A220 Bird strike [Archive]

underfire

27th Sep 2018, 16:04

Yes, A220!

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/800x500/doampujw0aaxw6c_5094e45327d828146f244321b84e2b1ba2b78abc.jpg

Aculiecinieka foto: 'airBaltic' lidma??na saskrienas ar putniem - Delfi (http://www.delfi.lv/aculiecinieks/news/riga/aculiecinieka-foto-airbaltic-lidmasina-saskrienas-ar-putniem.d?id=50428013)

Mad (Flt) Scientist

27th Sep 2018, 16:19

Yes, A220!

Well, sort of. If you look closely, it still says "Bombardier CS300" on the side of the nose ....

DaveReidUK

27th Sep 2018, 17:06

Well, sort of. If you look closely, it still says "Bombardier CS300" on the side of the nose ....

As does the Type Certificate and indeed everything related to airworthiness. Just calling it an Airbus doesn't make it one. :O

PEI_3721

27th Sep 2018, 17:40

Bird strike statistics, page 32
https://www.futuresky-safety.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/FSS_P4_NLR_D4.6_v2.0.pdf

underfire

27th Sep 2018, 18:38

Calling it the A220 was with a bit of sarcasm.

Aside from that, isnt this the first one?

msbbarratt

27th Sep 2018, 22:05

Calling it the A220 was with a bit of sarcasm.

Aside from that, isnt this the first one?

Possibly, seems to have performed adequately under the circumstances.

Royale

28th Sep 2018, 14:44

As does the Type Certificate and indeed everything related to airworthiness. Just calling it an Airbus doesn't make it one. :O
No - Its far better

good egg

28th Sep 2018, 16:51

That’ll teach ‘em for making it so damn quiet...😏

er340790

28th Sep 2018, 18:09

Ah, that would be the CS300AKAA220 then...

Nice bi-partisan solution, there!

underfire

28th Sep 2018, 18:24

Wait, looking closer at this image from the article, nothing makes sense....all the separations in the fuselage, and this engine is way out of place....there is a hell of a lot of fuselage between the door and the wing...notice where "Baltic" is on the fuselage vs the image......WTF!

Hell, at this point, I am not even certain they had a bird strike.....unless it crumple the fuselage back about 10 seats!

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/800x500/yvw5q8a_7f8371bcd01bd577bd8f4fcb710e783692a9b6e4.jpg

an impressive profile, especially the tail section....entire top is level, an the apu extends almost entirely beyond the vertical structure.
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1200x800/yl_csa_2831924493906_29_9f0cd48752abee5fea2435d67d93df1fc022 b07f.jpg

DaveReidUK

28th Sep 2018, 18:37

I've never understood why Airbus didn't just call the CS100 the A100 and the CS300 the .... oh, hang on.

Mad (Flt) Scientist

28th Sep 2018, 18:49

It is an effect of perception (angle of vision).

probably a bit of telephoto lens shortening too. There's a couple of images online that purport to show "the worlds scariest bridge" and it makes it look like a helter-skelter, but it's all due to the telephoto effect.

fleigle

29th Sep 2018, 18:13

Looks like 4 individual bird strikes to me.
f

lomapaseo

29th Sep 2018, 20:54

Looks like 4 individual bird strikes to me.
f

I can only see 3 on the nose near the vertical CL

bloom

30th Sep 2018, 02:21

I can only see 3 on the nose near the vertical CL
How about just one large bird bounced off radome hit again,split by the wipers and the third just blood trail ?

FlightlessParrot

30th Sep 2018, 02:28

Wait, looking closer at this image from the article, nothing makes sense....all the separations in the fuselage, and this engine is way out of place....there is a hell of a lot of fuselage between the door and the wing...notice where "Baltic" is on the fuselage vs the image......WTF!
....

I think if you count windows, you will see that after the "c" of "Baltic" there is one more window, then a door: exactly the same in both 3/4 view and profile. As people point out, any oddity in the 3/4 view is because the image was made at a very great distance, and the enlargement (either by long focus lens, cropping the image, or both) makes the perspective odd. The "separations in the fuselage" are surely hatches/doors, just where you'd expect them to be from the profile view, after allowing for perspective.

pattern_is_full

30th Sep 2018, 04:58

Wait, looking closer at this image from the article, nothing makes sense....all the separations in the fuselage, and this engine is way out of place....there is a hell of a lot of fuselage between the door and the wing...notice where "Baltic" is on the fuselage vs the image......WTF!

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/800x500/yvw5q8a_7f8371bcd01bd577bd8f4fcb710e783692a9b6e4.jpg

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_distortion_(photography)

Effect of a long lens or cropping, plus reflections of the open hold doors and right wing in the shiny white fuselage skin, not "separations" or creases.

lomapaseo

30th Sep 2018, 14:47

How about just one large bird bounced off radome hit again,split by the wipers and the third just blood trail ?

Birds guts don't bounce, they follow the slip stream like a large bug off your car window.

underfire

30th Sep 2018, 15:16

Effect of a long lens or cropping, plus reflections of the open hold doors and right wing in the shiny white fuselage skin, not "separations" or creases.

Got it! I was looking at this on the phone, on the computer is is much more clear....that bird is very reflective!

Volume

1st Oct 2018, 06:38

why Airbus didn't just call the CS100 the A100 and the CS300 the ....
Actually those aircraft are called officially BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11, which does not sound sexy either...

Chris2303

2nd Oct 2018, 04:29

Actually those aircraft are called officially BD-500-1A10 and BD-500-1A11, which does not sound sexy either...

As in Bede BD-5 Micro?

DaveReidUK

2nd Oct 2018, 06:40

As in Bede BD-5 Micro?

Yes, the CSeries is a development of the single-seat homebuilt ...

Or just maybe, BD = Bombardier, the manufacturer.

Mad (Flt) Scientist

2nd Oct 2018, 15:01

Yes, the CSeries is a development of the single-seat homebuilt ...

Or just maybe, BD = Bombardier, the manufacturer.

Yes.

The official type designations for the Global Express family is BD-700-nXnn (differentiated by the nXnn part) and for the Challenger 300/350 is BD-100-1A10 (no discriminating numbers, yet)

BD has been used since the constituent companies were brought together, but the pre-existing types that already had certificates when Bombardier took ownership have retained their original designations, so the original Challenger and the CRJ derivatives are all CL-600-nXxx

DaveReidUK

2nd Oct 2018, 15:45

The official type designations for the Global Express family is BD-700-nXnn (differentiated by the nXnn part) and for the Challenger 300/350 is BD-100-1A10 (no discriminating numbers, yet)

BD has been used since the constituent companies were brought together, but the pre-existing types that already had certificates when Bombardier took ownership have retained their original designations, so the original Challenger and the CRJ derivatives are all CL-600-nXxx

Yes, I was teasing the Bede fan. :O

Bombardier simply continued the identification system that Canadair introduced with the CL-215 in the 1960s, using the format you describe with just a change of prefix from "CL" to "BD" for new types.

Incidentally the reason the Challenger 300/350 don't have discriminated BD-100 TC designations is that they aren't certificated as different variants (similar to the situation with the Falcon 2000EX/LX).

EEngr

4th Oct 2018, 15:47

Looks like 4 individual bird strikes to me.

Bird kept coming back for more?
"None shall pass!"

[Apologies for the Monty Python quote]

FE Hoppy

4th Oct 2018, 16:59

Shame they are not as resistant to lighting strikes which appear to leave from as many different panels as possible.