Archive 2010

Relevant events of December 2010
Obviously the most significant event for us is that occurred on the 22nd at Genoa, airport often taken to “the honors” of the press – sometimes unjustly – mainly for its “legal precedents”: two events occurred there in the past caused several Court trials for damage compensation that are still under discussion.
In the 2009 the airport reported an impact rate of 6,8 out of 10.000 movements (source ENAC) that, even not the highest in Italy, is however well above the virtual “attention threshold” (5,00) established by the CAA (in this website we have discussed many times this issue complaining about its anachronism and calling upon more up-to-date risk assessment measures).
The main concern regards the steady increasing trend that raised from 2.4 in 2007 to the present 6.8. There are very serious environmental problems at Genoa, first of all the near landfill of Scarpino and the abandoned industrial site of Cornigliano, but not only these, whose solution cannot be charged only to the airport administration. Here and in all the similar situations, it is needed that the various entities that manage the territory, including the airport, find an (effective) common line to face thoroughly this problem.
  • 2 – Fort Lauderdale
    Jetblue A320, immediately after landing hit a bird that caused minor damages to a flap;
  • 4 – Bordeaux
    Jet4You B737, hit birds during the approach;
  • 8 – Fort Lauderdale
    USAir B737, hit birds at take off and returns due to vibrations in the right engine; serious damage to the engine cowling;
  • 16 – Miami
    Air Canada A320, hit a hawk during the approach; the bird struck the radar dome and caused minor damage to the airframe;
  • 20 - Madinah
    Astreus B757, ingested a bird into one engine when on the initial climb; precautionary landing;
  • 22 – Genoa
    Alitalia CRJ 900, in the initial climb the crew observed a flock of sea gulls almost immediately followed by bird impacts and indications that a bird had been ingested into an engine; precautionary landing;
  • 22 – Sacramento
    Southwest B737, hit a bird on approach, minor damages to the leading edge of a wing;
  • 24 – Porto Seguro
    TAM A320, struck a bird on take off, precautionary landing;
  • 27 – Sacramento
    Alaska Airlines B737, ingested a bird into one of its engines, precautionary landing;

Relevant events of November 2010
  • 1 November
    Norfolk, USAir B737, climbing through 1000 ft. the right engine ingested a bird that caused 4 fan blades damaged;
  • 4 November
    Memphis, Delta A320, on take off ingested a bird into the right engine; precautionary landing;
  • 5 November
    Vitoria (Brazil), TAM A320, rejected take off after a vulture (probably an Urubu, Coragyps atratus) was ingested in the right engine;
  • 6 November
    Hong Kong, Cebu Pacific A 319, bird strike during the approach; several next flights cancelled;
  • 7 November
    Birmingham, KLM F70, climbing after take-off ingested a bird into the left engine; precautionary landing and flight cancelled;
  • 8 November
    Los Angeles, Horizon Air DH Dash 8, on approach at about 6600 ft. a bird struck the leading edge of the right wing; substantial damages;
  • 8 November
    Tampa, Cayman Airways B737, at take off ingested a bird into its right engine; emergency landing;
  • 11 November
    Goa, Aeroflot B767, rejected take off at high speed after accelerated through a flock of birds and ingested at least one bird into one of its engines; 7 main gear tyres deflated; runway closed for about one hour; 5 or 6 fan blades damaged;
  • 11 November
    Philadelphia, USAir A320, at take off ingested a bird into the right engine; precautionary landing;
  • 15 November
    Delhi, Kingfisher A321, at take off the right engine ingested a bird; the flight crew decided to continue the flight; after landing aircraft grounded for maintenance;
  • 15 November
    Minneapolis, Compass E170, at take off several birds impacted the radome of the aircraft causing substantial damage; precautionary landing;
  • 16 November
    Florence, Lufthansa ERJ190, struck a seagull at take off and diverts to Pisa;
  • 16 November
    Johannesburg, Qantas B747, during the initial climb the #2 engine ingested a bird; precautionary landing; minor damage to some fan blades;
  • 16 November
    Salt Lake City, Skywest CRJ200, on final struck several birds that caused minor damages;
  • 19 November
    Minneapolis, Delta A320, hit some Canada geese after take-off and declared emergency reporting they may have structural damage to the right side;
  • 28 November
    San Antonio, American MD80, was climbing through 1800 feet when the crew reported to have hit two large birds; initially continued to climb but then decided to return due to some failure indications for the right hand engine;

FAA released an Advisory Circular on avian radar systems
The U.S. FAA released on 23 November 2010 the AC (Advisory Circular) n. 150/5220-25 regarding the guidance on the use of avian radar systems at airports. In these years the industry started to produce systems capable of detecting birds on the airports and in the critical areas of aircraft flight paths, and therefore the FAA decided to provide guidelines and standards for their deployment and management. In general, use of the AC is not mandatory. However, the use is mandatory for all projects funded with federal grant monies.
This matter has been discussed also in this website (see our article of last July) following an article of the Jane’s Airport Review magazine. We also remind that a session (Radar Technology) of the 2009 11° Joint Meeting of Bird Strike Committee USA –Canada has been dedicated to this issue (click here to download the meeting proceedings).

Multiple bird strike at Florence
On 16 November at about 07,25 LT a Lufthansa ERJ 190 in flight from Florence to Frankfurt, at take off flew through a flock of gulls and one small hawk, probably a kestrel. At least one bird hit the main gear and another one was ingested in the right engine causing strong vibrations. The crew decided to divert to Pisa where the aircraft landed safely 20 minutes later.

At least three fan blades resulted damaged (click here to see the picture). The event occurred in the first hours of light, that statistically represent the most critical moment of the day.
Presentations from Cairns conference available online
The presentations from the 29th Meeting of the International Bird Strike Committee, which was held in Cairns (Australia) from 21 to 24 September 2010, are now available online at the Internet address

Relevant events of October 2010
Two cases of multiple impacts appear to be quite relevant in this month: both occurred after take-off on 19 and 29 October, and both in North America. In both cases the pilots flew through a flock of birds at relatively low altitude and speed. In the first one it seems the birds involved were once again Canada Geese. In the 29 October event the emergency landing was disturbed by the bird blood covering the windshields with a consequent poor visibility. Events like these lead us to remind of the need of remote sensing radar devices to be installed in the most important airports in order to detect the flocks of birds in the airplane flight paths.
  • 30 September
    Vancouver, Air Canada A321, rejected takeoff after a hawk impacted the captain's upper left windshield;
  • 8 October
    Belfast, Easyjet A319, on final the right engine ingested a bird; two fan blades damaged;
  • 10 October
    Entebbe, KLM A330, ingested a Grey crowned crane (Balearica regulorum) in the right engine just after take-off; immediate landing and flight cancelled; (picture from; this bird weighs about 3,5 kg.
  • 11 October
    Kolkata, Air India A319, ingested a bird into one engine during the approach; minor damages;
  • 11 October
    Pacific Ocean, after the landing in Portland found damage to an engine and a flap as well as evidence of a bird strike;
  • 15 October
    Charlotte, USAir B737, struck a deer with the landing gear during the roll out;
  • 15 October
    Calgary, Jazz CRJ 200, struck birds after take off; damaged and replaced the right hand engine's fan blades;
  • 17 October
    Vadodara, Indigo A320, bird strike at take off and precautionary landing;
  • 18 October
    Phoenix, Southwest B737, struck a bird while on approach; minor damages;
  • 19 October
    Edmonton, Air Canada ERJ 190, multiple bird strike after take off at 2000 ft.; emergency landing; damage to the left hand engine, cowling as well as right hand wing components; the birds are suspected to have been Canada geese (Branta canadiensis);
  • 21 October
    Mumbai, Kingfisher A320, a bird impacted the aircraft and got entangled in the landing gear; minor damages;
  • 26 October
    Kochi, Air Arabia A320, 15’ after take-off the crew suspected a bird strike and returned;
  • 27 October
    Amsterdam, Jet2 B737, ingested a bird on one engine while landing; next flight cancelled;
  • 29 October
    Dallas, American Airlines MD83, climbing through 4000 feet after take-off hit a number of birds; returned to Dallas with windshields covered with blood; substantial damages;
  • 31 October
    Zurich, Swiss A321, struck a bird after take-off; precautionary landing;
  • 31 October
    Amsterdam, KLM F100, on approach at 2000 ft. struck two or three large birds, presumably geese that caused substantial damages to the radome; (picture from
Events of September 2010
In this month we point out another impact with bird ingestion in both engines of an A319 at Omsk; this time the crew managed to reject the take-off even though at high speed. Then we remark the case of a helicopter pilot struck by a bird come through the windshield, without any injury, and two cases of flights continued after a bird strike. The first occurred in Spain (15 September): the crew decided to return after two hours because of “vibrations” and before crossing the Atlantic; the second (28 September) in Italy: also in this case it seems that the crew decided to go on to the destination, even after been informed of the strike. After the landing an inspection was needed and the plane stopped for 6 hours. We have already discussed about this topic (see the comments related to the August wildlife events). Probably it’s time for new rules about procedures to be followed after a bird strike, avoiding to leave too much discretionary power on the crew, that often do not have sufficient elements for a right choice.
  • 2 September
    Barcelona, Jet4You B737, ingested a bird into an engine shortly after takeoff; precautionary landing;
  • 4 September
    Teheran, Iran Air A300, during the approach flew through a flock of birds that caused two large holes in the nose cone, dents in the left hand engine's cowling and dents in the leading edge of the left hand wing.
  • 5 September
    Joao Pessoa, TAM A320, struck a bird on initial climb out; precautionary landing;
  • 7 September
    Chandigarh, Air India A321, on taxi after the landing hit an eagle that caused damages to the nose gear;
  • 8 September
    Split, Croatia Airlines A320, rejected take off after hitting three feral pigeons that caused damages to nose cone, one engine and one wing;
  • 8 September
    Spokane, Horizon DH8D, hit a bird on landing; minor damages to a propeller
  • 9 September
    Igarka, Katekavia An24, while on approach struck a bird that caused a crack of 2.5 cm in one of the wings.
  • 10 September
    Karachi, PIA B747, ingested a bird into an engine shortly after takeoff; precautionary landing;
  • 13 September
    Riyhad, BMI A330, struck a bird while on approach and suffered damage to its nose cone; next flight cancelled;
  • 15 September
    Madrid, Delta B767, returned after two hours; the crew explained they had encountered a bird strike while climbing through 1000 feet but thought there had been no damage; after vibrations started later they decided to return to Madrid;
  • 15 September
    Nogales, Air Evac Bell 407 , in medical mission hit a vulture that came through the windshield and struck the pilot; precautionary landing; see photo
  • 16 September
    Omsk Sibir Airlines A319, rejected takeoff at high speed when the airplane accelerated through a flock of birds and both engines ingested birds; 8 fractured compressor blades in the left hand engine and feathers in the right hand engine
  • 18 September
    Beziers, Ryanair B737, diverted to Girona following a bird ingestion into the right engine at take-off; probably some fan blades damaged;
  • 20 September
    Bucaramanga, Avianca Fokker 100, a buzzard (Buteo buteo) hit the right wing during the flight; next flight cancelled;
  • 21 September
    Budapest, Malev B737, rejected take off at high speed due to a bird strike; no damage reported;
  • 21 September
    Beirut, UMAir DC9, ingested a large bird on initial climb and returned; some fan blades damaged;
  • 22 September
    Norfolk, Pinnacle Airlines CRJ200, a bird impacted a wing during the final approach; wing damaged;
  • 28 September
    Roma Ciampino, Ryanair B737, ingested a bird in the right engine but continued on the flight to destination (Bergamo); after the landing an inspection found bird remains inside the engine; next flight operated with a 6 hrs delay;
  • 29 September
    Horta (Azores), SATA A320, flew through a flock of birds a number of which struck the windshield; precautionary diversion to Punta Delgada (Azores);

BSCI 2009 Annual Report

The Bird Strike Committee Italy (BSCI), now a CAA department, recently released the 2009 annual report on the phenomenon of wildlife strikes at Italian airports. The full text (in Italian) can be downloaded from the ENAC website at  

In the foreword the Committee points out that the number of impacts remained stable with regard to 2008, but as the number of air movements decreased, the ratio of impacts/10,000 movements (from now on: n/10K) increased. However this is also a consequence of the increase of bird presence at or in the vicinity of airports.

The strikes

The total number of reported impacts is 851, 620 of which (72,8%) occurred below 300 ft. and 231 (27,2%) above. With regard to the year 2008, the total impacts decreased by 0,7%, those below 300 ft. by 4,02 % and the others increased by 9,48 %.

Diff. % btn 2007 and 2008
Diff.% btn 2008 and 2009
Total impacts
+ 21%
Impacts below 300 ft.
+ 18%
Impacts above 300 ft.
+ 30%
Damaging impacts <300 ft.
+ 29%
Multiple impacts <300 ft.
+ 57%
+ 57,0

Impacts with ingestion <300 ft.

- 39%
+ 18,2

Impacts with effects to the flight <300 ft.

+ 22%

What is worrying in the table above is the remarkable increase of the multiple impacts, more than doubled in two years, from 37 (2007) to 91 (2009). That means that aircrafts more often fly through flocks of birds, so increasing the risk that some bird may be ingested into one or more engines.

The average annual rate (n/10K mvt.) climbed from 3,52 on 2006 to the current 5.2; we remind that the threshold of 5/10K was posed by ENAC for airports as a limit beyond which some mitigation action had to be taken.

Even if this index does not fully represent the measure of strike risks, however for the first time the national average rate   exceeded the threshold established by the national Authority for airports.

It is interesting to associate the most relevant bird strike events occurred in Italy on 2009 with the impact rate of airports where the events occurred (between brackets):

  • 10 January, Florence (3,7), Alitalia A 319, bird strike at take off.
  • 25 February, Naples (3,4), AirOne B737, hit a gull on final (nose cone damaged).
  • 21 March, Bologna (2,3), Eurofly A320, birdstrike during approach; minor damages to a flap.
  • 7 June, Lampedusa (6,0), Windjet A319, bird ingestion into the left engine during the approach.
  • 1 Augost, Parma (7,7), Windjet A319, bird ingestion in the left engine and emergency landing with one only engine.
  • 29 September, Trapani (29,77), Ryanair B737, bird ingestion in both engines at take off, emergency landing.
  • 19 November, Brescia (8,5), Ryanair B737, bird ingestion into one engine at landing.
  • 18 December, Alghero (9,4), Ryanair B737, bird ingestion into one engine at take-off.

We see that in 5 cases out of 8 the airports where serious incidents occurred have an annual rate higher, even six times, the threshold index established by ENAC.

Phases of flight when bird strikes occur

According to the data, 81% of the impacts occur on the ground (49% landing roll, 1% taxi, 31% take-off run). It is almost the same datum of 2008 (79%).

Times of the impacts

Unsurprisingly, the strikes are mostly concentrated in the summer period, with the exception of seagulls that pose risks also in Winter, while the daily peak is reported on the morning first hours, then gradually dropping until the evening hours.

This information, jointly with the airport geographical location, should be very useful to airport operators in calibrating the prevention and harassment strategies and their costs.

Parts of aircrafts struck and damaged

The report shows an analytic table regarding the parts of aircrafts that were struck; firstly we note that the total number of events with a reported point of collision is 331 out of 620 (below 300 ft.); however we can see that 18,43 % of collisions (61 events out of 331) regarded the aircraft engines. In 13 cases out of 61 (21,3%) an engine damage occurred.

Bird species involved

The report lists the most involved species, pointing out that the “record” still belongs to the “Unknown Species” (20%), followed by Swallows/Swifts (19,7%), Seagulls(16%) and Kestrels (13%).

With regard to the previous year there are not signs of discontinuity with the exception of the “Unknown species” (34% in the year 2008). The BSCI however highlights the relevant rate (5.3%) of Feral pigeons.

Even 1 collision with a Flamingo and 3 collisions with Herons are reported.

Ecological studies

The current regulation establishes this obligation for airport operators when some particular events (strikes reported, dangerous events etc…) occur.

Airports considered
Did not present the study
% 2008
Study unfit
% 2008
The Hazard Management Plan

The ecological study should show the need of a specific hazard management plan on each airport. This is the basic tool to face the bird presence at airports both with prevention (e.g. habitat management) and dispersal.

Airports considered
Plans not presented
Plans approved (out of 26 presented)

Almost one third of Italian airports did not present a specific prevention plan as established by the current regulation. At least on 10 out of the 12 non compliant airports there is a regular passengers service, domestic and international.

The airports

The “airport by airport” list made by BSCI is quite analytic and does not allow a general view of the phenomenon; therefore we tried to process the data according to different criteria that may allow us to offer more significant understanding keys.

So we identified how many airports were in the 2009 above the threshold established by ENAC (5/10K mvt) and how many were at a slightly lower level, i.e. with a n/10K from 4 to 5.

Airport considered
% 2008
From 4 to 5/10K
% 2008

(*) 6 of these did not presented a Prevention Plan.


Almost one third of Italian airports ranks above the legal “attention threshold”, while another 10% is  close to it. In general about 40% of Italian airports is more exposed to bird strike risk. We also remark that 5 serious incidents out of 8 reported, occurred at airports “above the threshold”.

The rate trend

It might be interesting to verify the n/10K mvt trend, with regard to the previous year;

Airports considered
38 (100%)
Increasing Trend 
17   (44,74 %)
Decreasing trend
20   (52,63 %)
Unchanged trend
1     (2,63 %)

However very often the trends are inverted, i.e. airports with increasing trends in 2008 now show a decrease and vice versa: so we can assume that trends are not yet stable.

Increasing trend
17 airports
100 %
From 0,1 to 1,0
From 1,0 to 3,0
More than 3,0

As it is easy to see, 70% of airports with a positive trend also shows remarkable increases .

The Bird Control Unit (BCU)

The ENAC APT 01 A circular states that a BCU must be present in every interested airport; in other words a specialized staff unit, possibly with no other duties, responsible for dispersing birds, monitoring their presence, inspecting airport areas.

Only two airports in Italy (Rimini and Rome Urbe) do not have yet a BCU.

Airport Inspections

One of BCU tasks is to inspect airport areas and to harass and disperse birds using the proper devices. The table below shows how many inspections are daily carried on.

Number of daily inspections
% 2009
% 2008
Airport considered
No inspection
From 1 to 6

More than 6


Continuous inspections


We do not believe that 5% of Italian airports do not make any inspection; probably there should be a mistake. Pretty satisfactory is instead to see that 42,1 % of airports has a dedicated unit operating all day long.

The dispersal means

The report shows the frequency of use of the main known dispersal means, pointing out that the most used devices are acoustic, in particular distress calls (about 31%) and blank cartridge (14 %), followed by 4X4 vehicles and sirens.

It is an objective survey of the existing situation, that however does not explore the effectiveness of each device in general and in that airport environment in particular.

We think that times have come for the Aviation Authority to test and certificate the dispersal means used at airports, establishing their features and using procedures, as well as they do with other means and devices involved in air navigation safety.


Among the conclusions at the end of the report we would like to highlight the BSCI concern regarding Feral pigeons; this species is responsible for the increase of multiple strikes in 2009. One of the causes could be the presence of large and/or abandoned buildings inside the airports where this species find nesting and roosting sites. BC&T agree with this statement, considering the several consulting requests coming from all over the Country and involving the problem of pigeons, especially in the historical centers of the cities. 

Relevant events occurred on August 2010
A look at the events of this month allows us to make some observations: who is still speaking of rare and statistically irrelevant events, when talking about the damaging of both engines as a result of a bird strike, is not well-informed or tries to play down the question.
The Malaga event occurred on 16 August is a clear evidence: this time fortunately everything ended with 11 replaced fan blades, but is still vivid in everybody’s mind what happened on 15 January 2009, when an Airbus A320 was forced to ditch in the Hudson river. We therefore would like to highlight that, besides that event become famous through the flight crew ability, other less known cases occurred since 2007, listed here below:
07/07/2007: Rome Fiumicino, Delta B767;
03/08/2008: Burgas, Balkan Holidays A320;
10/11/2008: Roma Ciampino, Ryanair B737;
14/11/2008: Kansas City, Frontier A319;
19/10/2009: Knock, bmibaby B737;
29/09/2009, Trapani, Ryanair B737;
Eight cases in three years, with both engines (in twin-engine aircrafts) affected by bird ingestion, really do not seem negligible events even from a statistical point of view.
A second observation regards negative comments released by some international experts; according to these comments, it happens too often that, after a bird strike at take off, flight crew continue on their flights to destination not registering at the moment abnormal parameters, but verifying after the landing the need of deep technical inspections or even hidden damages.
Two cases on the same day (8 August): at Sitka (Alaska) one B737 aborted its takeoff at high speed on short runway due to eagle ingestion and destroyed engine. A second B737, departing, struck two eagles, but continued on to destination, over two hours' flight. The same day at Katowice an A320 landed one hour after having flown through a flock of birds. According to the comments, this would demonstrate that there is no required training, no corporate policy, no government rule, no industry guideline and no manufacturer's suggestion that this is a risky thing to do. On the contrary, it should be strictly forbidden on flight manuals to take off in presence of a bird strike risk, and prescribed to land immediately in case of an impact. Many problems related to bird ingestion into the engines may come out after hours or even after days. To be honest, and fortunately, the list below would show that most pilots prefer to land or divert immediately after a bird strike. However we agree that the matter should be studied thoroughly at a regulatory level.
Finally, as for Italy, we point out the Cagliari case (22 August) where the event isn’t so relevant (the crew came back to the parking area after the ingestion of a seagull at low speed), but it has been followed by the circumstance that, according to newspapers, the passengers were not allowed to get off and kept on board for four hours waiting for the airplane technical inspection; they were eventually “freed” by the police called by one of the passengers (!).
  • 1 August
    San Jose, Frontier A 319, a post flight inspection revealed damage to the airplane's radome as result of a bird strike;
  • 3 August
    Brisbane, Tiger Airways A320, struck a bird on initial climb and returned to Brisbane;
  • 8 August
    Katowice, Wizzair A320, flew through a flock of birds during the initial climb; then the crew decided to return to Katowice about one hour after takeoff;
  • 8 August
    Sitka, Alaska Airlines B737, rejected takeoff at high speed after an eagle was ingested by the left hand engine;
  • 9 August
    Winnipeg, Air Canada A319, rotated for takeoff when the right hand engine ingested a bird; the crew observed a high vibration indication and returned to Winnipeg;
  • 10 August
    Salt Lake City, Expressjet E145, on downwind hit a number of White Pelicans (Pelecanus erythrorhynchos) at around 11000 feet, declared emergency having lost several systems; substantial damage: one bird impacted the aircraft near the nose resulting in a section of the skin about 1 meter long being folded back.
  • 11 August
    Curitiba, GOL B737, ingested a bird into one of its engines while on approach; damaged compressor blades;
  • 11 August
    Chattanooga, Piedmont DH8C, suffered a bird strike during the flight;
  • 13 August
    Saskatoon, Skywest CRJ700, on take-off ingested a seagull into the right hand engine; three fan blades were found damaged;
  • 16 August
    Malaga, Easyjet Switzerland A319, in the initial climb the airplane flew through a flock of sea gulls; both engines ingested birds; immediate return; engineers replaced a total of 11 fan blades;
  • 18 August
    Wellington, Air New Zealand B737, in the initial climb the right hand engine ingested a bird prompting the crew to shut the engine down and return;
  • 18 August
    near Chengdu, Sichuan Airlines A321, struck a bird while climbing through 17000 feet, the crew noticed no anomaly and decided to continue the flight; at the arrival a hole of about 20cm (7 inches) in diameter was noticed in the airplane's nose;
  • 19 August
    near Trujillo, LAN Peru A319, struck a bird during the cruise and diverted; a post flight inspection revealed a dent in the nose of the aircraft;
  • 22 August
    Cagliari, Ryanair B737, rejected takeoff at low speed after an engine ingested a sea gull; flight delayed 8 hrs;
  • 23 August
    Christchurch, Air New Zealand B737, a large bird struck the left hand wing during the take off run; the crew performed a low approach to have the damage inspected from the ground and subsequently landed safely back; flight cancelled;
  • 24 August
    Amsterdam, Arkefly B767, was climbing to FL140 when the crew requested to level off at FL100 due to a bird strike into one of the engines; returned to Amsterdam;
  • 27 August
    Barcelona, Vueling A320, in the initial climb a bird hit the aircraft on its right hand side; the crew decided to return;
  • 27 August
    Raleigh/Durham, USAirways B737, on final approach descending through 800 feet AGL struck a big bird;
  • 28 August
    Bhubaneshwar, Indigo A320, at take off a bird hit the left hand engine; TWR reported seeing a small part falling off the engine; precautionary landing;
  • 29 August
    San Antonio, American MD83, struck a bird while on a visual approach; minor damages;
  • 30 August
    Los Angeles, Alaska Airlines B737, climbing through 1000 feet a bird impacted the aircraft just above the windshield; precautionary landing;

An article on wildlife remote sensing at airports
The prestigious magazine Jane’s Airport Review focuses once again on the problem of wildlife control methods at airports. The interesting article takes into consideration the radar systems dedicated to bird detection; in airports in Latvia (Riga) and in South Africa (King Shaka) they are already in operational use, and one of the main manufacturers is expecting massive orders of their equipments, particularly in Europe and Asia.
Another device mentioned in the article is that in use at London Heathrow, Vancouver and Dubai, a FOD detection system on the runways, also suitable for wildlife.
We are talking about the “remote sensing”, i.e. the possibility to detect at medium/long range possible hazards to air navigation posed by birds or other wildlife.
In this sector, Italy seems to have no strategy. After some studies conducted by Alenia in the 90’ regarding the use of meteo radars for bird detection, nothing else seems have happened. No testing of even imported products on some airports, nor studies. And the matter is really important: to see in real time from the TWR a flock of birds in the aircraft flight path can really make the difference; we all remember the Hudson ditching after a multiple impact with migrant Canada geese and the Ryanair accident at Rome Ciampino.
Therefore we hope that who is in charge of this, besides a strong campaign for eliminating bird attracting factors from airport bordering areas, also promote these new technologic devices in order to make our skies safer.
We finally remind that the Civil Tribunal of Genoa, deciding on the Ukrainian AN124 1997 accident, blamed the lack of a remote sensing device in that airport.

Relevant events of July 2010
Our sources report 26 events of bird/wildlife strikes; the number is relevant but it is pretty usual in the summer months. We would like to highlight two cases of multiple impact occurred on the same day (18 July) but in very different and distant places, near Cairo and at Asheville (USA); the first one occurred during the cruise and therefore at high speed even though we don’t know the bird species involved; in the second the geese again were involved, that caused substantial damages to an engine. Also relevant is the number of impacts with mammals on the runways, two with deer and one with an aardvark in South Africa. At last we remind the event of the 31st at Bucharest which forced an Alitalia airplane to reject the take-off.
  •  1 July, Warsaw
    Contact Air F100, struck a bird on climb and received a large dent on its nose cone; precautionary landing and flight cancelled; (see picture below) 

  • 1 July, Madrid
    Air Europa A330, collided with a hawk at take-off; precautionary return with minor damages to the fuselage;
  • 3 July, Stuttgart
    Germanwings A319, the left hand engine ingested a bird; precautionary return; three fan blades damaged;
  • 4 July, Valencia
    Delta B757, struck a gull on take-off to New York and diverted to Madrid;
  • 6 July, Madrid
    Ryanair B737, struck a bird when climbing through 10,000 feet; precautionary landing;
  • 6 July, Lahore
    PIA B777, struck a bird with the outboard leading edge of the right hand wing during the landing roll; dent in one of the outboard slats requiring repair; next planned flight cancelled;
  • 8 July, Brno
    Travel Service B737, collided with a bird on approach; unspecified damages;
  • 13 July, Amsterdam
    KLM A330, reported bird strike into the left hand engine; precautionary landing;
  • 14 July, New York
    Turkish B777, struck a bird on approach; damage to the slats;
  • 16 July, , Kimberly
    SA Express DH8C, during the landing roll the nose gear struck an aardvark (Orycteropus afer) on the runway;
  • 17 Luglio, Indore
    GoAir A 320, struck a bird during the initial climb; precautionary landing and flight cancelled;
  • 18 July, Asheville
    American Eagle E135, on final approach through about 300 feet, flew through a flock of geese and 3 or 4 impacted nose, gear door and the right hand engine that needed to be replaced.
  • 18 July, near Cairo
    Lybian Arab A300, enroute, collided with a flock of birds and suffered a cracked windshield as a result;
  • 19 July, Orlando
    COPA B737, after the landing discovered a substantial gash with feathers entangled in the left hand inboard slat resulting from a bird strike.
  • 20 July, Toulouse
    struck a bird on departure and returned to the airport; flight cancelled;
  • 20 July, Montreal
    Air Canada A320, rejected takeoff at high speed due to the impact with a Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias) found on the runway;
  • 21 July, near Beirut
    Royal Jordanian E190, on descent a bird impacted a windshield covering the window with blood;
  • 25 July, Charleroi
    Ryanair B737, ingested a bird into one of its engines on take off and returned for a precautionary landing;
  • 25 July, Stuttgart
    Germanwings A319, struck a bird while climbing out; precautionary return;
  • 25 July, Ithaca
    Pinnacle CRJ2, struck a deer during the roll out; minor damage to the right hand flaps;
  • 26 July, Miami
    American Eagle E145, hit a bird in final approach; some damage;
  • 27 July, Maastricht
    Transavia B737, bird struck an engine during the initial climb; precautionary return;
  • 27 July, Ahmedabad
    Indigo A320, rejected takeoff at high speed after a bird was ingested into one of the engines causing the engine to fail; during the slow down one of the main gear tyres deflated;
  • 27 July, Masset
    Pacific Coastal SF34, the left hand propeller struck a deer on the runway during the take-off; the crew rejected the takeoff, the airplane slowed safely and stopped on the runway; the left hand engine and propeller received substantial damage;
  • 30 July, Karachi
    PIA B747, rejected takeoff at low speed when the outer left hand engine ingested a bird causing the engine to fail with a loud bang and to emit smoke;
  • 31 July, Bucharest
    Alitalia A320, rejected takeoff at high speed after an engine ingested a bird, reportedly a hawk; flight cancelled;
  • 31 July, Berlin
    Easyjet A319 rejected takeoff at high speed; parts of the brakes needed to be replaced following the slow down;

BC&T makes an advanced training course for Bird Raptor
BC&T recently organized a training course for executives of Bird Raptor Int. The company produces and merchandizes the device called “Falco robot GBRS”; it is a remote controlled aircraft model that perfectly imitates the shape and the flight features of a Goshawk (Accipter gentilis). We had the opportunity in the past to widely discuss about this topic (see also in the page “papers”).
The course has been expressly requested by the company in order to develop the knowledge of the airport operative environment and the legal issues following bird strikes.
Relevant events of June 2010
The most relevant event in the month is beyond question that occurred at Amsterdam airport and described immediately here below. Firstly because the presence of Canada Geese (Brenta Canadensis) at North-Europe airports is becoming a more and more usual fact. Secondly because of the number of dead birds found on the runway after the impact, that makes clear the flock was pretty consistent. Finally because Amsterdam airport is traditionally in the lead in the adoption of prevention and dispersal measures; if events like this may occur there, who knows what one could expect in other less equipped airports.
Here below a couple of pictures of the Royal Air Maroc B737 after the multiple bird strike.
  • 6 June
    Amsterdam, Royal Air Maroc B737, collided with a flock of Canada geese on departure , one engine and the fuselage received substantial damage, an engine fire ensued which was put out by the engine's fire suppression system; landed safely 17 minutes after takeoff; six dead birds found on the runway;
  • 9 June
    Gdansk, Wizzair A320, ingested a stork into its right hand engine during initial climb; immediate return with one engine only;
  • 10 June
    Addis Abeba, Ethiopian B757, ingested a bird into one of its engines while on initial climb; return with one engine only;
  • 11 June
    Lagos, Chanchangi B737, ingested a bird into its left hand engine shortly after liftoff; return with one engine only;
  • 11 June
    Aalborg, Norwegian B737, ingested a bird into one of its engines on departure; immediate return but no damage;
  • 17 June
    Karaganda, SCAT B737, struck a bird on departure and returned; no damage;
  • 17 June
    Ufa, Aeroflot A320, struck a deer on the runway while landing; minor damages;
  • 18 June
    Boston, Jetblue A320, ingested a bird into its right hand engine right at liftoff and returns;
  • 21 June
    Orlando, Jetblue A320, struck birds during the landing roll; damages to the nose cone and an engine;
  • 24 June
    Pago Pago, Hawaiian B767, ingested a bird into one of its engines while on approach; inspections and repairs needed;
  • 26 June
    Ahmedabad, GoAir A320, an engine ingested a bird during the initial climb; damage to fan blades;
  • 28 June
    Dublin, Aer Lingus A 320, hit by a bird on its radome during initial climb; immediate precautionary landing; damage to a pitot tube and minor damage to an engine.

25 June – Bird strikes in the ANSV 2009 annual report
ANSV (National Agency for Flight Safety) released the 2009 annual report on their activities. Besides the description of the main technical investigations carried out, the report describes some particular aspects related to air navigation safety in Italy. Two pages are dedicated to bird strikes, the first of which focuses on the possible similarities between the accidents occurred at New York to the USAir A320, ditched in the Hudson River, and to the Ryanair B737 at Rome Ciampino on 10.11.2008: both aircrafts were equipped with engines of the same type.

ANSV then states they received 197 bird strike reports, some of them particularly relevant because of the damages suffered by engines following multiple bird ingestions. In two cases, both occurred at take off, the Agency started a technical investigation for “serious incident” (1.8.2009 Parma, B737 Ryanair and 29.9.2009 Trapani, B737 Ryanair). ANSV also started a technical investigation for “accident” following an event occurred during the approach to Palermo to the Cessna 650 – I-BLUB on 7.1.2009.

The Agency highlight problems concerning bird strike issues and declare they have started initiatives to investigate on monitoring and bird dispersal policies at minor airports.

Finally they remind some ENAC (CAA) initiatives adopted after ANSV safety recommendations: in particular those adopted after the investigation of the event occurred to Delta B767 at Rome Fiumicino on 7.7.2007, widely discussed in this website (see news of 9.7.2009).

In another report section there is a description of the problems caused by other wildlife, 17 events with various consequences, and even the airport invasion by pasturing animals which caused an airport closing.
ENAC papers on bird strike issues
ENAC recently released two reports which include also mentions to the bird strike problem in Italy. Both are only in Italian.
In this last report we may read the following final statement: “The sensible increase of the impact number shows that a problem related to bird strikes does exist, and that they are reported by airport ground staff with always more promptness. The number increase record has been possible also thanks to the ENAC continuous action of making the airport staff aware about this issue”.
Once again the strike number increase seems depending more on the airport staff attention than on an objective increase of birds at airports and on the related hazard. In the light of the general worldwide trend, we do not fully agree with this statement, also because the airport staff attention level should be now optimized. We believe instead that too many bird attractive factors still exist in the vicinity of airports and that strong initiatives for their removal are needed, as the new Navigation Code prescribes.
Relevant events occurred on May 2010
Oddly below the average is the number of impacts reported this month.
  • 2 May
    Cincinnati, Astar Air Cargo DC-8, struck a bird on departure but the crew elected to continue the flight ;
  • 4 May
    Sao Luis, TAM A 320, struck a vulture while on final approach through 900 ft, and landed safely;
  • 11 May
    Maraba, TAM A 320, struck a bird on approach; damage to one of the wings;
  • 17 May
    New York JFK, Jetblue A320, struck multiple birds (geese) and received minor damage to the nose and wing;
  • 23 May
    Newburgh, Jetblue A 320, ingested a bird into the left hand engine while climbing; the crew decided to return;

4 May 2010 – UK CAA is launching a campaign on the importance of bird identification
The UK Civil Aviation Authority has launched a campaign, aimed at those who report birdstrikes, to make every effort to identify the species of bird involved in a strike. CAA birdstrike data indicates that as much as 40 per cent of all birdstrikes reported to the CAA contain no bird species information at all.
Correct bird identification helps airfield personnel to target the species causing most incidents when putting together habitat management programmes or other bird hazard mitigation methods that discourage birds from nesting on airfields.
The CAA, through airfield personnel training, highlights the importance of accurate bird identification and how this might be achieved locally. Current methods of bird identification include awareness of bird species in the locality, knowledge of common species involved in birdstrikes locally, or by obtaining a formal scientific analysis of bird remains from feather, carcass or DNA.
Effective airport bird management has two key elements; the removal of features that birds find attractive, and selection of the correct bird dispersal techniques. This can be achieved efficiently with more accurate identification of bird species.
A link to the campaign poster can be found here:
(from the website

Relevant events occurred on April 2010
The event occurred on 13 April at Milan Linate (see also the news previously posted) did not cause damages only in terms of delays and problems to passengers. Actually relevant damages have been found out after the engine inspection. According to some sources, the hare hit the right main gear and subsequently was ingested into the right engine. All the fan blades were damaged, the hare passed through the first stage and its remains were expelled between the first and the second stage, causing a 50 cm. hole in the left fan cowling. According to the same source the damage amount would be more than one million Euro.
  • 1 April
    Fortaleza, GOL B 737, ingested a bird into one of its engines during rotation and returned for a precautionary landing;
  • 6 April
    Hamburg, Air Berlin 737, hit a number of big birds on final approach; aviation sources reported that the captain's windshield turned completely opaque, the first officer's view through his windshield was seriously restricted by impact marks and blood, so that the crew was forced to perform an automatic landing without forward visual reference;
  • 7 April
    Istanbul, Turkish A321, hit a bird on take-off and returned for a precautionary landing;
  • 13 April
    Linate, Alitalia Express ERJ-170, on take-off hits a hare that enters in the right engine air intake causing damages;
  • 13 April
    Jeddah, Egypt Air B777, struck a bird while on approach; the airplane received a dent of about 10cm in radius in the nose cone;
  • 14 April
    Hamburg, on take-off hits a bird and returns for a precautionary landing;
  • 19 April
    Lagos, DanaAir MD83, flew through a flock of egrets, one of which was ingested by the left hand engine causing the engine to fail;
  • 19 April
    Los Angeles, Skywest E120, struck a bird while on short final causing minor damage to radome and windshield of the aircraft;
  • 22 April
    Calabar (Nigeria), Arik B 737, an engine ingested a Black kite (Milvus migrans) during the landing roll;
  • 23 April
    Raleigh/Durham, Chautauqua Airlines ERJ-145, struck geese at the right hand windshield while climbing out, the flight continued;
  • 26 April
    Sevilla, Vueling A320, ingested a bird into its right hand engine shortly after takeoff; returned for landing;
  • 28 April
    Casablanca, RAM B737, a bird hit one of the pitot tubes forcing to a precautionary landing;


13 April – Airplane hits a hare at Milan Linate
Not by chance some months ago ICAO modified the chapter 9 of its Annex 14 replacing the words “bird hazard” with “wildlife hazard”. They recognized that not only birds pose risks at airports. What mentioned above has been demonstrated by the event occurred on 13 April at Milan Linate airport. An Alitalia Express Embraer ERJ-170, in service from Linate to Roma Fiumicino with 72 passengers on board rejected takeoff at high speed after a gear hit a hare.
The event seems to have caused no consequences other than the flight cancellation and the passenger rebooking on other flights. Probably the incident caused some sensation in Italy due to the presence of some politicians on board.
The Milan Linate airport knows well this problem: in the year 2007 a real battue was organized during which about 60 hares were captured and removed from the airfield.
Relevant events occurred on March 2010
  • 4 March
    Denver, on final approach, hit a flock of birds at about 800 feet AGL;
  • 8 March
    Chicago, United B757, bird strike during the approach; next flight cancelled;
  • 10 March
    Newark, Continental B777, after take-off flew through a flock of geese and hit a number of them; precautionary return to Newark;
  • 11 March
    Rochester, USAirways A319, hit a flock of Canada Geese at about 2000 feet after take-off; precautionary return for landing;
  • 11 March
    Chicago, American MD82, on take off a couple of birds struck the right hand engine just overhead the runway; precautionary return;
  • 13 March
    Kochi (India), GoAir A320, noticed engine vibrations and decided to return after a bird strike on take-off; two fan blades cracked;
  • 13 March
    Guadalajara, Volaris A319, rejected takeoff at high speed after a bird was ingested into the right hand engine;
  • 17 March
    Minneapolis, Expressjet ERJ 145, struck Canada geese at 1500 ft. after take-off and needed to return declaring emergency; the birds caused a large and long dent in the leading edge of the left wing with substantial additional drag;
  • 19 March
    Dallas, United Airlines A320, struck a bird descending through 4000 ft.; dent just below the first officer's windshield;
  • 20 March
    Vancouver, Westjet B737, hit a bird when rotating for takeoff; returned for a precautionary landing;
  • 28 March
    New York, Delta B767, hit a bird during rotation for takeoff; dumped fuel for about 90 minutes and returned to land;
  • 29 March
    Asuncion, TAM A320, rejected takeoff at low speed after the left hand engine ingested a bird;

Relevant events occurred on February 2010
  • 12 February
    Goiania, TAM A 320, ingested a bird into the left hand engine on take off and returned to Goiana.
  • 13 February
    Antalya, Sky Airlines B737, ingested a bird into one of its engines during initial climb forcing the crew to shut the engine down and return to Antalya;
  • 15 February
    Fort Lauderdale, Spirit Airlines A321, struck probably a turkey vulture while climbing through 1000 feet, and returned to FL for an inspection;
  • 15 February
    Tampa, Delta B757, was advised of a flock of birds at the departure end of the runway and cleared for takeoff. When the aircraft climbed through 600 feet, the crew advised they had been hit on the fuselage by a buzzard (Buteo buteo);
  • 16 February
    Charlotte, USAirways A321, struck birds with its wings and ingested a bird into one of its engines;
  • 17 February
    Huntington, FedEx B727, rejected takeoff after it struck a deer on the runway;
  • 19 February
    Bilinga, Tiger Airways A320, flew through a flock of birds with several birds impacting the airplane's nose cone; the airplane had to be removed from service pending examination and repairs;
  • 21 February
    Maracaibo, American Airlines B757, ingested a vulture into its right hand engine while climbing above a botanical garden and a landfill. The right hand engine lost power following the impact prompting the crew to return;
The Delta event (15 February) leads us to make some considerations and ask some questions. According to the media reports, the TWR controller properly advised the pilot about the bird presence at the departure runway end, but cleared him to take off, leaving the responsibility to him. The pilot, even though advised, accepted the responsibility and decided to take-off. According to the ICAO rules the Controller only must give these information and the pilot is the unique responsible for flight operations. Everything following the rules. However we know that the immediately preceding departing traffic had already reported they needed to manoeuvre around a large flock of birds right overhead the departure end of the runway, seconds before Delta was cleared for takeoff. Delta itself experienced a similar event at Rome Fiumicino on July 2007, an emergency landing with both engines damaged.
Could the Controller have sent the bird dispersal patrol before clearing for take-off? Could the pilot have required it? Could the airport operator have provided that service on its own? Did Delta, after the Fiumicino experience, issue strict regulations for its crew in case of confirmed bird presence? Could have or had to? Somebody still states that bird strikes are Acts of God.
15 February 2010 – A new index for bird strike risk assessment
The current Italian regulation states that an airport must adopt some form of action to counter wildlife when any of the following events occur at an airport:
  1. when number of bird strikes is equal or superior to 5 per 10,000 movements
  2. a multiple bird strike or engine ingestion
  3. damage ensuing bird collision
  4. frequent observance of birds in numbers capable of causing events as described in points b) and c)
Three of the above mentioned conditions (b,c,d) are those cited in the FAR 139.337 of the USA FAA whereas point a) constitutes an all Italian peculiarity. Why was it decided to adopt this arbitrary numeric index? First of all the bird impact ratio of 5/10,000 was the then supposed European average and the first objective was to contrast the anomalies above this threshold; also at that time ( 1999), the limited information available to most airports and the airport operator cultural gap regarding bird strike issues led the regulators to adopt a rigid approach to dealing with the phenomenon. It was also immediately evident that the index was not representative of the risk severity in an airport; in fact it was obvious that the dynamics of every impact are different. Assuming that aircraft speeds are the same, an impact with a sparrow is very different from an impact with a pelican; an airport that registers 100 single bird strikes with sparrows per annum is no more problematic than one with fifty multiple gull strikes.
However, as we lived in a country with no specific bird strike regulations except for two lines in a law that legally entrusted the Ministry of Transport with “ the control of bird population levels in airports”, a start had to be made somewhere. It was then that ENAC issued the first edition of the APT 01. However, some years later in 2007, the updated version APT 01 A still maintained the original four conditions, including the 5/10k index.
In the meantime more precise and scientific risk assessments methods had been published based on the so called “risk matrix”. On June 23rd 2009 in the news area of this website we published a classic example of a risk matrix that contemplates more aspects that play a role regarding this phenomenon and not just numbers regarding impacts and aircraft movements.
An interesting study has recently been published in the European Journal of Wildlife Research entitled “ An ecological approach to bird strike risk analysis” by Cecilia Soldatini, Vyron Georgalas, Patrizia Torricelli and Yuri V. Albores-Barajas, from the Department of Environmental Sciences of the University Ca’ Foscari in Venice. The study defines a new airport risk assessment index called BRI or “ Birdstrike Risk Index”. It defines the key variables involved in bird strike events and summarises their interactions with the aim to provide a tool for risk analysis based on the actual presence of birds in the airport.
Furthermore calculations based on prior statistical data can predict how many bird strikes could occur in any given period. The several factors that make up the BRI include bird biology and ecology, the group factor, or the association of different bird species with similar characteristics and of course the bird strike factor, or the event history in an airport. This model has already been tested at Venice airport and proved to be reliable showing that the predicted bird strike number was more or less the same than what actually occurred. Furthermore the BRI can be applied to different airport areas and also allows identification of areas where bird strikes are more probable. All of this will naturally facilitate airport operators to concentrate their resources to counteract the more problematic bird species, either during the higher risk periods or in more exposed airport areas. We are pleased to acknowledge this innovative study and hope that ENAC will consider it when updating the APT 01 A.
On many occasions we have stated that it is time to eliminate the numeric index which indicates the threshold below which no action should be taken. The bird strike monthly review, that we regularly publish, demonstrates that the phenomenon is growing constantly and we feel that all Italian airports should be in any case equipped with the necessary procedures and preventative devices for bird dispersal and to also avail of the above mentioned risk factor model.

15 February 2009 – FALCO ROBOT GBRS got positive results in Israel
In the recent past we described the innovative bird dispersal system called FALCO ROBOT GBRS, launched by an Italian-Spanish company ( upon an Italian project. It’s a remote controlled aircraft model which perfectly resumes in its shape a Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis) and, while flying, replicates the natural hunting methods of a natural predator. That’s the reasons why the device is so efficient in deeply scaring several bird species that pose risks at airports. The company has been recently invited to Israel to carry out flight tests that obtained excellent results.
From 16 to 29 January 2010 three BirdRaptor experts, at the invitation of Israel Nature & Parks Authority, made several tests on different local bird species that cause troubles and severe damages to human activities. Directed by the ecologist/ornithologist Dr. Ohad Hatzofe, from the local Division of Science & Conservation, the BirdRaptor experts could carry out tests in different environments and climatic conditions (countryside, fisheries, airports, industrial plants, landfills) always obtaining results beyond all expectations. Besides the confirmation of the extreme power and speed in dispersing Laeridae (Gulls), excellent results were also obtained against Ardeidae (big flocks of Egretta garzetta), Charadriidae (Vanellus spinosus, the local lapwing) and Threskiornithidae (Plegadis falcinellus)
Very interesting was the escape reaction obtained on a very large scale on huge flocks of Skylarks (Alauda arvensis), that are a real pest in Israeli airports. In this particular action the comparison with the Border Collie dogs was out of discussion: the dog proved to be ineffective on these gregarious birds and inactive even on very short distance (10-15 mt.), while the FALCO ROBOT GBRS “cleared” hundred square meter areas. Other relevant news to be confirmed (only two tests have been carried out) are the very fast escape of two species so far considered problematic: the Stone Curlew (Burhinus oedicnemus) and the Rose-ringed Parakeet (Psittacula krameri). Israel is now negotiating with BirdRaptor for the system acquisition. So far the system is being used in 17 Peru airports and in the Plus Petrol Company Amazonian heliports; it will be used soon also in Chilean airports.

Relevant events of January 2010
January 2010 will probably be remembered in the bird community as the month of the “Istanbul events”. In 25 minutes six multiple bird strikes occurred, and five left on the ground at least ten carcasses of gulls, while one slightly damaged an A320. We do not have sufficient information for an exhaustive comment, however we would like to make some observations and ask ourselves some questions.
As first the times of occurrences: given the fast sequence of impacts, it would seem that at least three or four airplanes landed without a proper runway cleaning, and that the runway was probably contaminated by tens of gull carcasses. Secondly, the decision to keep the runway operative sounds strange, when it was evident that the airport was literally invaded by gulls and the runway likely needed to be cleaned. And finally: have the pilots been properly informed and warned in order to allow an autonomous decision regarding a possible diversion? We have the feeling that the events have been more suffered than managed according to prearranged protocols.
If Istanbul weeps, Sacramento does not smile. Two bird strikes again in the same day, after the consecutive three of December 19, and another one on December 30 that involved geese, as unfortunately usual. Big problems must be faced here regarding bird management and control outside the airport, that is just under one of the main migratory flight path. Finally, at home, one more multiple impact on rotation (Florence) and consequent rush landing. This time the birds must have been on the runway.
  • 3 January
    Sapporo, JAL B767, ingested a bird into its left hand engine shortly after liftoff climbing through 200 feet AGL;
  • 3 January
    Wellington, Jetconnect B737, suffered a bird strike causing severe engine vibrations while climbing out of Wellington and diverted to Christchurch ;
  • 5 January
    Sacramento, Soutwest B737, was climbing through about 500 feet out of Sacramento, when a bird impacted the windscreen. The crew decided to return;
  • 5 January
    Sacramento, Hawaiian B767, struck a bird while on final approach . The crew continued for a safe landing;
  • 6 January
    Florence, Meridiana A319, struck two birds while rotating for takeoff. The crew continued the takeoff and decided to return to Florence;
  • 10 January
    St. Petersburg, Swiss A319, climbing out of Pulkovo Airport, when the crew reported engine vibrations prompting them to return to Pulkovo Airport;
  • 10 January
    Istanbul, Lufthansa A320, on final approach to Istanbul Airport, when the airplane flew through a flock of sea gulls and experienced multiple bird strikes; nose gear landing light broken;
  • 10 January
    Istanbul, Turkish, struck sea gulls leaving about 10 dead birds on the runway, however did not receive damage.
  • 10 January
    Istanbul, Air France A320, struck sea gulls leaving about 10 dead birds on the runway, however did not receive damage.
  • 10 January
    Istanbul, Turkish, struck sea gulls leaving about 10 dead birds on the runway, however did not receive damage.
  • 10 January
    Atlas jet, struck sea gulls leaving about 10 dead birds on the runway, however did not receive damage.
  • 10 January
    Atlas jet, struck sea gulls leaving about 10 dead birds on the runway, however did not receive damage.
  • 16 January
    Burlington, Repub
General archive