NRC is a full-service environmental consulting firm providing private sector and government clients with a full range of expert natural resources consulting and ecosystem services, project management support, and guidance through today's complex regulatory environment. Learn more at nrcdifference.com.

Saturday, January 30, 2010

Airplane Bird Strikes: A Growing Issue with Serious Consequences

Bird strike on Germania Boeing 737 at Dusseldorf
After the much publicized Flight 1549 emergency landing in the Hudson River early last year some much needed attention was directed at the issue of airplane-wildlife collisions.  Somewhere between 10,000 and 20,000 collisions occurred in 2009 (reporting is not mandatory so exact estimates are hard to get), and some of these caused substantial damage and put hundreds of passengers at extreme risk during emergency landings.

The FAA currently requires major commercial airports to conduct Wildlife Hazard Assessments and to prepare Wildlife Hazard Management Plans – documents used to assess the potential risks and take steps to reduce the likelihood of collisions.  Many smaller airports servicing the general aviation community are also required to conduct these assessments.  Steps that can be taken to reduce the risk of potentially catastrophic collisions include managing airport habitat to discourage use by wildlife, maintaining fences and other barriers to prevent wildlife from entering airports, and active controls such as distress calls and pyrotechnics to scare wildlife off runways and other areas of activity.  These measures, while relatively simple, can go a very long way towards reducing the number of collisions and preventing situations like Flight 1549.  The added attention and the realization of the deadly seriousness of the issue has reinvigorated the FAA to ensure that airports are in compliance with these requirements and to ensure that these are viewed as living documents that are taken seriously and not simply boxes to be checked.

Adding to our existing airport services, NRC Avian Biologists Brian Bub and Scott Yanco recently participated in training to learn how to assist airports assessing hazards and managing wildlife on airport grounds.  This training included a field visit to Orlando International Airport where they got to experience, hands-on, some of the techniques that can be employed in order to ensure a safe environment for the traveling public.  NRC is excited to be a part of the community of professionals dedicated to keeping airports safe for everyone.

To learn more about bird strikes, check out some of the links below or feel free to contact Brian or Scott.

Brian Bub
608-839-2037

Scott Yanco
720-330-7280 x11

2 comments:

  1. While wildlife management at airports continues to be an important issue, I think that it is inaccurate to say that ground-based managememt actions can prevent a situation similar to Flight 1549. That accident actually had nothing to do with airport-wildlife interactions. Consideration of how to avoid wildlife-aircraft impacts at altitude is another problem altogether, and a much more difficult one.
    Michael Lee Jones, Certified Senior Ecologist
    ReplyDelete
  2. Michael,

    That's a good point - around 95% of all bird strikes occur below 3,000ft. Flight 1549 struck the gees at around that altitude, as I remember. Also, stable isotope analysis demonstrated that they were migratory gees originating in Canada. Bottom line, airport hazard mitigation probably would not have changed the outcome of that flight.

    However, the vast majority of bird strikes (especially non-military) are associated with airports and can be managed. The "take-home" point with Flight 1549 is that it brought more attention to this often overlooked issue and has spawned some recent action form the FAA, and continues to do so. Check out: http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=11105 While the Flight 1549 may not have been a "preventable" strike, it has caused action that may help prevent other strikes.

    Thanks for your comment, Michael, that's an important point of clarification.

    -Scott
    ReplyDelete