Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Pilot Lounge > Safety
Bird Strikes, PETA, real solutions? >

Bird Strikes, PETA, real solutions?

Search

Notices
Safety Accidents, suggestions on improving safety, etc

Bird Strikes, PETA, real solutions?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-31-2009, 08:52 AM
  #1  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
proskuneho's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Position: Enjoying the view
Posts: 407
Default Bird Strikes, PETA, real solutions?

OK so we all know that birds cause serious problems for aircraft. If you have not had aircraft damage from a bird strike, you surely know someone who has. I know that engine manufacturers are beefing up their engines to withstand some bird strikes, but it seems that only a few airports are really dong something about the bird problems. Some airports use ultrasonic noisemakers, some use large trained hunter birds like Falcons, etc. Does anyone know if airports are required to have a certain level of bird deterrent based on airport volume?

On a funny note, here is a quote from a Yahoo article that is sure to make PETA angry:

"Since January 2007, at least 26 serious birdstrikes were reported. In some of them, the aircraft's brakes caught fire or cabins and cockpits filled with smoke and the stench of burning birds. ...In some cases reported to the NASA database, crews said they could smell birds burning in the engines — "a toxic smell like burning toast (or) popcorn" wrote a flight attendant on an MD-80 airliner that had just taken off last March."

Since PETA values animals and single celled life forms more than humans, I'm surprised they aren't suing the entire aviation industry over this problem.

Last edited by proskuneho; 01-31-2009 at 09:32 PM.
proskuneho is offline  
Old 01-31-2009, 09:25 AM
  #2  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 143
Default

I have read that airports are getting some sort or radar that can track large flocks of birds and I guess will then have us fly around them. Also the pulsating landing lights are another good preventative against bird strikes. As far as I know I don't think there is a written requirement for airports having certain facilities based on their traffic volume...
JPilot23 is offline  
Old 01-31-2009, 01:30 PM
  #3  
Gets Weekends Off
 
todd1200's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,023
Default

FAR 139.337 is the only guidance I know of that addresses wildlife management at airports. Here's the link:

Electronic Code of Federal Regulations:
todd1200 is offline  
Old 01-31-2009, 01:34 PM
  #4  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: G550 & CL300 PIC
Posts: 370
Default

Put hoods on the engine.

They do it for cars and piston aircraft, I don't see why they can't do it for jets.
FlyingNasaForm is offline  
Old 01-31-2009, 02:48 PM
  #5  
Gets Weekends Off
 
hotshot's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: C172 Left
Posts: 642
Default

Originally Posted by FlyingNasaForm
Put hoods on the engine.

They do it for cars and piston aircraft, I don't see why they can't do it for jets.
Some one commented on an ABC News story about Capt. Sullenberger, saying "Airlines should have retractable screens on their engines when they arent running, like during landings"
hotshot is offline  
Old 01-31-2009, 02:58 PM
  #6  
A Second Past V1
 
Outlaw2097's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: Assumed
Posts: 743
Default

Originally Posted by hotshot
Some one commented on an ABC News story about Capt. Sullenberger, saying "Airlines should have retractable screens on their engines when they arent running, like during landings"
Sweet...turn a Pratt & Whitney into a Salad Shooter!
Outlaw2097 is offline  
Old 01-31-2009, 09:38 PM
  #7  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
proskuneho's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Position: Enjoying the view
Posts: 407
Default

Originally Posted by hotshot
Some one commented on an ABC News story about Capt. Sullenberger, saying "Airlines should have retractable screens on their engines when they arent running, like during landings"
Wow. Do TV anchors get paid by the word for spewing ignorant and illogical opinions?
proskuneho is offline  
Old 01-31-2009, 09:50 PM
  #8  
Gets Weekends Off
 
USMCFLYR's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,839
Default

Originally Posted by proskuneho
Wow. Do TV anchors get paid by the word for spewing ignorant and illogical opinions?
The Russians have figured out an efficient way to reduce the chances of FOD - at least while the jets are on the ground for a few of their fighters. Check out the louvers on the top of the engines on the Mig-29 for instance.
Google Image Result for http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/MiG-29_Fulcrum_B_Luftwaffe.jpg/800px-MiG-29_Fulcrum_B_Luftwaffe.jpg

USMCFLYR
USMCFLYR is offline  
Old 01-31-2009, 10:11 PM
  #9  
Gets Weekends Off
 
hotshot's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: C172 Left
Posts: 642
Default

Originally Posted by proskuneho
Wow. Do TV anchors get paid by the word for spewing ignorant and illogical opinions?
This wasnt an anchor, ABC lets readers comment on their stories. Thats one of the many reasons I normally read BBC News.

Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
The Russians have figured out an efficient way to reduce the chances of FOD - at least while the jets are on the ground for a few of their fighters. Check out the louvers on the top of the engines on the Mig-29 for instance.
Google Image Result for http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/MiG-29_Fulcrum_B_Luftwaffe.jpg/800px-MiG-29_Fulcrum_B_Luftwaffe.jpg

USMCFLYR
Ive seen this before, from my limited understanding of Migs, doesnt it use a smaller air intake higher on the aircraft while taking off from a dirty airfield?
hotshot is offline  
Old 01-31-2009, 11:39 PM
  #10  
Are we there yet??!!
 
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,010
Default

Originally Posted by hotshot
This wasnt an anchor, ABC lets readers comment on their stories. Thats one of the many reasons I normally read BBC News.
I have that problem with BBC. Their talking heads decide to interject some crap they are unqualified to comment about.
Thedude is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices