Jump to content

Mid air today. AKA suicidal bird


orionflt

Recommended Posts

I was up flying Young Eagles today when a suicidal bird jumped out in front of me. 

He went thru the prop and into the front cowl above the intake. I never saw him until he flashed by and I heard a thud. Both were simultaneous so I wasn’t sure where he hit. I thought maybe the inboard wing but couldn’t see any damage. Once I landed we figured out where he hit. 

He pushed the cowl back about 1/2 inch. 

DD7964A4-4ADE-4EFC-A4AA-6FE7350B101C.jpeg

ACD5C017-3A84-42CE-8BDF-3FDCF230CCAE.jpeg

4CE99EC2-62EC-42A4-B336-510D663FF90D.jpeg

CD57ADB9-766F-4A51-B785-B3BE1A1D4D94.jpeg

  • Like 1
  • Sad 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hank said:

Be sure to send samples of the remains to the FAA. Or is it the Smithsonian? They identify the species, as well as tracking incidents.

It's the FAA via the Smithsonian.

Here is a link to the AC https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_150_5200-32B.pdf

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yikes better the cowl than the windshield I guess.  This may seem like a dumb / obnoxious question, but would hitting a bird ever count as a prop strike? I guess you're ok if there's no visible damage to the prop?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, DXB said:

Yikes better the cowl than the windshield I guess.  This may seem like a dumb / obnoxious question, but would hitting a bird ever count as a prop strike? I guess you're ok if there's no visible damage to the prop?

Back in 2007 I had strike that took out my landing light back. The glass gouged the face (back) of my prop. Insurance had no interest in the engine. They were most concerned with explaining the concept of betterment. The prop had ~400hrs and 8 yrs SMOH. They calculated their share of the prop overhaul was $1100 and the paid for a new light.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

already filed the FAA report, I have samples but have not sent them out yet. 

the bird pushed the cowl back about 1/2 inch, it did some damage to the Lasar mod by pushing it into the starter and the ring gear. as for the prop strike requirements, I haven't researched enough to see if this meets the requirements. the bird initially impacted the spinner and there was blood on the inboard section of one of the propeller blade. there was no visible damage to the spinner, but i have not removed it yet.  I really thought the bird had bounced off the lower wing so I was surprised to see the damage on the cowl. 

May be time for the new @Sabremech cowl :) 

I will let you know what the final damage list is but I'm not expecting much more then what I listed.

 

Brian

 

  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, flyboy0681 said:

You didn't write about the impact itself. Any changes to power when it happened? How about handling characteristics?

no changes to power and handling, I did take precautions and did not apply any power and eventuated the flight characteristics before landing.  everyone cleared the pattern for me when I landed to give me the ability to abort my landing if necessary. It truly was a non event considering the possibilities and I was over a private strip if I needed a place to land immediately. 

Brian 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DXB said:

Yikes better the cowl than the windshield I guess.  This may seem like a dumb / obnoxious question, but would hitting a bird ever count as a prop strike? I guess you're ok if there's no visible damage to the prop?

Caught my attention, a couple of inches up or down could have been bad, up obviously the windscreen, down the intake or oil cooler. thankfully my overworked guardian angle was there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 201er said:

One of the eagles?

seagull or similar,

my Young Eagle did not know anything had happened until we were back on the ground, the ground crew only knew there was an incident and I asked for the pattern. they thought my passenger may have gotten sick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought I've read MS comments in the past noting something to the nature of "even if the prop tip touches blades of grass it is therefore a strike and needs to follow the propeller and engine manufacturers guidelines". Well I hope the insurance company doesn't beat you up too bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 5/11/2019 at 6:48 PM, tigers2007 said:

How does this work with the engine? Does this count as a prop strike and need a teardown?

 

From AD 2014-10-14

 

Quote

Definition of Propeller Strike

(i) For the purposes of this AD, a propeller strike is defined as follows:

  1. Any incident, whether or not the engine is operating, that requires repair to the propeller other than minor dressing of the blades.
  2. Any incident during engine operation in which the propeller impacts a solid object that causes a drop in revolutions per minute (RPM) and also requires structural repair of the propeller (incidents requiring only paint touch-up are not included). This is not restricted to propeller strikes against the ground.
  3. A sudden RPM drop while impacting water, tall grass, or similar yielding medium, where propeller damage is not normally incurred. (j) The preceding definitions include situations where an aircraft is stationary and the landing gear collapses causing one or more blades to be substantially bent, or where a hanger door (or other object) strikes the propeller blade. These cases should be handled as sudden stoppage
  4. Any situation where an aircraft is stationary and the landing gear collapses causing one or more blades to be bent or substantially damaged, or where a hangar door (or other object) strikes the propeller blade. These cases should be handled as a sudden engine stoppage because of potentially severe side loadings on the propshaft flange, front bearing, and seal.

 

 

For a bird strike, i believe the standards of "a similar yielding medium" would make item 3 apply, so the question becomes "did the RPM drop during the strike?".  If the answer is 'no', then no teardown is required.

 

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAD.nsf/AOCADSearch/9FA5E5F8683A0A4686256E9B004BC295?OpenDocument

Edited by ShuRugal
added AD URL
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ShuRugal said:

For a bird strike, i believe the standards of "a similar yielding medium" would make item 3 apply, so the question becomes "did the RPM drop during the strike?".  If the answer is 'no', then no teardown is required.

This seems like the correct interpretation of the AD standard, though practical application of the AD's language seems problematic.  One is generally not staring at the rpm gauge at the moment the bird or whatever else hits the fan. Hearing a transient audible decrease in rpm seems more likely, but that's very subjective. Also I think the AD was probably written before so many people were flying around with a data-logging engine monitor, which might very well have captured this particular event if the sampling rate was set high enough....

Edited by DXB
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, DXB said:

This seems like the correct interpretation of the AD standard, though practical application of the AD's language seems problematic.  One is generally not staring at the rpm gauge at the moment the bird or whatever else hits the fan. Hearing a transient audible decrease in rpm seems more likely, but that's very subjective. Also I think the AD was probably written before so many people were flying around with a data-logging engine monitor, which might very well have captured this particular event if the sampling rate was set high enough....

I’d also throw out there that the first line states as follows: “For the purposes of this AD...”. Which implies that the following definitions are only applicable under the context of the AD referenced.  While a good starting point for information, I’m not sure if that AD references bird strikes or not (I couldn’t find the AD itself under mooney or lycoming in the FAA database, and no link was provided).... and if it doesn’t, then I don’t know that an insurance company would be bound by those definitions unless the AD was specifically related to this instance in some way shape or form.

I should mention that I am not a lawyer- so I could be way off here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



I’m not sure if that AD references bird strikes or not (I couldn’t find the AD itself under mooney or lycoming in the FAA database, and no link was provided)....


http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAD.nsf/AOCADSearch/9FA5E5F8683A0A4686256E9B004BC295?OpenDocument

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.