Scarecrows and bird-pooh.
I wondered, who pays for the services of the airport scarecrows? The reason being that ‘the expense’ of this operational necessity is often mentioned in despatches.
ABC [Phil Shaw] from Avisure, the company contracted to keep birds away from Gold Coast Airport, said remnants of a bird had been found on the runway.”
Seems as though the operators of Coolangatta airport do; in this instance;
“A report released by the ATSB in February this year found the level of bird strikes in high capacity operations have increased dramatically in 2014-15.The largest increases were found in Cairns, Canberra, Darwin, Sydney and the Gold Coast.”
A suspicious mind, one used to the venal thinking and profit driven motivation of the modern aerodrome operator may entertain thoughts of minimum service to minimum costs. It is not enough that operators must pay for use of the airport but now must bear the costs of turn back, engine and airframe repairs – dodging drones and birds – all part of the cost imposed SOP.
"Strategic Aviation Solutions chairman Neil Hansford, who consults with commercial airlines and airports, said the explanation from AirAsia X was suspicious, especially when airports spend large amounts of money to keep birds away from the air strip."
On the other hand, I can agree that the Air Asia alleged ‘strike’ is bloody suspicious; just don’t believe the birds 'done it'; or, that the ‘large ‘amount being spent’ is for a full service option.
The carefully constructed barriers around passenger safety are not crumbling, so much as being slowly eroded away; dollar saved here, penny pinched there; all very clever until someone else rediscovers (again) that whilst safety is expensive – accidents cost a shed load more.
No matter; I’m sure Darren 6D has a solution for us – probably want to use drones to scare off the birds – which ain’t such a bad idea; when you think about it. Mind you, being so PC and all, he’d probably invite the anorak’s to bring their drones and ‘assist’.
Toot toot.
I wondered, who pays for the services of the airport scarecrows? The reason being that ‘the expense’ of this operational necessity is often mentioned in despatches.
ABC [Phil Shaw] from Avisure, the company contracted to keep birds away from Gold Coast Airport, said remnants of a bird had been found on the runway.”
Seems as though the operators of Coolangatta airport do; in this instance;
“A report released by the ATSB in February this year found the level of bird strikes in high capacity operations have increased dramatically in 2014-15.The largest increases were found in Cairns, Canberra, Darwin, Sydney and the Gold Coast.”
A suspicious mind, one used to the venal thinking and profit driven motivation of the modern aerodrome operator may entertain thoughts of minimum service to minimum costs. It is not enough that operators must pay for use of the airport but now must bear the costs of turn back, engine and airframe repairs – dodging drones and birds – all part of the cost imposed SOP.
"Strategic Aviation Solutions chairman Neil Hansford, who consults with commercial airlines and airports, said the explanation from AirAsia X was suspicious, especially when airports spend large amounts of money to keep birds away from the air strip."
On the other hand, I can agree that the Air Asia alleged ‘strike’ is bloody suspicious; just don’t believe the birds 'done it'; or, that the ‘large ‘amount being spent’ is for a full service option.
The carefully constructed barriers around passenger safety are not crumbling, so much as being slowly eroded away; dollar saved here, penny pinched there; all very clever until someone else rediscovers (again) that whilst safety is expensive – accidents cost a shed load more.
No matter; I’m sure Darren 6D has a solution for us – probably want to use drones to scare off the birds – which ain’t such a bad idea; when you think about it. Mind you, being so PC and all, he’d probably invite the anorak’s to bring their drones and ‘assist’.
Toot toot.