Bird strike(s)

That just chases away from places jeeps can go. If you want them totally
off the property, dogs.

"Stubby" wrote in message
. ..
Years ago, Hanscom Field in Bedford, MA employed jeeps to disperse the
Canada geese.


sfb wrote:
Right, there are guys with dogs that given permission of the state
will harass the geese until they leave. Shooting at the geese doesn't
do it.

"Newps" wrote in message
. ..

That's how we got rid of the Canada Geese at one of our small
airports near here. You get permission from your state, which ours
readily gave, then you harass the hell out of them. You kill some,
you bother the rest. Took a couple of weeks and haven't seen them
since.



sfb wrote:


What idea? I've seen Canadian Geese get knocked off their feet by a
golf ball, roll-over, get up, and continue to eat and crap.

"Newps" wrote in message


Start shooting. They'll get the idea.

LAX is using trained falcons and dogs.
Jim

"sfb" wrote in message news:d9Qbf.9085$dU6.6820@trnddc03...
That just chases away from places jeeps can go. If you want them totally
off the property, dogs.

"Stubby" wrote in message
. ..
Years ago, Hanscom Field in Bedford, MA employed jeeps to disperse the
Canada geese.


sfb wrote:
Right, there are guys with dogs that given permission of the state
will harass the geese until they leave. Shooting at the geese doesn't
do it.

"Newps" wrote in message
. ..

That's how we got rid of the Canada Geese at one of our small
airports near here. You get permission from your state, which ours
readily gave, then you harass the hell out of them. You kill some,
you bother the rest. Took a couple of weeks and haven't seen them
since.



sfb wrote:


What idea? I've seen Canadian Geese get knocked off their feet by a
golf ball, roll-over, get up, and continue to eat and crap.

"Newps" wrote in message


Start shooting. They'll get the idea.

Andrew Gideon wrote:
Jim Burns wrote:

Sheesh! Glad he didn't care if you and the plane were ok!!

Hmm. I wonder what would have been for dinner had the pilot been hurt.

If I had been less tongue tied, I like to think I would have told him,
"EAT ME"

The highest-flying bird ever recorded was a Ruppell's griffon, a
vulture with a wingspan of about 10 feet; on November 29, 1975, a
Ruppell's griffon was sucked into a jet engine 37,900 feet above the
Ivory Coast--more than a mile and a half higher than the summit of
Mount Everest. The plane was damaged, though it landed safely.

See:
http://magazine.audubon.org/birds/birds0011.html

denny

They even authorize these 'hunts' in a bird sanctuary:

http://www.alpena.mi.us/newsreleases...unt%202004.pdf


"Newps" wrote in message . ..
That's how we got rid of the Canada Geese at one of our small airports near here. You get permission from your state,
which ours readily gave, then you harass the hell out of them. You kill some, you bother the rest. Took a couple of
weeks and haven't seen them since.



sfb wrote:

What idea? I've seen Canadian Geese get knocked off their feet by a golf ball, roll-over, get up, and continue to eat
and crap.

"Newps" wrote in message

Start shooting. They'll get the idea.

On Mon, 7 Nov 2005 12:31:56 -0500, "John Gaquin"
wrote:



You can be cautious, and try to avoid or observe areas with known bird
problems, but in my opinion, unless you are well trained and skilled at
judging relative speed and motion of two moving bodies, trying to take
evasive action can be more dangerous than the strike itself.

I agree - I'm always amazed at how difficult it is to judge closing
speeds and relative positions with soaring hawks - they change
direction and altitude so quickly with no visual clues.

However, you probably can't depend on the bird to take appropriate
evasive action. Birds evolved flying skills and maneuvers that didn't
have to deal with anything like an airplane. Kind of like hitting a
mammal with your car - you can't really expect that the
deer/raccoon/skunk etc. will be smart enough to avoid your 60 MPH
vehicle. I suspect the reason number of bird strikes is so low is
mainly because the big sky theory is at work to protect us 99.9% of
the time.


Michael

On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 12:38:48 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

Anyone ever hit a bird? Anyone got a good bird avoidance plan they'd care
to share?

My friend hit a goose in a Bonanza. 10,000 dollars later he had a
rebuilt wing. After studying it a bit we learned (fo geese) never
dive away as he did. They'll think you're the lead bird and follow.
A high performance plane can out climb a goose and is a preferred
technique. Other birds I'm not sure about.

Part of his story was watching the geese literally fold up their wings
and fall like a rock to keep up with him.

z

Jay
As posted here and on the rotorcraft boards over the past couple years,
I've had hundreds of bird strikes but the vast majority were below
200'agl. Some interesting stories out of them and some wisdom gained.
Ol Shy & Bashful

On 7 Nov 2005 06:50:05 -0800, "Longworth"
wrote:

Jay,
I was told that birds like to dive down so the best way to avoid
hitting them is to pull the nose up. However, I have also read that
this may or may not work with different types of birds. I guess the
next best thing is to say a prayer providing that you have enough time

Think of it this way. Ducks and Seagulls are brainless. Geese will
try to avoid you except a flight of them believe they have the
"right-of-way". :-)) Everything else is unpredictable.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
;-)

Hai Longworth

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:rVHbf.520936$x96.436058@attbi_s72...
Paraphrased from Sport Aviation this month:

Hitting a Canada Goose exerts the same force as dropping a 1000 pound
weight 10 feet.

Yikes! That would make mince-meat out of ANY GA aircraft.

It would if the claim were true. But a little high-school physics shows it's
not. (And knowing that it's not could bear on important choices you make
while flying--if the claim were true, you'd want to choose almost any
alternative to such a collision.)

Assuming the same compressibility, the forces of the two collisions would be
proportionate to the colliding objects' respective momenta. After dropping
ten feet, an object has a velocity of about 15 knots; hence, a 1000-pound
weight has a momentum of 15,000 knot-pounds. A Canada Goose weighs up to 14
pounds; hence, at (say) 120 knots, its momentum is at most 1,680
knot-pounds--about an order of magnitude less than what's asserted above. If
the 1000-pound weight is harder (less compressible) than the goose, then the
asserted comparison is wrong by an even greater factor.

--Gary