what would you do in this emergency scenerio?

[Plasmech]

Guppy, hitting birds won't cause much damage? An acquaintance of mine hit a flock of birds climbing out at 2000' at around 100 knots. Several bounced off the airframe, but one came straight through the middle of the windshield taking off his glasses and headset, leaving him with a large gash on the side of his head. He dialled in 7700 and returned to the airport. If it had been slightly more over his side he would have not have survived. I have photos of the results.

Agree 100%.

I've seen many pictures of bird strikes. Yes, of course the faster an aircraft is going the more damage a given bird is going to do, but in some ways it's all relative. For example, a CFM56 is designed to be able to ingest birds...during testing actual dead birds are fed into an engine. A 737 also has a MUCH stronger multi-layer laminated windshield. While a 737 is going to hit a bird a heck of a lot faster than a 152, a bird could just as easily if not more easily penetrate the 152's windshield, or completely disable its engine that was never tested for a bird (most likely prop) strike. Faster (usually larger) aircraft have much more system redundancy built into them as well.

I myself would not want to hit a bird in a 152 nor would I consider it a "non event". This holds true while I have only 4 lessons under my belt and will continue to hold true forever.

[Fuji Abound]

For the little spamcans that most of us here fly, the legal rule in such a scenario is actually to go to a non-controlled airport and land there.

I'd like to see that rule?

If you have a problem that warrants it (I am not talking about this problem especially) you land at the nearest available airport.

It is nonesense to ever suggest otherwise. I have had people tell me when your engine quits in a twin the other engine is to get you home. The other engine is to get you to the closest airport - if it happens to be an inter galactic port so be it! I guarantee you will look really stupid when you land in a field on the way back to your home base, run over a ditch, total the air craft and crack a rib.

The rule is the same in a single - if the problem warrants it, land at an airport any airport as soon as possible. Dont think for a moment that because it is "big" airport I had better go else where. Heathrow and Fairoaks have a length of tarmac that is good to land on and always better than a field, one is a bit longer and a bit wider but thats it.

As to making a drama landing in a field shouldnt be a drama in a 152 but a field you dont know is never going to be a better option than an "airport" - if you can make the airport thats the route to take, if you cant do the best you can with the field.

[SNS3Guppy]

I did just last night learn about squawk codes while doing a Cessna cloud based lesson. 7500, never planning on needing that one. 7600 for coms failure and 7700 rings the doorbell to the afterlife.

"Rings the doorbell to the afterlife?"

Is it possible that you can get any more melodramatic?

[LH2]

Originally Posted by SNS3Guppy

"Rings the doorbell to the afterlife?"

Is it possible that you can get any more melodramatic?

I think you are being a bit of tit there mate. Don't know if it's the same in the US, in Europe we are taught using the mnemonics "75... taken alive, 76... in a fix, 77... could be going to heaven". I took the above as a reference to that which, while a bit melodramatic if you think about it, is just the way we memorise them codes.

I did like the points made by Genghis further up, so I would say this thread has served a useful purpose at least as far as I'm concerned.

And a small remark regarding a comment by Backpacker: not every controlled airport wants you to bugger off if NORDO. Last I checked, most AENA airports have a published NORDO procedure involving a special circuit and light signals. I do agree however that as a generalisation his comments reflect accurately the usual state of affairs.

[gileraguy]

Does a vivid imagination make flying more perilous?

(I remember feeling a heavy thump on the nose wheel just before rotation and for the rest of the flight I sweated out the landing, thinking the tyre was ripped off the rim! (it wasn't)))

[Plasmech]

"Rings the doorbell to the afterlife?"

Is it possible that you can get any more melodramatic?

The "afterlife" comment was sarcasm on my part.

Tell you what guy, since you seem to despise me, how about just skipping over my posts? You're not teaching me or anybody else anything except for the fact that you need psychological help, seriously.

You are trying to make me out to be but a mere "civilian" whose only perception of aviation is what I have seen from Hollywood, and you are going to great pains to do so. RELAX. Give it up. You will live a longer healthier life if you get your heart rate down.

[SNS3Guppy]

In the United States, we teach that 7500 is used for hijack or illegal interference with a crew member; 7600 is for radio failure, and 7700 is a general emergency squawk. No special mnemonics needed.

No airport is going to turn away emergency traffic; not even a military field with strict entrance and landing requirements.

Light signals are established for lost communications. One need only land, either at the nearest airfield, or at an expedient precautionary landing site off-field. Problem solved.

Lost communication is not the end of the world, nor is it much concern. There is no certain death here. There is no doorbell to the afterlife.

A forced landing should be a familiar event if one has been properly trained.

I've had thousands of bird strikes over the years; some have done significant damage in high speed aircraft, most have done little more than leave blood and feathers. I've shared the cockpit with birds on a number of occasions. I've had bird strikes in 152's and 172's and a falcon crushed the wing in a 210 I flew, back to the spar. Many of the birds, the vast majority, were flocks through which I flew while doing ag work. Approach low to the crop, my sound footprint masked, the birds rose up right in front of me, often resulting in flying through the entire flock.

Bird strike damage varies in severity. Most bird strikes occur at low altitude. I have experienced two at night at 10,000', and the 210 wing damage occurred between seven and eight thousand, but the majority of my bird encounters happened at low altitude.

I don't believe I've ever heard of a cracked fuel tank in a Cessna 152 resulting from a bird strike.

Generally in the professional world, we train for emergencies in singularity; we don't do compound emergencies during training for a reason. They seldom happen. That's not to say that one emergency doesn't lead to another, because this is often the case. Compound emergencies also happen, though in extreme rarity. The famous case of the airbus in the river (Sullenberger) recently is such an example, as is UAL 232 at Sioux City, with the loss of all hydraulics.

In theory, a severe bird strike with a really large bird could damage one communication antenna, though that doesn't necessarily impair communication. Another bird strike sufficient to crush a wing and "crack" a fuel cell is more fantastical, and in combination with the damage to the antenna, of rather long odds. The loss of the transponder is curious as to how or why, but the timing is fantastic.

The only issues of note in the scenario are that the airplane is flyable and under control, and that a suitable landing site exists. The problem is, therefore, solved.

[Fright Level]

With fuel gone out of only one wing with a gravity feed and typically being "topped off" before each flight, you surely have some flying time left before the other tank is dry? Halve the original endurance, knock off 30 mins reserve and surely there is enough time to get to a smaller airport?

[BEagle]

Just land at the airport. Anyway, what sort of bird is so slow and stupid that it cannot get out of the way if it sees a Cesspit 152 in its way?

Worst birdstrike I ever had was in a car. A pheasant flew out of the hedge, dented the corner of the front wing, took out a wing mirror and broke the radio antenna.

When I stopped to recover the mirror, I turned off the engine as I got out - only for the electric antenna motor to try to wind in the remains of the antenna, which then flailed about scratching the paintwork to hell... So I grabbed it and tried to stop it, then wondered what to do next as the tug-of-war contined. Got back in, turned the power back on, then found a pair of pliers to remove the remains of the antenna, power off, pull fuse.

And the wretched pheasant had bounced over the hedge, so I couldn't even take it home and eat it!

[ShyTorque]

There you go, so make a precautionary landing, find the pheasant and take it home for supper.

[BackPacker]

I'd like to see that rule?

Okay, you got me. I just checked and, indeed, it's not a general rule. In the Netherlands, it's buried deep in the AD part of the AIP. So the VFR lost comms procedure is apparently specific to each aerodrome.

Here's for instance AIP AD EHAM, para 2.22:

4.4 Communication failure procedures for VFR flights at Schiphol
4.4.1 General

Select SSR code 7600.
4.4.2 VFR outbound

In case of communication failure adhere to the departure instructions. If the departure instructions contain a clearance limit in the CTR, act in accordance with 4.4.4.
4.4.3 VFR inbound
4.4.3.1 Via VICTOR Arrival

1. In case of communication failure before joining the circuit, leave the CTR according to VICTOR Departure and divert to an appropriate aerodrome.
2. In case of communication failure over or after a position from where to join the circuit (this is past the compulsory reporting point BRAVO), execute a circuit as short as practicable for the last received and acknowledged runway (helispot). If the runway appears to be clear, make a full stop landing and vacate as soon as possible, otherwise go around and execute a similar circuit (be aware of the fact that your flight path could interfere with the flight path of other aerodrome traffic).

4.4.3.2 Via a different route to the field

1. In case of communication failure before joining the circuit, act in accordance with 4.4.4.
2. In case of communication failure after joining the circuit, act in accordance with 4.4.3.1 item b.
3. In case of communication failure overhead the centre of the aerodrome, maintain altitude, proceed to point BRAVO, act in accordance with 4.4.3.1 item a.

4.4.4 VFR crossing the CTR

In case of communication failure leave the CTR via the shortest route (radial wise), maintain altitude until outside the CTR, do not cross a runway centre line or ILS area and proceed to an appropriate aerodrome.

I found essentially the same instructions for EHRD, EHGG and EHBK, which are the other civilian controlled airports in the Netherlands. I have no idea about other controlled airports around the world, but it should be in the local AIP somehow.

So that's another item to check when planning a flight to a controlled aerodrome. Particularly if you expect large birds en-route that may take out all your comms.

[Ryan5252]

You are trying to make me out to be but a mere "civilian" whose only perception of aviation is what I have seen from Hollywood, and you are going to great pains to do so. RELAX. Give it up. You will live a longer healthier life if you get your heart rate down.

To be fair though, you do fuel the fire with the substance of your posts. You started the thread with an emergency scenario (albeit long winded and far-fetched) and asked for the advice of others on here as to what they would do, prompted by your recent studying of emergency procedures. As you can see from the responses, regardless of the nature (or number) of 'emergencies' one's reaction is always the same; Fly the plane! Then depending on the situation you assess your best course of action. You put in down in a field, road or runway. Ultimately, the buck stops with you. You are in command and responsible for the safe conduct of your flight. No one else. There are many, many pilots of many backgrounds and levels of experience on these forums and we all will have differing views on exactly what is the best course of action and will argue amongst ourselves for days on end as to which is best - but we will all agree with one thing; we will fly the plane first, after that its up to you. Try not to think too hard at this stage of your training, it will all come together nicely at some point. Airmanship is not a skill that be taught or gleamed from a book, it is one which is acquired over time with experience and your level of airmanship in such an occasion will either be your saving grace or your doom.

As regards to the Gupster (looks like that’s gonna stick ) I have been on ****ty end of his 'rants' more than once, but when one learns not to get too upset about them and actually look into the content of what he is saying one can learn a lot and generally take something productive and informative away - why else would anyone keep coming back for more? However, I'm afraid I agree with him in this case - from your posts you are spending too much time playing FSX and watching pilots shooting themselves in the movies and not enough time doing research on real world procedures. YouTube is your friend - there are tons of videos on there from Sun'n Fun for example, some up to an hour long which will teach you alot about real world flying.

[BackPacker]

You're not teaching me or anybody else anything

Speak for yourself buddy.

Although I don't always like the Gupsters (yep, it's gonna stick) tone and I have indeed crossed swords with him on one or two occasions, I acknowledge that he's got an incredible wealth of experience, way more than I ever will acquire, and I find a very large number of his posts very informative.

If you find that he's not teaching you anything, then either you're not reading his posts for what they're worth, or you are too inexperienced to grasp where they're coming from.

[thing]

I too find on occasion the Gupster has an erudite answer to a question, if no people skills, however we can't have everything. The only thing that niggles me slightly with the wealth of experience in everything that the Gupster has, shouldn't he be about 700 years old and therefore a Timelord..........?

Gupssy, that was British humour, no need for a response.

[SNS3Guppy]

Gupssy, that was British humour, no need for a response.

As some may be aware, mine is a British family, with the odd Welshman thrown in (hence a strong affinity for blackened sheep), and a very solid Irish half (for which I make no apology, and to which I naturally gravitate). I grew up with an English accent, and while I'm not British, I'm fairly sure Timelords apply to Doctor Who (an export that would have been far better served restricted to Great Britain). I never really understood the whole thing.

Consider this a needless response.

Anyway, what sort of bird is so slow and stupid that it cannot get out of the way if it sees a Cesspit 152 in its way?

Indeed. A careful inspection of the trailing edge of the wings of the Cessna 152 are the best place to inspect for bird strikes. These usually occur when being overtaken.

[vabsie]

I too find SNS3Guppy's posts very helpful - He actually takes the time to explain most of his posts. As a student, I find this helpful regardless of what some might make of the tone.

As far as I'm concerned, keep up the debates (heated or not) as that's how I learn.

Vabsie

[thing]

Well you're probably right Gups, Dr Who is peculiarly British. I'm of Scottish descent, my wife is of Irish descent (my brother in law owns a pub in Ireland, how good is that?) and my daughter was born in St Asaph in Wales so you're talking to a fairly well rounded Brit.

[SNS3Guppy]

For example, a CFM56 is designed to be able to ingest birds...during testing actual dead birds are fed into an engine.

The CFM56 is most assuredly, absolutely NOT designed to ingest birds. It's tested for the effects of bird strikes against fan blade integrity. It is not designed for bird strikes, however.

A 737 also has a MUCH stronger multi-layer laminated windshield. While a 737 is going to hit a bird a heck of a lot faster than a 152, a bird could just as easily if not more easily penetrate the 152's windshield, or completely disable its engine that was never tested for a bird (most likely prop) strike.

What a 737 can or can't do is largely irrelevant.

When you talk about a bird disabling the engine on a 152, you're confused. When you compare it to a CFM56 you're also confused. Where tests have been conducted on turbofan engine fan blades, the birds were not fed into the engine itself, and the birds were not tested through the engine.

Bird strikes to the engine of the Cessna 152 are really meangless, as there's little means for a bird to be ingested into the engine. A bird passing through the propeller is really a non-event. Most of the time the bird doesn't survive the passage. The propeller, however does. Further, the stresses on a propeller blade traveling at 2,500 rpm are very different than those on a thin fan blade turning at 5000 or higher RPM.

In a worse-case scenario in which a bird manages to block the induction air inlet (bearing in mind that the induction in the 152 isn't easy to block, and comes with an alternate air source to rectify the situation, in the form of the carburetor air heat control), it's fixable. A bird isn't going to damage the cylinders or engine case. The engine installation in the Cessna 152, then, is entirely unlike that on a B737.

Examples of significant bird strikes:
Significant Bird Strikes to Aircraft

Debunking some myths surrounding bird strikes:
Bird Strike Committee USA

A Cessna 152 bird strike:
YouTube - Bird strike against cessna 152/ Impacto de ave. Argentina

[Fuji Abound]

As some may be aware, mine is a British family,

I thought all Yanks were originally British (or Irish) .. .. well nearly all.

Reluctantly I even must accept you speak better English than we .. .. well at least in the sense of old English.

Shame

[SNS3Guppy]

Reluctantly I even must accept you speak better English than we .. .. well at least in the sense of old English.

Is there any other kind?

I have my mother to blame for that; the same one who insisted that cowboy boots are a sin.

I thought all Yanks were originally British (or Irish) .. .. well nearly all.

Not really.

The truly original ones were there before any one else showed up.