Printable View
Bird strike shatters windscreen.
<video controls autoplay loop> <source src="https://diqn32j8nouaz.cloudfront.net/birdstrike_destroy_windscreen_white.mp4" type="video/mp4"> Your browser does not support the video tag. </video>
Previously:
https://www.homemadetools.net/forum/...800#post159922
https://www.homemadetools.net/forum/...687#post136654
https://www.homemadetools.net/forum/...2486#post76456
https://www.homemadetools.net/forum/...381#post131389
Reminds me of a joke that went around NASA several years ago. NASA created a bird proof windscreen then shot chickens out of an air cannon to demonstrate its strength. They sold rights of the formula to a European aircraft manufacture, who called NASA up to say the formula was defective every time they shot a chicken out of their cannon it smashed through it like it wasn't even there. NASA replied, "Gentlemen THAW your chickens".
I used to work on F-111D fighter jets, and then became still photographer for the USAF while still at the same base. Had to go take photos of a sparrow (we think. Feathers and such were pretty messed up) that punched a hole a foot deep and about an inch in diameter into the wing root of one the aircraft I used to work on. Fortunately it missed the wing pivot pin. Had another that got hit by a goose on the divider between the two halves of the windscreen. Both aircrew got a face-full of broken glass and splattered goose, but they were able to land it. IIRC they were on approach when it happened. Water is non-compressible. You can demonstrate this for yourself by jumping in to a pool in a belly flop. The water displaces around you, but the initial impact hurts a lot. Our bodies, and the bird bodies are mostly water. The splatter happens mostly after they penetrate the surface.
Bill
So who is the culprit? The pilot or the bird.
the navigator,Quote:
Originally Posted by mansworld
Culprit? About the slowest an F-111D can possibly be going is about 100mph. That is almost 150fps. They are more likely to be a minimum of about 450fps. And they weigh a great deal more than a BB, or even a pistol bullet. At mach II, they are upwards of 3000fps. A BB moving at 150fps will punch a hole in your skin. Who is the culprit there? At 3000fps, you probably can't even see the bird. Even as big as goose is. Military pilots wear helmets that restrict their vision to more or less straight ahead. Little to no peripheral vision. And they don't wear them by choice, they are required to wear them. The F-111D aircraft weighs nearly 100,000 pounds. Max takeoff weight, IIRC, was about 96000 pounds, where the aircraft fully loaded, fueled, and crewed was around 104,000 pound. To carry a max weapons and fuel load, they had to launch sort of the max takeoff weight, and hit a tanker to in-flight refuel to get the full load of fuel.Quote:
Originally Posted by mansworld
Besides, birds are birds. They do what they do. And they can't move fast enough to get out of the way of something moving from 100 to 1000 or more times as fast as they possibly can. Nor are pilots responsible for what birds do. Usually, they can't even see the birds. "Culprit" indicates culpability. Neither pilots nor birds are culpable.
Bill
Nonsense! See my post to mansworld.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank S
You are over analyzing both posts, I saw the post as tongue and cheek when the question was who's at fault the pilot of the bird. The most obvious answer was a navigational error on the part of the bird. Once on a flight from Frankfurt to Furth/Nuremberg we encountered a flock of large birds shortly before reaching our designated cruising altitude resulting in a bird strike which at least 1 bird went through one of the engines. The pilot came on the intercom and said folks a flock of birds have just made a serious navigational error and have struck our right engine, I have shut it down this happens sometimes in air travel, we are in no serious danger, and since this is a short flight, we are waiting instructions to either continue on to our destination or return to Frankfurt Main. It is 30 minutes to our intended destination or due to the time it will take to make the turn and receive landing instructions at our takeoff point the time will be closer to one hour. The officials must weigh all circumstances of their decisions in the meantime we are to remain on course.Quote:
Originally Posted by WmRMeyers
A couple minutes later the Pilot came back on the intercom and explained we would be required to return to Frankfurt.
Most of us who's final destination was Furth/Nuremberg elected to take the ICEII which departed in 30 minutes after landing we received a full refund on our tickets and our train fare was paid by the airlines Those who chose to wait for the next available flight in an hour arrived only a few minutes before we did but did not benefit of a free trip. I only know this because my traveling companion decided to wait and take the flight so he could rent us a car at the airport. What he found out later was he could have rented a car near the Bahnhof.
So my statement stands the navigator:lol:
While speaking of the F111, My Uncle who lived 2 miles from my grandpa's farm worked ad General Dynamics during the development of the F111 project as a class B electrician, and it was his fault you might say that the plane ever flew. He discovered what could be a potentially serious chaffing problem in how electrical sensor harness of the wing deployment was to be routed. brought it to the attention of the developing engineers, who made a few changes in the design during the prototyping stage. He received a citation and a plaque thanking him for his input.
Why are the plane's windshield not safety glass that breaks into small pieces like those used in cars? That big chunk of glass that broke off could have cut the pilot really bad.
The tem,perd safety glass you are referring to in the automotive industry is only used on the side and rear windows the front windscreen is laminated to prevent shattering like the other glass does.Quote:
Originally Posted by hotdog0627