COMPETITION in the AIR: BIRDS VERSUS AIRCRAFT Author(S) :Navjot S

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

COMPETITION in the AIR: BIRDS VERSUS AIRCRAFT Author(S) :Navjot S COMPETITION IN THE AIR: BIRDS VERSUS AIRCRAFT Author(s) :Navjot S. Sodhi Source: The Auk, 119(3):587-595. 2002. Published By: The American Ornithologists' Union DOI: 10.1642/0004-8038(2002)119[0587:CITABV]2.0.CO;2 URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1642/0004-8038%282002%29119%5B0587%3ACITABV %5D2.0.CO%3B2 BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use. Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. The Auk A Quarterly Journal of Ornithology Vol. 119 No. 3 July 2002 The Auk 119(3):587±595, 2002 PERSPECTIVES IN ORNITHOLOGY COMPETITION IN THE AIR: BIRDS VERSUS AIRCRAFT NAVJOT S. SODHI1 Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore, Blk S2, 14 Science Drive 4, Singapore 117543, Republic of Singapore THE FIRST KNOWN aircraft fatality that was HUMAN SAFETY AND ECONOMICS directly attributable to a bird occurred in 1912, when a gull (Larus sp.) was caught in the con- Incidents. On average, the aircraft of the U.S. trol cables of an aircraft, causing it to crash. Air Force incur 2,500 bird strikes annually Since that time, aircraft have generally in- (Lovell 1997). Out of those, one human death creased in size to carry more passengers. Bird± occurs per 2,000 strikes (Neubauer 1990). Most aircraft con¯icts are becoming more common air crashes occur when a bird hits the wind- recently, which is possibly due to increased shield or is inducted into the engine. In terms numbers of both aircraft (e.g. an estimated 28 of civilian aircraft, over 5,000 bird strikes were million jets now take off in the United States as reported in the United States during 1999 compared to 18 million in 1980) and some alone. Between 1950 and 1999, 286 serious bird- kinds of bird species (e.g. Canada Geese [Branta related accidents of military aircraft (in which canadensis], in the United States have quadru- the aircraft were destroyed or there were fatal- pled to 2 million since 1985). Between 1990 and ities) occurred in 32 countries. Of those acci- 1998, there were an estimated 22,000 bird±air- dents, 63 were fatal, which resulted in 141 craft collisions in the United States, which cost deaths (Richardson and West 2000). These bird- an annual $400 million in aircraft repairs. This strike incidents, at least in some cases, are min- bird±aircraft con¯ict takes place around the imum estimates because pilots only report 20 world, although the species, situations, and se- to 30% of actual strikes (Burger 1985). Pilots are verity differ. It is estimated that at least 350 thought to underreport bird strikes either be- people have been killed in bird±aircraft colli- cause they are unaware of the strikes or because sions worldwide. of the inconvenience of ®ling reports (Solman Understanding bird±aircraft con¯ict is criti- 1978, Linnell et al. 1999, Brown and Hickling cal due to monetary reasons and the potential 2000). Sometimes, strikes by large bird species threat to human life. Despite the severity of the (.350 g) such as Brahminy Kites (Haliastur in- situation, bird±aircraft con¯ict has largely re- dus) and Cattle Egrets (Bubulcus ibis) go unre- mained on the fringes of rigorous ornithologi- ported by pilots (N. Sodhi pers. obs.). There- cal investigations, and sound ornithological fore, runway carcass searches must supplement understanding is still required to ®nd long- pilot reports to correctly evaluate the bird term management solutions for that con¯ict. I threat at airports. hope that this review will stimulate ornitholo- Economic losses. The cost of repairing an air- gists to show more interest in this crucial issue. craft damaged by a bird strike can vary from very little to millions of dollars when an air- 1 E-mail: [email protected] craft is lost. The aircraft component that is most 587 588 Perspectives in Ornithology [Auk, Vol. 119 frequently damaged by bird strikes is the en- uncommon and can result in loss of life and gine. International Civil Aviation Organiza- high costs. tion's (ICAO) analysis shows that bird strikes damaged 200 engines on or near airports WHY DO BIRDS COLLIDE WITH AIRCRAFT? around the world in 1996. The cost of repair due to bird ingestion can range from $250,000 Air®elds can provide good resources (e.g. to $1 million, depending on the type of engine. foraging and nesting sites) for some bird spe- However, there have been cases in which the cies (e.g. Kershner and Bollinger 1998). How- cost of aircraft repair has been as high as $6 ever, they can be hazardous habitats due to the million, as was the case for an Air France Con- danger of getting hit by an aircraft. The ability cord that was struck by a number of Canada to avoid an aircraft may involve learning to Geese in 1995 on approach to the John F. Ken- judge the threat and ¯ying in a manner to nedy International Airport in New York City. It evade it successfully. As bird strikes typically is predicted that bird±aircraft con¯ict will be- occur four to six times per 10,000 aircraft move- come costlier due to the plans for increased ments, it is possible that most individual birds numbers of wide-bodied jets in the air (Rob- succeed in evading an aircraft. However, it is inson 2000). critical to understand why evasive behavior The cost of the bird management program at does not always work. Birds should typically the Christchurch International Airport in New be good at sound and color signal detection. Zealand is about twice that of repairs to aircraft Those abilities, however, can vary with species that are damaged by bird strikes. However, that and individuals. How nutritional stress, paren- does not include the costs of lost ¯ight time, tal duties, disease, and ecotoxins (e.g. neuro- passenger disruption, and passenger safety toxins) affect a bird's ability to evade an aircraft (Chilvers et al. 1997). Annually, aircraft spend remains poorly understood (Kelly et al. 2000). 461,000 h on ground in the United States due to For example, carcasses versus live individuals bird strikes (Cleary et al. 1999). The cost of bird in airports can be compared to determine strikes in terms of human morbidity and mor- whether dead individuals have disproportion- tality has not been rigorously investigated ately more parasites. Therefore, exciting re- (Neubauer 1990). One human fatality can cost search avenues remain open to understand up to $2.5 million. Other studies show that bird which characteristics may make individuals management actions have halved the cost of re- more likely to collide with aircraft. pairs to aircraft that are damaged by birds (e.g. It is also possible that due to a lack of pre- Solman 1973). vious near-fatal encounters, most birds do not Military versus civil aircrafts. Military air- perceive an aircraft as a threat or potential craft are usually more vulnerable to bird predator. Limited evidence suggests that the strikes than civil aircraft because they typically amount of air traf®c affects birds' evading abil- travel at high speeds at low altitudes (30 to 300 ities. The chance of bird strikes increases with m), where most birds ¯y. Approximately 54% the reduction of air traf®c on a runway (Burger of the bird strikes on military aircraft and 90% 1985). Birds probably get acclimatized to the of those to civil aircraft around the world occur lack of traf®c and become less vigilant. There- in or near to air®elds (e.g. during take off) fore, airport mangers must take speci®c action (Smith 1986, Neubauer 1990, Cleary et al. 1999). (e.g. disperse birds before resuming aircraft ac- However, those ®gures should be viewed with tivity) when a runway has been inactive for caution because bird strikes en route can go un- several hours. reported. Military aircraft are also vulnerable Recent design improvements might have at bombing ranges where pilots do not always made aircraft more vulnerable to bird colli- adequately detect approaching birds (Neu- sions. Due to public and economic pressure, bauer 1990). The number of reported bird quieter, larger, and faster aircraft have been de- strikes on military aircraft in the United States veloped. Faster and wider-bodied aircraft are increased steadily between 1974 and 1987. struck more often by birds than are the older, However, that could have been due to height- narrower-bodied jets (Burger 1983). For exam- ened pilot awareness of the need to report col- ple, birds strike 737 passenger jets less fre- lisions. Thus, bird±aircraft collisions are not quently than the larger 767 jets (Chilvers et al. July 2002] Perspectives in Ornithology 589 1997). With the wider bodied aircraft, birds son for these species differences is not clear, but have to ¯y twice as far to escape than they do young individuals are probably either less ca- for the older small-bodied aircraft.
Recommended publications
  • Dynamic Load Measurement of Ballistic Gelatin Impact Using an Instrumented Tube
    NASA/TM—2012-217661 Dynamic Load Measurement of Ballistic Gelatin Impact Using an Instrumented Tube J.D. Seidt The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio J.M. Pereira Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio J.T. Hammer and A. Gilat The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio C.R. Ruggeri Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio August 2012 NASA STI Program . in Profi le Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to the • CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected advancement of aeronautics and space science. The papers from scientifi c and technical NASA Scientifi c and Technical Information (STI) conferences, symposia, seminars, or other program plays a key part in helping NASA maintain meetings sponsored or cosponsored by NASA. this important role. • SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientifi c, The NASA STI Program operates under the auspices technical, or historical information from of the Agency Chief Information Offi cer. It collects, NASA programs, projects, and missions, often organizes, provides for archiving, and disseminates concerned with subjects having substantial NASA’s STI. The NASA STI program provides access public interest. to the NASA Aeronautics and Space Database and its public interface, the NASA Technical Reports • TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. English- Server, thus providing one of the largest collections language translations of foreign scientifi c and of aeronautical and space science STI in the world. technical material pertinent to NASA’s mission. Results are published in both non-NASA channels and by NASA in the NASA STI Report Series, which Specialized services also include creating custom includes the following report types: thesauri, building customized databases, organizing and publishing research results. • TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of completed research or a major signifi cant phase For more information about the NASA STI of research that present the results of NASA program, see the following: programs and include extensive data or theoretical analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • AC 150/5200-32B, Reporting Wildlife Aircraft Strikes, 31 May 2013
    Advisory U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration Circular Subject: Reporting Wildlife Aircraft Strikes Date: 5/31/2013 AC No: 150/5200-32B Initiated by: AAS-300 Change: 1. Purpose. This Advisory Circular (AC) explains the importance of reporting collisions between aircraft and wildlife, more commonly referred to as wildlife strikes. It also explains recent improvements in the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA’s) Bird/Other Wildlife Strike Reporting system, how to report a wildlife strike, what happens to the wildlife strike report data, how to access the FAA National Wildlife Strike Database (NWSD), and the FAA’s Feather Identification program. 2. Applicability. The FAA provides the standards and practices in this AC as guidance for all public-use airports, aviation industry personnel (e.g., Air Traffic Control, pilots and airline personnel, and engine manufacturers), and others who possess strike information. The FAA strongly recommends that the above aviation representatives and others possessing strike information participate in reporting. 3. Cancellation. This AC cancels AC 150/5200-32A, Reporting Wildlife Aircraft Strikes, dated December 22, 2004. 4. Background. The FAA has long recognized the threat to aviation safety posed by wildlife strikes. Each year in the United States, wildlife strikes to U.S. civil aircraft cause about $718 million in damage to aircraft and about 567,000 hours of civil aircraft down time. For the period 1990 to 2011, over 115,000 wildlife strikes were reported to the FAA. About 97 percent of all wildlife strikes reported to the FAA involved birds, about 2 percent involved terrestrial mammals, and less than 1 percent involved flying mammals (bats) and reptiles.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife Hazard Management
    Deer Hazards Reporting Wildlife Strikes Deer and other mammals pose an extreme The FAA has a standard form (FAA Form hazard to aircraft due to their size and the 5200-7) for the voluntary reporting of bird and possibility of a strike during the critical flight other wildlife strikes with aircraft. To improve periods of takeoff and landing. Airports offer an the ease of reporting, strikes can also be excellent habitat for deer and the possibility for reported via the Internet at http://www.faa.gov/ Wildlife wildlife incursions is a potential threat at many documentLibrary/media/form/faa5200-7.pdf. Wisconsin airports. Deer are most active in the It is very important that strikes be reported Hazard early morning and evening by anyone who has knowledge of the strike. It and pilots should take is important to include as much information as extra precaution during possible on FAA Form 5200-7. The Management operations at these time identification of the species of wildlife struck is periods. particularly important. Bird strike remains that can not be identified can be identified by a Pilot Actions local biologist or by sending feather remains in a sealed bag with FAA Form 5200-7 to: Check NOTAMs and airport directories for Federal Aviation Administration information regarding deer activity. If Office of Airport Safety and Standards unsure call ahead by telephone or unicom for deer advisories. AAS-310 800 Independence Avenue, SW Use landing lights during takeoff and Washington, DC 20591 landing. Make a low approach to determine if any deer are present. If necessary, have airport personnel, if available, disperse deer before landing.
    [Show full text]
  • Bird Strike Damage & Windshield Bird Strike Final Report
    COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Bird Strike Damage & Windshield Bird Strike Final Report 5078609-rep-03 Version 1.1 EUROPEAN AVIATION SAFETY AGENCY COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Approval & Authorisation Prepared by: N Dennis (fera) D Lyle Approved for issue R Budgey (fera) by: P Kirrane Authorised for issue A M Whitehead by: Record of Revisions Version Description of Revision 0.1 First Draft for review by EASA 0.2 Second Draft responding to EASA Comments 1.0 Draft Final Report 1.1 Final Report This document was created by Atkins Limited and the Food & Environment Research Agency under Contract Number EASA.2008.C49 Copyright vests in the European Community. ATKINS Limited The Barbican, East Street, Farnham, Surrey GU9 7TB Tel: +44 1252 738500 Fax: +44 1252 717065 www.atkinsglobal.com 5078609-rep-03, Version 1.1 Page 2 COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Executive Summary Background to the Study This report presents the findings of a study carried out by Atkins and the UK Food & Environment Research Agency (FERA). The study was commissioned in 2009 by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), under contract number EASA.2008.C49 [1.]. Its aim was to investigate the adequacy of the current aircraft certification requirement in relation to current and future bird strike risks on aircraft structures and windshields. Bird strikes are random events. The intersection of bird and aircraft flight paths, the mass of the bird and the part of the aircraft struck are all random elements that will determine the outcome. In managing risk all that can be controlled are the design and testing of the aircraft driven by certification specifications, the aircraft’s flight profile and, to a limited extent, the populations of birds near airports.
    [Show full text]
  • An Airlines Perspective by Capt Andrew Carroll Ryanair
    Captain Andrew Carroll Safety Services Office © Ryanair 2014 Birdstrike Hazard Mitigation and Analysis © Ryanair 2014 15th January 2009 © Ryanair 2014 © Ryanair 2014 © Ryanair 2014 © Ryanair 2014 Costs Of A Birdstrike - Operational EU passenger compensation rules: 261/2004 Cost of refreshments if a flight is delayed ( X 189) Up to €400 per passenger if a flight is cancelled ( X 189) Overnight accommodation and transportation cost ( X 195) Wet lease operating cost for a replacement aircraft ~€10,000 per hour 7 © Ryanair 2014 Ryanair’s Network 200 airports 32 countries 1,600+ routes 113m pax p.a. 369 x B737-800’s 320 x B737s on order Over 2000 sectors per day 8 © Ryanair 2014 Recognising the risk © Ryanair 2014 SMS Mental Model Safety Policy & Objectives SMS © Ryanair 2014 Risk Mitigation Using the Bow Tie Methodology © Ryanair 2014 Example of a Full Bow Tie Analysis © Ryanair 2014 Post Event Mitigation Controls © Ryanair 2014 Post Event Mitigation Controls Airframe impact/Engine system malfunctions • Aircraft and system design • Standard operating procedures • Flight crew normal checklist • Captain’s inspection and release to service if there is no damage • QRH Non normal checklists • Recurrent flight crew training © Ryanair 2014 Threats To Ryanair Operations © Ryanair 2014 ARMS Methodology © Ryanair 2014 EU no 139/2014 ADR.OPS B.020 © Ryanair 2014 REPORTING “Without data, you don’t have an SMS” Captain D Maurino Safety Management Advisor, ICAO © Ryanair 2014 Ryanair Risk Assessment Model The Ryanair bird strike risk assessment
    [Show full text]
  • Bird Strike – Typical Fan Blade Damage
    Developments in Aircraft Engine Design for Bird Ingestion ICAO Wildlife Symposium Montreal, Canada 18 May 2017 Presented by: Chris G. Demers Contains No Technical Data Subject to EAR - ITAR Approved for Public Release FAA Bird Requirements Evolution Increased Regulations due to Industry Study of Bird Populations Med Bird Large Bird 5 min. Run- Incr. Med Large Bird, ARAC 1.5 lbs., non- Safe On Reqmt & Large Bird 20 min. Proposed specific Run-On Shutdown Added Reqmts Run-On Enhanced Core AC33-1 Amd 33-6 Amd 33-10 Amd 33-20 Amd 33-24 We Requirements Are Here 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 B707 DC-9 B747 A300 B767/B757 B777 A318 B787 CS100/CS300 B727 A380 A310 A320neo A320 E195-E5 MRJ Contains No Technical Data Subject to EAR - ITAR Approved for Public Release High By-Pass Turbofan Engine Inlet Fan Blade Intake Airflow Spinner Contains No Technical Data Subject to EAR - ITAR Approved for Public Release Bird Strike – Typical Fan Blade Damage Soft Body “Cusps” Contains No Technical Data Subject to EAR - ITAR Approved for Public Release Design Process for Bird Strike Mitigation 2 - Computer 1 - Regulation Modeling / 3 - Component and Field Data Design Testing Review Iterations 4 - Rig / Engine 6 - Service 5 - Certification Development Experience Testing Testing Contains No Technical Data Subject to EAR - ITAR Approved for Public Release Computer Modeling Fan blade design is optimized via computer modeling for bird strike response Contains No Technical Data Subject to EAR - ITAR Approved for Public Release Component Testing Fan blades are
    [Show full text]
  • The Crash of the Boston Electra / Michael N
    The Story of Man and Bird in Conflict BirdThe Crash of theStrike Boston Electra michael n. kalafatas Bird Strike The Crash of the Bird Boston Electra Strike michael n. kalafatas Brandeis University Press Waltham, Massachusetts published by university press of new england hanover and london Brandeis University Press Published by University Press of New England One Court Street, Lebanon NH 03766 www.upne.com © 2010 Brandeis University All rights reserved Manufactured in the United States of America Designed by Katherine B. Kimball Typeset in Scala by Integrated Publishing Solutions University Press of New England is a member of the Green Press Initiative. The paper used in this book meets their minimum requirement for recycled paper. For permission to reproduce any of the material in this book, contact Permissions, University Press of New England, One Court Street, Lebanon NH 03766; or visit www.upne.com Library of Congress Cataloging- in- Publication Data Kalafatas, Michael N. Bird strike : the crash of the Boston Electra / Michael N. Kalafatas. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-1-58465-897-9 (cloth : alk. paper) 1. Aircraft bird strikes—Massachusetts— Boston. 2. Aircraft accidents —Massachusetts— Boston. 3. Electra (Turboprop transports) I. Title. TL553.525.M4K35 2010 363.12Ј465—dc22 2010013165 5 4 3 2 1 Across the veil of time, for the passengers and crew of Eastern Airlines Flight 375, and for my grandchildren: may they fl y in safe skies The bell- beat of their wings above my head. —w. b. yeats, “The Wild Swans at Coole” Contents Preface: A Clear and Present Danger xi 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife Strikes to Canadian Aircraft 1.1 How This Report Is Organized
    2008 Summary Report – Wildlife Strikes to Canadian Aircraft 1.1 How This Report is Organized This report provides a summary of Canadian wildlife strike statistics for 2008. It is intended for the use of all stakeholders involved with Airport Bird and Mammal Control Programs. Included in this group are pilots, airfield staff, airline maintenance personnel, airport managers, and Transport Canada staff. The information contained in this edition reflects the 2008 situation only, and therefore may differ from established trends. It should be noted that Wildlife Strike incidents are reported from four major sources, each with a different emphasis. A large portion of the information is derived from Canada’s major international airports, and therefore reflects wildlife strikes for transport aircraft, and within these, mostly commercial airlines. These sources are: i. Pilot Reports: These reports are completed by private and commercial pilots in one of several formats. They are submitted voluntarily and regularly by most airline pilots and emphasize aircraft and flight parameters at the time of a strike. ii. Department of National Defense Reports: Pilots of all DND aircraft and Air Traffic Services personnel are required to complete and submit reports of wildlife strikes. They use forms similar to those used by civilian pilots, but submit them to DND. This information is then forwarded to Transport Canada for incorporation into this report. iii. Airline Headquarters Reports: Airlines submit summaries of wildlife strike incidents to Transport Canada on a voluntary basis. These reports emphasize aircraft damage, repair costs, and the operational effects of wildlife strikes. iv. Airport Site Reports: Canadian airport operators are required to submit reports on all wildlife incidents that occur at their sites.
    [Show full text]
  • A Model to Determine the Severity of a Birdstrike With
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln 1999 Bird Strike Committee-USA/Canada, First Bird Strike Committee Proceedings Joint Annual Meeting, Vancouver, BC 5-1-1999 A model to determine the severity of a birdstrike with flocks of Canada Geese Richard Budgey Central Science Laboratory, Birdstrike Avoidance Team, Sand Hutton, York, UK J. R. Allan Central Science Laboratory, Birdstrike Avoidance Team, Sand Hutton, York, UK Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/birdstrike1999 Part of the Environmental Health and Protection Commons Budgey, Richard and Allan, J. R., "A model to determine the severity of a birdstrike with flocks of Canada Geese" (1999). 1999 Bird Strike Committee-USA/Canada, First Joint Annual Meeting, Vancouver, BC. Paper 10. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/birdstrike1999/10 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Bird Strike Committee Proceedings at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in 1999 Bird Strike Committee-USA/Canada, First Joint Annual Meeting, Vancouver, BC by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Bird Strike '99 - Proceedings A model to determine the severity of a birdstrike with flocks of Canada Geese R Budgey JR Allan Birdstrike Avoidance Team Central Science Laboratory Sand Hutton, York, UK, YO41 1LZ Key words Flock density, Certification standards, Mathematical models, Canada Goose, Branta canadensis, Birdstrike Introduction The number of birds of a flocking species likely to be ingested into an aircraft engine in a multiple birdstrike is of profound interest to engineers when they consider birdstrike tolerance in engine design.
    [Show full text]
  • Bird Strikes and Aircraft Fuselage Color: a Correlational Study
    Human–Wildlife Interactions 5(2):224–234, Fall 2011 Bird strikes and aircraft fuselage color: a correlational study ESTEBAN FERNÁNDEZ-JURICIC, Department of Biological Sciences, Purdue University, Lilly Hall G-302, 915 W. State Street, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907, USA [email protected] JIMMY GAFFNEY, Department of Biological Sciences, Purdue University, Lilly Hall, 915 W. State Street, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907, USA BRADLEY F. B LACKWELL, USDA/APHIS/Wildlife Services’ National Wildlife Research Center, Ohio Field Station, 6100 Columbus Avenue, Sandusky, OH 44870, USA PATRICE BAUMHARDT, Department of Biological Sciences, Purdue University, Lilly Hall G-302, 915 W. State Street, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907, USA Abstract: Collisions between birds and aircraft (bird strikes) pose safety risks to the public, cost airports and airlines money, and result in liability issues. Recent research suggests that aircraft visibility could be enhanced to increase detection and avoidance by birds. We questioned whether aircraft color scheme might play a role in bird-strike frequency. We used public records of bird strikes along with information on fl ights that were gathered by federal agencies in the United States. We estimated the bird-strike rates and compared them among airline companies using different fuselage color schemes, while controlling for aircraft type. Using an avian vision modeling approach, we fi rst corroborated the hypothesis that brighter colors would contrast more against the sky than darker colors. We found differences in bird-strike rates among airline companies with different color schemes in 3 out of the 7 aircraft types investigated: Boeing 737, DC-9, and Embraer RJ145. With each of these aircraft, we found that brighter aircraft were associated with lower bird-strike rates.
    [Show full text]
  • Apparent Efficacy of Bird Aircraft Strike Hazard Programs at Four Naval Air Stations
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln 2 - Second Eastern Wildlife Damage Control Conference (1985) Eastern Wildlife Damage Control Conferences September 1985 APPARENT EFFICACY OF BIRD AIRCRAFT STRIKE HAZARD PROGRAMS AT FOUR NAVAL AIR STATIONS Thomas C. Walker Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Phila., PA C. Willard Bennett Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Charleston, SC. Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/ewdcc2 Part of the Environmental Health and Protection Commons Walker, Thomas C. and Bennett, C. Willard , "APPARENT EFFICACY OF BIRD AIRCRAFT STRIKE HAZARD PROGRAMS AT FOUR NAVAL AIR STATIONS" (1985). 2 - Second Eastern Wildlife Damage Control Conference (1985). 47. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/ewdcc2/47 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Eastern Wildlife Damage Control Conferences at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2 - Second Eastern Wildlife Damage Control Conference (1985) by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. APPARENT EFFICACY OF BIRD AIRCRAFT STRIKE HAZARD PROGRAMS AT FOUR NAVAL AIR STATIONS by Thomas C. Walker and C. Willard Bennett* ABSTRACT evaluations or trials of bird control methods. Many have The Department of the Navy- involved a single species or implemented its present manda- management technique. Boudreau tory bird-aircraft strike (1971a, 1971b) reported the reporting system in 1981. effectiveness of bio-accoustics Reported bird-aircraft strikes in dispersing horned larks, have increased each year, house finches and gulls. presumably due to increased Nemergut, et al. (1976) success- awareness and compliance with fully dispersed starlings from regulations. Four Naval air Seymour-Johnson Air Force Base, stations implementing bird- NC using distress calls.
    [Show full text]
  • Risks on Feathered Wings
    AIRPORTOPS © iStockphoto © Karl Jacobson/Jetphotos.net RISKS As air traffic and wildlife populations increase,on Feathered collisions between aircraft and wildlife — especially birds — are increasingly likely. BY LINDA WERFELMAN ildlife strikes at airports around that bird strikes damage engines more the world destroyed moreWings than 163 often than any other aircraft component. aircraft and killed more than 194 people from 1988 through 2005, and As an example of the extent of the change, Wthe threat to human health and safety is increas- in 1969, 75 percent of the 2,100 passenger ing, a 2006 report by the U.S. Federal Aviation aircraft in the United States had three or Administration (FAA) says.1 four engines; by 2008, only about 10 percent The report warned of an increase in the of the 7,000 passenger aircraft in the United “risk, frequency and potential severity of States will have three or four engines. wildlife-aircraft collisions” during the next de- cade, primarily as a result of three factors: • The populations of many species most com- monly involved in strikes — and many bird • The replacement of older aircraft with species with the largest body weights — have three or four engines with quieter, two- increased dramatically in recent years. For engine aircraft “increases the probability of example, the Canada goose population in life-threatening situations resulting from Canada and the United States increased aircraft collisions with wildlife, especially about 7.9 percent a year from 1980 through with flocks of birds,” because of the reduc- 2005, and the population of white-tailed tion in engine redundancy.
    [Show full text]