md-100, that one's been thrashed to death before. The consesus is absolutely NO!

I was interested to read Canuckbirdstrike's contribution (as always) wherein he states that bird movements are observable on radar. I'm aware that our Wx radar transmissions are frequency optimised to detect water droplets, and return little else except highly reflective targets. Would a second radar optimised for bird density / reflectivity be feasible? If feasible, it could be a worth-while investment.

Failing that, the only way to use weather radar to avoid birds would be to seek active thunderstorms and fly through them deliberately. No self-respecting bird would fly there:D

Regards,

Old Smokey

Dont be too sure bout that Smokes! I struck a sparrow while descending through a line of thundereys into Da Nang just on dusk. His head got stuck under the wiper arm while the rest of his torso went south.

Little bugger was either stupid or accidentley got sucked up into it.

Dammit Slasher, you just shot down my preferred bird avoidance technique.:(

Regards,

Old Smokey

Onya Slash and welcome back mate, long time no see!

Old Smokey:

Once again the issue of using the weather radar to scare away birds is raised. This has got to be the most pervasive myth in aviation - it doesn't work!

As for your comments on a second radar unit configured for bird tracking, it is not beyond the realm of possibility.

Currently there is a great deal of research and field trial work being done with ground based radar units that provide raw data to software applications that are able to identify and track bird movements and also use predictive algorithms to generate future "threat paths". The objective is to produce a product that can be used to map potential aircraft/bird interactions and feed back the information to the flight crew. This work is well past the theoretical stage, but it will take time to refine the product and make it useable by ATC and flight crews. Discussion has also occurred on the issue of developing mechanisms to either build units for aircaft or to provide real time datalink and display information for flight crews.

I have seen the current product and am very excited with the results. I believe that the developers are well on the way to producing a practical safety enhancement tool.

Richard

Mutt - having had a Pegasus (Harrier GR3) compressor disintegrate around me 6 hrs after FOD caused a stress point on a blade, have you considered prior damage? What was the reuslt of the boroscope?

In the UK there's a Govt research lab with a modified missle radar set up to track birds. It has X and Y band and was imported from the US.

Being used at a far north RAF station to track Geese (Canada I think) and Gulls near ABZ too.

In terms of daily risk operating in the UK I'd put Birds second to MAPADS with runway incursion slipping as education improves.

If you fly a twin and take birds in both - who ya gonna call?

Sir George Cayley

Don't migratory birds migrate to AVOID the harsh winter cold (amongst other things)? If so, what the $#%$# are they doing climbing to an altitude where the temperature is around -45 degrees C??

Why would they bother expelling so much energy to climb so high? Soaring thermals associated with ground heating wouldn't get them that high. They'd have to make the effort themselves.

And don't birds suffer hypoxia??

With such little heads at the end of a long neck such as a duck or goose, with little feather insulation, wouldn't their brains just freeze solid at -45 degrees C??

I can believe that some birds might fly too close to the bottom of a very active thunderstorm and find themselve spat out the top. In fact I remember an article in an aviation magazine about planes striking snakes, mice, even fish that were probably sucked up via dust devils, tornadoes and water spouts. However I just find it hard to believe a bird would intentionally climb so high. And there would be that much super cooled water inside a thunderstorm, they'd be covered in ice and dead in no time.

Birds in clouds...

It was night time, descending IMC through 16000 feet when we felt the impact.
BAC 111-500, 30 years ago, radome got a prety good size hole.
Brown feathers inside the area.


Rgds.

Manuel
DC-3>>>>>>A-320

My guess is that they enjoy the TAS advantage and resultant efficiency that comes with altitude -- same physics as with airplanes. Winds at altitude tend to be faster and they do generally wait for winds in the right direction.

Too bad it's geese and swans that like to fly high. Wing loading likely keeps ducks and loons lower down -- not that you'd want to hit one of those either.

Hit something at 2am. at 8000' -- the landing light gave me enough warning to stuff my head under the panel. Very big bang and messy windshield.

Can't they be equipped with a mode S transponder ? :D

Yes, but who would tell them what to 'SQUAWK'? :p

(Sorry about that. I'll get back in the cupboard)

Anyone have a sensible answer to Blip's question?

'With such little heads at the end of a long neck such as a duck or goose, with little feather insulation, wouldn't their brains just freeze solid at -45 degrees C??'

High life
 

Googled a bit.

Seems some of these little beasts are rather resilient at 29000ft and up...

Please see http://magazine.audubon.org/birds/birds0011.html

stuckbee Thank you very much for that link. Isn't nature amazing!! I am now a believer.

Nice one discostu. Made me laugh. :)

http://www.greenharbor.com/fffolder/unlucky.html

Doesn't sound like fun.

BOAC,

I originally opened this thread in 2004, I cant remember the outcome of the investigation.

Mutt

I think the PanAm 747 strike over Nova Scotia was a canada goose at FL290.

I also believe that some swans can also get up into the low thirties. But I do know of a chap whose weather radar was taken out by a goose at FL330. They (and most of the pax) heard a very loud bang followed by the WX failing. The force of the impact pushed the radome into the scanner and stopped it moving.

question...
 

So was it an official or an unofficial bird strike?