Bird Strikes on the Increase

[Anthony Supplebottom]

The number of bird strike incidents at Britain's airports has nearly doubled with three ''significant hits'' a week, according to the Civil Aviation Authority.

In both 2011 and 2012 more than 2,200 bird strike reports were recorded by the CAA, nearly 1,000 more than in 2007 when just 1,299 were reported.

There has also been a steady rise in the number of cases in which pilots have reported damage to their aircraft, rising from 132 in 2010 to 167 in 2012.

In two cases pilots were forced to issue MAYDAY calls. One involved an Airbus A321 flying out of Luton, which was hit by a flock of birds shortly after take off, forcing the pilot to shut off an engine. The other saw an Airbus A320 having to return to Heathrow shortly after a bird struck take off after one of its engines shortly after take off. Other incidents have included a passenger jet declaring an emergency after being hit by greenfinches as it came in to land at Gatwick.

The most spectacular recent bird strike incident took place in New York in 2009 when a US Airways Airbus A320 was forced to ditch into the Hudson River after being hit by a large flock of birds.

Recognised as a global aviation problem, airports have become increasingly imaginative in their efforts to keep birds and aircraft apart. At Fort Myers, Florida, a border collie, called Sky, has been used to scare birds away from the runway.

Bird strikes damage three aircraft a week - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/aviation/10257036/Bird-strikes-damage-three-aircraft-a-week.html)

[joy ride]

Confirming my concerns about building an airport in the Thames/Medway estuary, the breeding ground of millions of sea birds.

[T-21]

Its not just aircraft whilst driving to work last year pigeon flew into my windscreen at 55mph . Big bang,laminated screen cracked blood/feathers ,both wipers removed. Lost my £85 excess getting it fixed . Shuttleworths Collection had a nice hole in the leading edge of their Hurricane recently.

[Earl of Rochester]

Confirming my concerns about building an airport in the Thames/Medway estuary, the breeding ground of millions of sea birds.

I shall gladly have them removed in order to see the project proceed and the Medway towns benefit from the industry. :ok: ;)

[joy ride]

Damned birds invading our domain!

[HDRW]

I don't know how widely known it is, but after Sully's ditching New York City rounded up as many Canada Geese as they could, put them in a warehouse and gassed them. A despicable attitude, in my opinion. I understand EGLL has a number of strategies to deal with the problem, from the Landrovers equipped with PA to play bird alarm-calls to scare flocks away, to leaving the grass at such a length that birds are discouraged from landing there because they can't see approaching predators. Do airports share their ideas on this sort of thing, I wonder?

[Yellow & Blue Baron]

I don't know how widely known it is, but after Sully's ditching New York City rounded up as many Canada Geese as they could, put them in a warehouse and gassed them.

You are joking yes?

[phiggsbroadband]

Quote
The number of bird strike incidents at Britain's airports has nearly doubled with three ''significant hits'' a week, according to the Civil Aviation Authority.

I would have thought it would be more, when you compare a Comet to an A380, the size of the engine air intakes is 10-20 time bigger... You should be hovering up 10 times more. (and the number of flights/day has increased significantly.)

Hope those Canada Geese tasted good....

[HDRW]

You are joking yes?I wish I was. There are several reports online about it, this is one example:
Volunteers flock to save NYC's Canada geese Metro.us (http://www.metro.us/newyork/news/2013/06/11/volunteers-flock-to-save-nycs-canada-geese/)

[good egg]

The regulators do...

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP772.pdf

http://www.faa.gov/airports/airport_safety/wildlife/problem/media/2005_FAA_Manual_complete.pdf

...and it's not just birds...

http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/1006.pdf :ok:

[lomapaseo]

I think the thread title should reflect the reality that the reporting of bird strike incidents has nearly doubled.

Mother nature doesn't change her knickers as often as the original title implies.

Some of the reportings could indeed be due to pilots and ground crews dilligence in reporting criteria, whilst the more significant events (severe damage or multiple engine, aircraft surface strikes) show less of an increase.

Also the speculation of more hoovering of birds into larger engines doesn't jibe with engine inlet area. The birds have a tendancy to see and avoid large moving shadows. The increase is more linear than area increases (squares).

[Hen Ddraig]

The increase could of course be something to do with the CAA making the reporting of birdstrikes mandatory.

[Tarq57]

It could also be something to do with an increase in aeroplane traffic.

[grounded27]

Let's not forget shark bites.

[AndyPandy068]

More planes hit more birds, duh!

[Desert185]

Climate change or Bush's fault. Take your pick. :ugh:

[BARKINGMAD]

Some airlines discourage the use of all forward-facing lights as the inconvenience and cost of filament replacement has been noticed by the beancounters, who don't risk their a*ses every day............

Some say don't use the nosewheel steering light as it gets hammered by the C/L lights on the runway when/if we can maintain the C/L and therefore requires more frequent replacement.......................

Myth has it that the weather radar repels our feathered friends, it doesn't as anyone who's observed the activities of birds near airfield radar installations can testify.....................

I have statistical evidence that the brighter the light(s), the lower the strike rate, this on a 'frame with taxi and landing lights behind perspex covers in the leading edges roughly mid wingspan...............

As everyday operating practice I use every forward-facing light, vis conditions permitting, despite the mutterings that "it's not SOP!"..............

Of course our backroom managers are more concerned with the cost and inconvenience of filament replacement than they are with the possibility of a hull loss, indicating the disconnect between modern airline leadership and the real world of everyday operations, as clearly enunciated in other fora in this site. :ugh:

[FlightCosting]

Back in the 70`s I was discussing the technical merits of the F28 with an Engineer from Indian Airlines. He kept asking me about something that sounded like "bardits"
I asked him to clarify what he meant, to which he said "How much do you think a fully grown vulture weighs after a good meal?" He then went on to tell me they had to rebuild an F27 after a vulture had been mashed up by the prop and bits had got into the air on system. Oh the delicate aroma of rotting vulture flowing through the cabin!

Engine manufacturers do bird strike safety tests by shooting a chicken at the engine to check damage. GE did this when testing an engine. The result was a big hole through the engine. They took a chicken out of the freezer and forgot to defrost it before they shot it at the engine.

[4Greens]

In my youth having a falcon on standby at our base meant no birds hanging around. You need to let the falcon loose ocasionally to take one out. It keeps their interest up.

[Basil]

Aahh, I thought the OP meant they were refusing to get airborne :O

rounded up as many Canada Geese as they could, put them in a warehouse and gassed them.
Excellent! Barstewards crap everywhere when they arrive in my little town.

[Yankee Whisky]

A Shuttlebottom posted the above title in his story. Sure, "number of birdstrikes" can increase and makes one think the birds are taking over the skies !
Now, everyone knows that this is only one part of the total picture, which is the ratio per numbers of
activity in which bird strikes occurred. So, please report this in a rate per number of flights or hours flown, so that we can properly understand the impact (or lack thereof) :ugh:

[Monoccular]

I expect that the IPCC will shortly be issuing a release to the effect that "this is just one further piece of incintrovertable evidence proving the dangers and effects of anthropomorphic climate dhange", or words to that effect.

[BARKINGMAD]

It might very well be climate change?

The financial climate, which means airports will do ANYTHING to maximise their profits, in keeping with the standard psychotic behaviour of corporations and those who run them, means that any attempt to operate a "long grass policy" is doomed by the requirement to harvest the hay on the airport at the optimum time to allow the connected farmer the best product.

The RAF reckoned that a long grass policy discouraged the presence of many of the "offending" bird species, taking care to ensure the lighting systems and electronic radiators were unaffected by such vegetation.

I can't see the modern airport managers allowing this practice to interfere with the hay income, which must feature along with the shopping franchises in the terminals, in helping the beancount to look better!

[ShyTorque]

Thirty years ago my job involved flying at very low level in West Germany. Birdstrikes were commonplace occurrences. It was wasn't seen worthwhile sending remains for analysis because we would be doing it so often. For me, birdstrikes are now far less common.