Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: uptown on February 06, 2009, 07:59:50 AM
-
I was watching the news last night about the Hudson River plane crash, and was wondering why they just don't put steel mesh over the front of the jet engines to keeps birds and other debris out. Does anyone know why they don't?
-
When there's a bird strike, the bird and the mesh will both be ingested into the engine. Mesh won't stop that from happening, and will be additional damage to the engine.
-
The screen would disturb the inlet airflow causing major performance issues...
And, like TM said, a 20+ pound goose being sucked into the screen, combined
with the planes forward speed, would take screen and all into the engine..
Then Instead of a flameout, the engine would GRENADE!! causing even more damage..
Nature of the beast..
RC
-
I actually have a good friend who's an airline pilot and I asked him the same thing. He said that you would lose up to 30% thrust on the engine. To me it doesn't seem like a thin mesh would cause that much disruption.
-
Engine intakes on jets are designed to straighten
the air molecules, so they present themselves in
an orderly fashion the the face of the compressor..
Disturb that, ya loose power output..
Like putting a big rock in the middle of a stream..
-
You want to put something that will destroy the engine right in front of the engine? Brilliant!
There are a lot of reasons to not do this. For one a 5 or 10lb hunk of bird is generally soft and better than 99 times out of 100 the bird is going to go right through the bypass air doing no damage. A 15,000-20,000 rpm titanium fan vs a bird is no contest. Putting a steel mesh in front of the airplane that turns into shrapnel upon ingestion doesn't sound like a good solution.
The other glaring issue would be how would your mesh screen deal with ice accumulation? With no means of shedding ice or preventing its buildup it would be a short matter of time before the mesh iced over choking off airflow to the engine.
-
My 1st thought was what TxMom said, but I thought surely they could come up with a kevlar mesh or something along those lines. So I kind of guessed it would have some affect on air flow and effect thrust somehow.
It sure sucks that a bird can put that many peoples lives at risk and bring down such a large aircraft.
-
Why not just put a forcefield around the whole plane?
-
Why not just put a forcefield around the whole plane?
gunners would be more fun :D
-
A mesh would have to be heated anytime you were in conditions conducive to ice.
-
I actually have a good friend who's an airline pilot and I asked him the same thing. He said that you would lose up to 30% thrust on the engine. To me it doesn't seem like a thin mesh would cause that much disruption.
Do some calculations as to speed and mass and I think you'll find the mesh would be of heavier construction that what most assume.
-
If man can develop a air-driven device that goes on cars that deer can hear miles away that makes them want to go AWAY from the sound and not toward it...
Then some genius can go invent a sound so hateful to birds in the area of a jetliner (say 3-5 miles) that they want to head the other way ASAP...
Necessity is the mother of invention.
BTW: Posted here (see date/time stamp) MY IDEA. If it's developed, I get 50% of all profits. Thanks!
ROX
-
gunners would be more fun :D
Bird seaking laser beams to the front of the plane. :aok
-
gunners would be more fun :D
LMFAO...if that job ever opens up, I will quit my current one and be the first in line!
-
Then some genius can go invent a sound so hateful to birds in the area of a jetliner (say 3-5 miles) that they want to head the other way ASAP...
You mean a jet engine that is up to 160 decibels isn't enough to scare them away?
-
If man can develop a air-driven device that goes on cars that deer can hear miles away that makes them want to go AWAY from the sound and not toward it...
Then some genius can go invent a sound so hateful to birds in the area of a jetliner (say 3-5 miles) that they want to head the other way ASAP...
Necessity is the mother of invention.
BTW: Posted here (see date/time stamp) MY IDEA. If it's developed, I get 50% of all profits. Thanks!
ROX
Doppler Effect.
Maybe if planes were quieter the birds would calmly stay on the ground and wait for clearance to take off.
wrongway
-
Birds are a good indication of thermal activity and I see them under the same clouds I am circling under. Ive seen these geese and even storks as high as FL180 but mostly FL150 and lower. I have flown in formation with geese and pelicans and cranes and they are fun to fly near as long as they are going in the same direction! (http://i447.photobucket.com/albums/qq197/Chalenge08/costumed-smiley-011.gif)
-
You mean a jet engine that is up to 160 decibels isn't enough to scare them away?
Obviously not.
Anyway, flocks of them around a runway is the scary part. Get a pair of gulls into an engine at takeoff, and things go really bad.
I once planted several hectars of Lupins around and close to an international airbase's runways. They were intended to encourage the life of foxes/minks and such. Egg-stealers and young bird killers.
It was a NATO bas and funded by NATO.
Lupins will make some scrub, making i harder to birds to sit, as well as providing shelter to foxes and alike.
I have no idea whether this worked, but at least no birdstrikes in years.
Now a squadron of migrating birds is a completely other thing. But once up to cruise, one should be safe. However, Swans have been spotted at more than 20K AFAIK, and both them and the geese will benefit from using Jetstream. So in short, the problem of possibly hitting birds is yet not so easily solved.