Plane Down in Hudson River - NYC
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Birds at night
Many species of Birds migrate at night. Both short and long distance migration. If you are outside at night in the UK try this: Listen and after usually only a few minutes, you will hear the high pitched calls of Redwings overhead (a migratory Thrush). Many thousands of these Birds are constantly on the move at night.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Grantown Scotland
Age: 70
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Active bird control
As one of many aspects of my former work as an air traffic control assistant I carried out thousands of hours on the airfield doing active bird control.
RAF Kinloss suffered a terrible fatal take off birdstrike accident and as a result of the post accident recommendations the bird control team became full time covering all operational hours at Kinloss.
One part of the service included watching approach and departure paths, records of bird activity were kept, a pattern of bird movement tracked. This included large skeins of geese and birds feeding on the tidal estuary.
During the five years of my time in charge of the bird control unit we had no damage caused by birdstrikes. Air traffic relayed our warnings to aircraft resulting in take off delays, overshoots and circuit training was avoided during the high risk times.
Pioneering work in bird control came from the Dutch air force, in the Uk courses have been organised by MAFF.
To get the best out of the bird control system you need dedicated keen operatives and an air traffic system to relay warnings plus an airport authority who fully understand that it is not a part time job done by a person who skives inside the office and dashes outside to fire off a few shellcrackers
every hour.
I wonder if a proper study of bird activity has ever been done at New York airports?
RAF Kinloss suffered a terrible fatal take off birdstrike accident and as a result of the post accident recommendations the bird control team became full time covering all operational hours at Kinloss.
One part of the service included watching approach and departure paths, records of bird activity were kept, a pattern of bird movement tracked. This included large skeins of geese and birds feeding on the tidal estuary.
During the five years of my time in charge of the bird control unit we had no damage caused by birdstrikes. Air traffic relayed our warnings to aircraft resulting in take off delays, overshoots and circuit training was avoided during the high risk times.
Pioneering work in bird control came from the Dutch air force, in the Uk courses have been organised by MAFF.
To get the best out of the bird control system you need dedicated keen operatives and an air traffic system to relay warnings plus an airport authority who fully understand that it is not a part time job done by a person who skives inside the office and dashes outside to fire off a few shellcrackers
every hour.
I wonder if a proper study of bird activity has ever been done at New York airports?
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Seoul
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Considering that many on PPRuNe complain about people who buy near existing airports like LHR and then complaining about noise and expansions, it seems a bit of a double stnadard at best for some to suggest the solution to birds near airports is to get rid of the birds and bird sanctuaries near airports!! Lets face it, the birds were there first, just like LHR was there before the subdivisions. Of course, usage patterns for airports and bird sanctuaries vary over time and may be the source of conflict, the point still remains valid.
While every situation and thus solution is different and unique, I would suggest that in some situations it is the airport that needs to be relocated. This seems especially true considering that in some cases, as noted above, changing the birds' behavior is near impossible.
TME
(edited for spelling and to make milder)
While every situation and thus solution is different and unique, I would suggest that in some situations it is the airport that needs to be relocated. This seems especially true considering that in some cases, as noted above, changing the birds' behavior is near impossible.
TME
(edited for spelling and to make milder)
Last edited by TeachMe; 22nd Jan 2009 at 14:32.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Grantown Scotland
Age: 70
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a few things gleaned from 5 years in bird control which may be useful to aircrew and ground airport operatives.
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)
They do usually take off into wind and the stronger the wind at surface the lower they stay.
After several studies in Europe ,on balance, longer grass around 6 inches average is better.It discourages flocks where the species needs a clear view of possible danger.(But many officers in charge of RAF airfields disliked this cos they hated untidy grass !! )
Heavy rain which floods soft grass airfield areas will bring worms to the surface and increase bird activity. Land drainage should be maintained. Marshes attract birds so those inside the airfield ownership should be drained. Even the RSPb rep at air safety meetings agreed with this.
The use of raptors ie Hawks to control birds is useful but the best part is that you get a keen operative who will be out and about and they have a good knowledge of bird behaviour.
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)
They do usually take off into wind and the stronger the wind at surface the lower they stay.
After several studies in Europe ,on balance, longer grass around 6 inches average is better.It discourages flocks where the species needs a clear view of possible danger.(But many officers in charge of RAF airfields disliked this cos they hated untidy grass !! )
Heavy rain which floods soft grass airfield areas will bring worms to the surface and increase bird activity. Land drainage should be maintained. Marshes attract birds so those inside the airfield ownership should be drained. Even the RSPb rep at air safety meetings agreed with this.
The use of raptors ie Hawks to control birds is useful but the best part is that you get a keen operative who will be out and about and they have a good knowledge of bird behaviour.
Last edited by scotavia; 22nd Jan 2009 at 11:57. Reason: typo
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Brazil
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Geese Migration Routes
Adding to the response of TeachMe:
(SLF only).
Geese learn their traveling routes from their parents. Thus, the ways they travel have been established over some considerable amount of time. Also, they have determined travel seasons, mostly two times per year, according to seasons. Monitoring of the flocks and their migration behavior surely already is done by ornothologists, for example here. Can it really be that difficult to regularly pass these observations on to whom is concerned with the security of (civil) air traffic?
(SLF only).
Geese learn their traveling routes from their parents. Thus, the ways they travel have been established over some considerable amount of time. Also, they have determined travel seasons, mostly two times per year, according to seasons. Monitoring of the flocks and their migration behavior surely already is done by ornothologists, for example here. Can it really be that difficult to regularly pass these observations on to whom is concerned with the security of (civil) air traffic?
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pontius, thanks for correcting my poor reading skills. I agree that avoidance at night or high speed is problematic.
Overall avoidance options are limited and problematic. While in general birds tned to dive away from aircraft, this is not a given. Second, sonce bird encounters are more frequent a low altitude during critical phases of flight when maneuvering ability may be limited and/or constrained by obstacles.
With respect to wildlife control, the key is an integrated approach that uses habitat management (strategic), harassment and predation (tactical) as well as detecting and warning processes. The problem is in our instant society everyone is looking for the "silver bullet" as a solution. Unfortunately, no one solution works and wildlife management is a guerilla warfare activity that requires constant reevaluation of the enemy and changing of tactics.
Radar detection is now a proven technology with lots of development work being done with ex-military doppler radar and sophisticated software to identify bird species and predict route/altitude. Work will need to be done to determine how all the stakeholders; pilots, ATC and airports will use the information, but the future will bring much better tools to detect birds.
Overall avoidance options are limited and problematic. While in general birds tned to dive away from aircraft, this is not a given. Second, sonce bird encounters are more frequent a low altitude during critical phases of flight when maneuvering ability may be limited and/or constrained by obstacles.
With respect to wildlife control, the key is an integrated approach that uses habitat management (strategic), harassment and predation (tactical) as well as detecting and warning processes. The problem is in our instant society everyone is looking for the "silver bullet" as a solution. Unfortunately, no one solution works and wildlife management is a guerilla warfare activity that requires constant reevaluation of the enemy and changing of tactics.
Radar detection is now a proven technology with lots of development work being done with ex-military doppler radar and sophisticated software to identify bird species and predict route/altitude. Work will need to be done to determine how all the stakeholders; pilots, ATC and airports will use the information, but the future will bring much better tools to detect birds.
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 58-33N. 00-18W. Peterborough UK
Posts: 3,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ref silver life rafts.
If this is some sort of 'metalised' coating does it also give a radar reflection?
Radiant heat protection to reduce damage from exposure to fire.
Guest
Posts: n/a
TeachMe
It's hard to let your post go w/o a reply. Your reference to hypocrisy concerning Real Estate (homes) and sanctuaries (airports) is surprising
to me. As I understand it "sanctuary" is a term that implies Human action to protect bird habitat. Suggesting an air field be moved to accomodate bird life seems a "wild" statement. If you are granting parity to Birds regarding the location of their abode and ignoring Flight safety, you come off as a "loon" (sorry). You didn't mean that birds have equal standing in the degree of care regarding the right to be safe from mid-air collision did you?
AF
to me. As I understand it "sanctuary" is a term that implies Human action to protect bird habitat. Suggesting an air field be moved to accomodate bird life seems a "wild" statement. If you are granting parity to Birds regarding the location of their abode and ignoring Flight safety, you come off as a "loon" (sorry). You didn't mean that birds have equal standing in the degree of care regarding the right to be safe from mid-air collision did you?
AF
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Seoul
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airfoilmod,
I always respect your points. I do not in any way suggest that flight safety be compromised. You note that sanctuaries are made by humans, but more correct I would suggest a bird sanctuary is all that is left after us humans are done with the rest of the land. Of course it would be best for that bird sanctuary land to be far from an airport but it seems all too often that both are near each other (perhaps due to land values??).
I do not however like the idea of getting rid of scarce natural habitat only in the name of economics and convenience. My point with the mention of LHR is that it is illogical to say that first there gets priority (airport operation over homeowners objections) but then say we have to get rid of preexisting natural habitat to make the airport safer when birds conflict with planes.
Actions need to be taken to reduce the risk of such acidents such as this one, and in some cases perhpas relocating the airport would be the best option, even if that airport is farther away. It might even be the only option as it seems that sometimes nothing will prevent birds from being around cerrtain locations at certain times. Yes, I know this would be bl...dy expensive and difficult but if planned for over time then reasonable (eg Incheon, Korea, Bangkok and Hong Kong although for differnet reasons) and beneficail for numerous reasons, not only birds.
As for there being more geese, well true, but there are also more 320s.
I always respect your points. I do not in any way suggest that flight safety be compromised. You note that sanctuaries are made by humans, but more correct I would suggest a bird sanctuary is all that is left after us humans are done with the rest of the land. Of course it would be best for that bird sanctuary land to be far from an airport but it seems all too often that both are near each other (perhaps due to land values??).
I do not however like the idea of getting rid of scarce natural habitat only in the name of economics and convenience. My point with the mention of LHR is that it is illogical to say that first there gets priority (airport operation over homeowners objections) but then say we have to get rid of preexisting natural habitat to make the airport safer when birds conflict with planes.
Actions need to be taken to reduce the risk of such acidents such as this one, and in some cases perhpas relocating the airport would be the best option, even if that airport is farther away. It might even be the only option as it seems that sometimes nothing will prevent birds from being around cerrtain locations at certain times. Yes, I know this would be bl...dy expensive and difficult but if planned for over time then reasonable (eg Incheon, Korea, Bangkok and Hong Kong although for differnet reasons) and beneficail for numerous reasons, not only birds.
As for there being more geese, well true, but there are also more 320s.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quite
I presumed a position similar to the one I am used to counter, philosophically and politically:"move the airport" "move the homes" etc.
I see your point, mostly the argument is about flight path, noise, and nitwits demanding dangerous and flight critical manouvering to avoid the din of a turbofan which more than likely is putting bubble and squeak on their sorry table.
Economic consideration seldom has to do with supply. More often than not, it is distribution that rears its ugly noggin; "not here, not now".
LaGuardia is situated in a precarious place, politically and economically.
Midway? Meigs Field? DFW DIA? FailSafe is a concept, not a reality.
Aviation is wicked safe and getting safer. Geese seem to be doing well also. Proximity forces us to look at things that may annoy us. I love birds, I love a/c, they don't mix well.
My bottom line? (Today.) : As Humans we overestimate our importance to the Planet, vis-a-vis survival. We can't kill it, it can kill us.
rgds. AF
I see your point, mostly the argument is about flight path, noise, and nitwits demanding dangerous and flight critical manouvering to avoid the din of a turbofan which more than likely is putting bubble and squeak on their sorry table.
Economic consideration seldom has to do with supply. More often than not, it is distribution that rears its ugly noggin; "not here, not now".
LaGuardia is situated in a precarious place, politically and economically.
Midway? Meigs Field? DFW DIA? FailSafe is a concept, not a reality.
Aviation is wicked safe and getting safer. Geese seem to be doing well also. Proximity forces us to look at things that may annoy us. I love birds, I love a/c, they don't mix well.
My bottom line? (Today.) : As Humans we overestimate our importance to the Planet, vis-a-vis survival. We can't kill it, it can kill us.
rgds. AF
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Far Side
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for there being more geese, well true, but there are also more 320s
And one less Seminole ... this one happened at night recently
Aero-News Network: The Aviation and Aerospace World's Daily/Real-Time News and Information Service
with tragic results.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: US
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also, they have determined travel seasons, mostly two times per year, according to seasons. Monitoring of the flocks and their migration behavior surely already is done by ornothologists, for example here.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 81
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here in the US, we're having more and more geese become resident. They don't migrate. The resident geese still fly around each day. They just don't migrate: Goose facts & figures
The figures quoted before were for about 750000 resident and 250000 migrants. The number shot was IIRC avove only 250000.
That's a lotta goose and a lotta more than 320s.
Forewarned is Forearmed
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: uk
Age: 60
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As someone who's day to day job almost tied up with Bird Hazard Control (18 years), I have read a lot of comments by posters on here with interest, certainly what has come to notice is that many on here have limited knowledge of Bird Hazard Control and how it is achieved.
I agree with lomapaseo that we should cut the geese some slack for now until all the evidence has been gathered and the investigation completed.
It was interesting to read from scotavia his account of Bird Hazard control in his days as an RAF controller, the following made me smile,
"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, its best to hold the aircraft, clear them then release the aircraft when the have been fully dispersed, the only exception to this is if the aircraft is rolling and you discover the birds or if the aircraft is on final approach within a certain distance which will not enable the bird controller to clear the airfield and approaches in time.
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 agree with lomapaseo that we should cut the geese some slack for now until all the evidence has been gathered and the investigation completed.
It was interesting to read from scotavia his account of Bird Hazard control in his days as an RAF controller, the following made me smile,
"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, its best to hold the aircraft, clear them then release the aircraft when the have been fully dispersed, the only exception to this is if the aircraft is rolling and you discover the birds or if the aircraft is on final approach within a certain distance which will not enable the bird controller to clear the airfield and approaches in time.
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
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: SoCal
Age: 65
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NTSB Update
NTSB Advisory
National Transportation Safety Board
Washington, DC 20594
January 21, 2009
NTSB ISSUES UPDATE ON INVESTIGATION INTO DITCHING OF US AIRWAYS JETLINER INTO HUDSON RIVER In its continuing investigation of US Airways flight 1549, which ditched into the Hudson River adjacent to Manhattan at approximately 3:30 p.m. on January 15, 2009, the National Transportation Safety Board has developed the following factual information:
The right engine has been externally examined and documented. An examination of the first stage fan blades revealed evidence of soft body impact damage. Three of the variable guide vanes are fractured and two are missing. The engine's electronic control unit is missing and numerous internal components of the engine were significantly damaged.
What appears to be organic material was found in the right engine and on the wings and fuselage. Samples of the material have been provided to the United States Department of Agriculture for a complete DNA analysis. A single feather was found attached to a flap track on the wing. It is being sent to bird identification experts at the Smithsonian.
The left engine has been located in about 50 feet of water near the area of the Hudson River where the aircraft ditched. The NTSB is working with federal, state and local agencies to recover the engine, which is expected to occur sometime on Thursday.
The NTSB has learned that the right engine experienced a surge during a flight on January 13, 2009, and that subsequent maintenance actions included the replacement of a temperature probe. Investigators from the NTSB's Maintenance Records group are researching this report by examining applicable maintenance records and procedures.
The NTSB's Survival Factors group is in the process of interviewing passengers to learn more about the events surrounding the ditching and the emergency evacuation and rescue. The Operations and Human Performance group is interviewing US Airways flight operations training personnel.
The checked and carry-on baggage is in the process of being removed from the aircraft. Representatives from the NTSB's Office of Transportation Disaster Assistance are working to coordinate efforts with US Airways to return these items to the passengers.
The on-scene documentation of the airplane is expected to be completed by the end of the week. Preparations are underway to facilitate movement and more permanent storage of the airplane so that more detailed documentation of the damage can be performed at a later date.
NTSB Media Contact: Peter Knudson (202) 314-6100
[email protected]
National Transportation Safety Board
Washington, DC 20594
January 21, 2009
NTSB ISSUES UPDATE ON INVESTIGATION INTO DITCHING OF US AIRWAYS JETLINER INTO HUDSON RIVER In its continuing investigation of US Airways flight 1549, which ditched into the Hudson River adjacent to Manhattan at approximately 3:30 p.m. on January 15, 2009, the National Transportation Safety Board has developed the following factual information:
The right engine has been externally examined and documented. An examination of the first stage fan blades revealed evidence of soft body impact damage. Three of the variable guide vanes are fractured and two are missing. The engine's electronic control unit is missing and numerous internal components of the engine were significantly damaged.
What appears to be organic material was found in the right engine and on the wings and fuselage. Samples of the material have been provided to the United States Department of Agriculture for a complete DNA analysis. A single feather was found attached to a flap track on the wing. It is being sent to bird identification experts at the Smithsonian.
The left engine has been located in about 50 feet of water near the area of the Hudson River where the aircraft ditched. The NTSB is working with federal, state and local agencies to recover the engine, which is expected to occur sometime on Thursday.
The NTSB has learned that the right engine experienced a surge during a flight on January 13, 2009, and that subsequent maintenance actions included the replacement of a temperature probe. Investigators from the NTSB's Maintenance Records group are researching this report by examining applicable maintenance records and procedures.
The NTSB's Survival Factors group is in the process of interviewing passengers to learn more about the events surrounding the ditching and the emergency evacuation and rescue. The Operations and Human Performance group is interviewing US Airways flight operations training personnel.
The checked and carry-on baggage is in the process of being removed from the aircraft. Representatives from the NTSB's Office of Transportation Disaster Assistance are working to coordinate efforts with US Airways to return these items to the passengers.
The on-scene documentation of the airplane is expected to be completed by the end of the week. Preparations are underway to facilitate movement and more permanent storage of the airplane so that more detailed documentation of the damage can be performed at a later date.
NTSB Media Contact: Peter Knudson (202) 314-6100
[email protected]
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
"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 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 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.