John - YES, we switch on the searchlight as we descend from the cruise - it's a checklist item.

SilsoeSid

31st May 2005, 00:56

skycop;
Some years back I had a heavy birdstrike at around midnight, over the sea at 500', True to your word I see,
I have never had a birdstrike while flying above 500 feet agl.Are you sure about the 'around midnight' part, as you are so accurate with your height! :=
I wont argue the AGL/ASL bit!!

As for your exploits in Belize, having done that same trip countless times in a Gazelle, we realised the dangers of low flying out there before we attempted anything silly like a low level 100NM transit trip for no tactical reason!

The thought of a 'Toucan strike' tends to put the wary aviator in his place!

In Hong Kong, the Scout tended to scare anything else out of the skies!! ;)

Brunei, 89, I was in the back of a Scout, carrying out winch man duties, sat on the floor with my feet on skids when I had a birdstrike on my left leg during a transit. Now that did smart a bit!
Mrs Sid says she remembers that she had to wash my trousers a few times to get the stains out. Both the blood and other bodily fluids!! :yuk:

(What was that earlier about pi$$ing matches?)

As for lamps, any flight around Strensham or indeed out of my protective ATC zone! In particular pursuits up/down the Motorways! But mainly for the attention of other aircraft.

http://www.boomspeed.com/carolrobert/driver.gif
SS

Thomas coupling

31st May 2005, 09:03

You get a light for free on the front of your helo - use it all the time, why don't you?

Isn't the price of a burnt out bulb 2 to 3 times a year worth it?

I have been flying in and around the hills and cliffs here for 11 years and (touch wood) never had a bird strike. Atleast half of that time I've been 'low level' trying to keep out of the way of bigger metal birds!
I've gleaned the following:

Birds definitely 'see' my lights - they abruptly manouevre well before I'm in their airspace.

Kestrels and Buzzards in particular will NOT move for you!

Anywhere a thermal is formed, you can guarantee there will be birds (well in excess of 'low level').

Cliffs are a magnet to birdies.

Most birds fold their wings and dive to avoid you.

Swans fly at 25,000 :D

SilsoeSid

31st May 2005, 11:05

Nice one TC.

I for one wasn't aware that lamps were effective 'bird scarers'. Judging by the amount of activity at this time of year, perhaps it's something that warrants more consideration.

A quick google search (http://www.copters.com/mech/r22_accident_analysis.html) came up with;

"COLLISION WITH AIRBORNE OBJECT - although it is not always possible to avoid a birdstrike, balloon/kite strike, etc., training techniques in-flight and in a simulator can teach the pilot how to react when a collision is imminent to avoid a catastrophic accident. The U .S. Navy has demonstrated that simply turning on a landing light when a high concentration of birds is encountered will greatly reduce the chances of a bird strike. Many other techniques can be employed and must be taught to new pilots. "

Like you say, a burnt out bulb is better than a replacement screen. :ugh:

SS

Bertie Thruster

31st May 2005, 12:25

I have always flown with a landing light on during daylight.

No bird strike yet.

212man

31st May 2005, 13:48

The landing light can also help avoid birdstrikes of the large aluminium kind; always a bonus!

whoateallthepies

31st May 2005, 15:53

Just for info I had both landing lamps on when the buzzard hit.

Skycop

31st May 2005, 17:43

SS,

You asked "Are you sure about the 'around midnight' part, as you are so accurate with your height! I wont argue the AGL/ASL bit!!"

The height bit was easy, as of course you might remember from your HK days, the standard ATC clearance inside the Kai Tak zone was "not above 500 feet amsl".

You also stated: I for one wasn't aware that lamps were effective 'bird scarers'. Judging by the amount of activity at this time of year, perhaps it's something that warrants more consideration."

I'm amazed that you have flown many military hours at low level but never heard that forward facing lights are a bird deterrent! It was standard UK military low flying policy, and probably still is, for this very reason.

No wonder you've always thought that birdstrikes are merely a matter of luck...!

:rolleyes:

MightyGem

31st May 2005, 19:03

Bird strikes at night? We were at a hover over a rural area doing a search one dark night at about 1000', when on the thermal we see a standard V formation of geese(about 30-40) going underneath us! :eek:

SilsoeSid

31st May 2005, 19:35

http://www.razza.fsnet.co.uk/canda/images/cisada.jpg

Its like getting skycop to put his fingers in a terrapin pool with all these little nips!!The height bit was easy, as of course you might remember from your HK days, the standard ATC clearance inside the Kai Tak zone was "not above 500 feet amsl". As it happens, (clearing out the attic) I have 3 maps in front of me.
Two are the 50,000 HKLFC (sheet 1 west / sheet 2 east)
And the other is the 100,000 HKLFC

I am willing to be corrected of course, but heights within the KAI TAK zone were 'AAL'.
All other areas, such as ISLAND, PLOVER COVE, LANTAU, CHEUNG CHAU, JUBILEE, INNER PORT SHELTER and even SEK KONG ATZ , were related to by 'AMSL'.

If the standard clearance was in the zone was "not above 500ft AMSL", as skycop says, how on earth do you manage entry from NORTH PASS or EAST PASS when their heights are given as 1500ft AMSL for entry?
I'm amazed that you have flown many military hours at low level but never heard that forward facing lights are a bird deterrent! It was standard UK military low flying policy, and probably still is, for this very reason. I must admit, so am I.
I can say that I don't recall this being mentioned at all in reference to birds. I hadn't thought of it as a bird deterrent.
As for it still being policy, living not far from the A1, it would seem that the word hasn't got round to the Chinook, Lynx, Gazelle, Apache, Puma world about this "standard UK military low flying policy".
And as for the Tucanos, Harriers, Tornados and the odd Jaguar, the word still has quite a way to go round!!

Lights on, lights on, GO!
:ok:
SS

Bertie Thruster

31st May 2005, 19:58

Didn't Shawbury once teach a modified 'FREDAH' check that included landing light, before descending low level?

SilsoeSid

31st May 2005, 21:00

'Normal' Low level checks;

'FREDAH' +VL

Fuel, Radio, Engine, DI, Altitude, Harness, Visors, Lookout.

perhaps 'FREDAHVLL'?

Skycop

31st May 2005, 22:32

Yawn!

Well done Sid, you've finally won the PPOTY Award for 2005.

It was not above 500 amsl as we were over the sea coming back from the south west via Green Island.

The prize is a bottle of shampoo - the sort that fixes split ends, which I'm sure you'll find very useful. If you'd only got second, you would have got the case of eggs to suck.

p.s. Wrong country for little nips - that's a bit further NE.

:bored: :zzz:

;)

SilsoeSid

31st May 2005, 23:20

Thanks for the award skycop. Of course there are others I would like to thank.....etc ;)
It was not above 500 amsl as we were over the sea coming back from the south west via Green Island.Which , if I may I point out, is not within the Kai Tak Zone. Green Island was 'AT' 500ft, as was 'West Pass' and 'Tsin Yi'. Of course you'll remember the noticable exception was 'Lei Yue Mun Crossing' at 300ft.

So let me get this straight. You were at 500ft AMSL passing Green Island. In the Kai Tak Zone you would have had to adjust to 500ft AAL in order to comply with ATC instructions.
You had your birdstrike within the zone.
Kai Taks elevation is/was 28ft. Therefore you had your birdstrike at 528ft AMSL.I have never had a birdstrike while flying above 500 feet agl. But one above 500ft AMSL !

Off to get some conditioner to go with my prize. :ok:

SS

ShyTorque

1st Jun 2005, 10:02

Better get a couple of bottles as I never said I had reached Green Island... :8

SO, having cleared SS's distracting aside and reaching way back to the original incident - Why does Shoreham have a rejoin procedure that requires a helicopter to be below 500' agl outside the ATZ?

Spanish Waltzer

1st Jun 2005, 11:15

IIRC the Shawbury/CFS teaching of low level checks has changed a number of times since Bertie's time.

I stand by to be corrected but I believe it is now HOVL -

Height - including authorised minima and radalt bug setting
Obstructions - including lookout and crew arcs of responsibility
Visors - Down
Landing Lamp - on

I have to also agree with SS that I do not remember being told that the landing light was part of the checks as a bird deterrent rather than for conspicuity for other low flying aircraft - makes sense though.

jayteeto

1st Jun 2005, 13:26

Landing lamp has always been selected for conspicuity AND birds, even in my Jet Provost days

jumpseater

1st Jun 2005, 17:08

I've been doing work on a project involving FW operations and birdstrikes at aerodromes. Some figures may be of interest here to the rotary comunity. Due to dealing with FW ops I looked at arrival and departure stats, to determine trends etc and note that the research was based around FW related operations.

69% of all departure strikes happened at or below 250ft AGL

59% of all arrival strikes occurred at or below 500ft AGL

85% of all recorded strikes occured when Pilot reported visibility in EXCESS of 10km. The number of birdstrikes drops dramtically when the runway is reported as wet, i.e. its raining or has just finished raining.
We don't appear to have any significant data on time of strikes, however it is generally regarded that dawn and dusk are 'prime time' for bird strikes.

These are probably the most relevant stats based on an intensively operated flying programme Europe wide.

There does not appear top be any specific evidence that landing lights illuminated prevent birdstrikes, and neither do colour schemes or those 'swiggles' on the spinners of props/fans.

One European airfield is looking at raptor use, even though there are natural avian predators at the same airfield. This is because the species do recognise each other and the threat they pose to each other, so the 'they all recognise sillouette X or Y as a threat' does not unfortunately hold true.

If there is a bird control unit at the airfield you operate from, its worth popping in to see them, they may well have knowledge of bird concentrations/local habitats/migratory routes that you are unaware of and vice versa of course!. For remote sites or those unconnected to an airport theres quite a bit you can do to minimise the possibility of birdstrikes in the vicinity of the landing pad too. I can drone on for a while on this but I'll end now, if anyone has any q's them ask away and I'll try to answer them as best I can.

Bearintheair

1st Jun 2005, 22:46

If you're joining (or departing) Shm from a direction that will conflict with the FW circuit the standard instruction for all helos is not above 600 ft in the zone.

overpitched

2nd Jun 2005, 02:17

Hers's an article on helicopter bird strikes

http://www.bellhelicopter.com/en/training/pdf/heliprops_16_1.pdf

John Eacott

2nd Jun 2005, 04:27

Further to my comment a couple of days ago about flashing car headlamps at birds to get their attention: a very useful addition to landing lamps is the Pulselite system, which flashes the landing lamps on and off to make the aircraft more apparent. A number of manufacturers have STC'd units, a simple Google will give them.

They are required on contracted fire fighting helicopters here, but I first used them about 15 years ago on a 109. If you have more than one lamp, and they are close together, set them to pulse together rather than alternately. If they are far apart, alternate flashing is best :ok:

Barndweller

2nd Jun 2005, 10:27

Mildly related to topic, but interesting / amusing none the less..

Urban legend from the north sea about pilot who, fed up with the Cr@p food on a particular oil rig, decided to throw the remains of his bacon roll out the window whilst rotors running on the deck. This was the que for the seagulls loitering above to instantly dive on the goodies forgetting the small matter of the rotor disc. Dozens of seagulls through the blades and very red faces inside.

Also... When flying as a crewman in the distant past , copped a wood pidgeon on the shoulder / back whilst sitting in the door. Caught the movement in my peripheral vision and brain decided to turn away from it rather than look towards it. Just as well or i'd have taken it in the face at 100kts - Endex methinks.

Overwhelming thoughts on this thread... HELMETS!!!