Posted on 02/03/2009 8:32:10 PM PST by nickcarraway
A United Airlines flight headed from Denver to SFO was forced to turn around this afternoon when it hit a bird, according to the Federal Aviation Administration.
The story has just about everyone thinking about the Miracle on the Hudson from two weeks ago. This time the plane was able to land on the tarmac instead of a river.
Flight No. 77 departed from Denver International Airport shortly after noon, but soon after takeoff a bird was sucked into one of the plane's two engines.
The plane returned to the Denver airport and landed without incident, FAA spokesman Ian Gregor said. He did not know the extent of damage to the plane but said no passengers were hurt.
Last month, Danville pilot Chesley Sullenberger became a national hero when he landed a U.S. Airways plane in the Hudson River in New York after the plane struck birds, disabling both of its engines. Everyone on board the plane survived.
Gregor said it is fairly common for planes to hit birds. Between 1990 and 2008, he said, more than 100,000 birds were sucked into plane engines.
the airlines should start painting the nose and cockpit of these aircraft to resemble giant hawks to ward off and scare these pesky birds. Then the airlines could start charging a bird tax.
What I don’t understand is:
The US Air flight lost it’s engines at about 3000 feet after a bird strike!
? What birds fly at 3000 feet ???
Certainly not the large Canadian Geese that seem to be prevalent on the east coast in the winter. So what big birds fly that high??
This drives me nuts. I don't care if the BBC says runways are made out of tarmac, they're not. They're made out of asphalt or concrete. Pinhead reporters who use jargon to try to appear informed really need to shut up. They remind me of the idiots who write about cops drawing their service revolvers, which turn out to be made by Glock or Sig Sauer.
The Snargenator!
Geese certainly do fly that high. Not a problem at all.
NBC
Geese do indeed fly at that altitude and higher.
Why can’t chicken wire be placed over the intakes? Mesh large enough to not stop air but stop all but the smallest birds.
I've also wondered about that. I am certain there must be an answer why it's not done, but it does seem like a pretty simple solution. Maybe not chickenwire (a hit by a bird once you add the forward momentum of the plane would probably either shred it, or make the entire mesh get inside the engine), but surely some stronger mesh system that does the same thing that you propose. Hopefully someone 'in the know' will explain why that is not done.
There are a couple reasons: 1) some disruption to efficient air flow; 2) there would be a surface for ice accumulation; 3) a bird strike would probably still go through the engine, plus you’d have the screen injested as well.
There are a couple reasons: 1) some disruption to efficient air flow; 2) there would be a surface for ice accumulation; 3) a bird strike would probably still go through the engine, plus you’d have the screen injested as well.
The BBC supposedly started the use of the word with the Entebbe raid.
Perhaps the heavy screen used in jails might work?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.